English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The international experience of performance indicators application by supreme audit institutions of European countries and the USA in their annual reports is investigated. In total, 267 indicators were identified, analyzed and grouped by areas of activity, in particular, audit activity (audit, conclusions and reports), recommendations, other activities, consequences and effects of work, relations with main stakeholders (with parliament, audit objects, other bodies, society, international community), human resources (personnel, training and certification), management and financial support. The areas of interaction with society and publicity of work, personnel management and audit activity are the most characterized by quantitative indicators areas, least of all interaction with audit objects and other activities of the body, except audit. Among the studied countries, fewer quantitative indicators were published in the reports of the Supreme Audit Institutions of Estonia, Slovakia and Croatia (less than 20 indicators), most of the aspects of activity were quantitatively assessed in the reports of the Supreme Audit Institutions of the UK, Czech Republic and Poland (65 – 80 indicators). The Accounting Chamber in 2020 in terms of the number of indicators in this comparative analysis ranked second (published 75 indicators). Over the eight years analyzed, this number increased significantly, but there is still no indicators for some areas of work, such as international activities and interaction with audited entities. It was also determined that the selection of indicators presented in the reports of the Accounting Chamber lacks consistency, the practice of disclosing some important performance indicators has ceased. Based on the analysis of international practice and the experience of the Accounting Chamber, a system of indicators advisable to characterize its work is proposed. Proposed 55 groups of indicators characterize all areas of activity and correspond to the best international practice and approaches of the supreme audit institutions performance measuring framework (SAI PMF), which is used in the strategic planning of the Accounting Chamber.

fìnansi ukraïni

Practice of the key performance indicators application of supreme audit institutions of European countries, the USA and the Accounting Chamber of Ukraine