SWISS-ESTONIAN COOPERATION FACILITY
AUDIT STRATEGY
As prepared by:
AUDIT AUTHORITY
SITUATED IN
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia
31st of March 2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3
RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................... 3
METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................................................... 4
Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 4
Walkthrough ........................................................................................................................................ 4
Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility ................. 5
Audits of Support Measures ................................................................................................................ 6
AUDIT WORK PLANNED ........................................................................................................................... 7
RESOURCES.............................................................................................................................................. 7
INTRODUCTION
The Framework Agreement for the implementation of the second Swiss Contribution to selected
Member States of the European Union was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the
Government of the Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of
the Swiss Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth referred to as “Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility”.
As per the country-specific setup, the Audit Authority is the Financial Control Department of the
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia. The Audit Authority is solely responsible for drawing up,
monitoring, and updating the audit strategy.
The functions of the Audit Authority are set out in Regulations on the implementation of the second
Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the European Union. In addition to that, the tasks of
the Financial Control Department are stipulated with the statute of the Ministry of Finance and
specified with the statute of Financial Control Department, which functions as the audit charter.
With the decree of the Government of Estonia No 177 from 22nd of December 2011, the Financial
Control Department as the Audit Authority is subordinated directly to the Secretary General of the
Ministry of Finance. That ensures its functional and organizational independence within the Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility, as the National Coordination Unit and the Paying Authority of the Facility
are situated in the State Shared Service Centre.
RISK ASSESSMENT
National Coordination Unit is responsible for the overall risk assessment of the Swiss-Estonian
Cooperation Facility, including the methodology, coordination, and consolidation of the results of the
risk assessment.
In addition to the risk assessment exercise coordinated by the National Coordination Unit, the Audit
Authority carries out its own, independent risk assessment to compose the annual audit plan, including
audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well as audits
of Support Measures.
The risk assessment is carried out annually, before the composition of annual audit plan, considering
the risk components of impact, likelihood and implemented internal control measures. The risk factors
to be considered for risk assessment exercise are the following:
- Results of risk assessment carried out by the National Coordination Unit.
- Results of audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures.
- The quantity and frequency of errors and the error rate of previous accounting year or years.
- Any other indications of significant risks or weaknesses.
METHODOLOGY
Overview
According to the statute of the Financial Control Department, all the auditors of the department must
follow the Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal
Auditors.
There are no discrepancies between the standards for professional practice of internal auditors which
are established by the decree of Minister of Finance of Estonia and International Standards for the
Professional Practice of Internal Auditing issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors.
To obtain assurance of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility as a whole, the Audit Authority shall
carry out audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well
as audits of Support Measures.
The Audit Authority shall carry out those audits for each accounting year running from 1st of July on
the year N-1 to 30th of June on the year N (with an exception for the first accounting year which shall
cover the period from the signing of the Framework Agreement on the year N-1 until the 30th of June
on the year N).
It is the sole responsibility of the Audit Authority to prepare and submit to Switzerland for each of
those accounting years and not later than 31st of March of the year N+1 an Annual Audit Report along
with the Audit Opinion signed by the head of the Audit Authority. The Annual Audit Report shall include
all data of the audits carried out for the accounting year, including findings and measures taken.
The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out those audits. Instead, the
Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department of Financial Control
as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the second Swiss
Contribution.
However, a short description of audit principles along with the main elements to be verified shall be
outlined in the audit strategy. The Audit Authority will also prepare general checklists to be used in
audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures. Those checklists
will be annexed to the audit strategy.
Also, every audit will be thoroughly planned with the reasons, processes, risks, goals, and extent of
defined and agreed on in detail during the planning process. This thorough planning process precludes
the need for a separate manual.
Walkthrough
The methodology used by the Audit Authority is compliant with the Global Internal Audit Standards as
operated by the Institute of Internal Auditors.
The audits are carried out assuming full and unhindered access by the auditors for all documents and
information necessary.
All auditors included in the audit activities must sign a declaration of independence and objectivity in
relation to the audit scope.
All engagements are communicated to the auditees beforehand. The audit engagements include desk-
based checks of documents and other information, with additional on-site visits, if necessary.
The communication of all results, including irregularities, errors and corrective measures, is always
provided to the auditee as well as the Managing Authority. The auditee has always the right to
comment on the results of the audit before the final report is issued.
The corrective measures recommended by the Audit Authority are always reviewed later to ensure
that they are carried out in a sufficient manner.
All audit documents are archived in accordance with the principles of the Cooperation Facility.
The materiality level for the annual reporting is set at 2% of the amounts included. For annual
reporting, any extrapolated final residual error rates above should be met with corrective action at the
level of the Cooperation Facility.
Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility
The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for the audits of management and control
systems. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department
of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the
second Swiss Contribution
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on the functioning of the management and control
systems, audits at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be carried out. Those audits shall aim to
provide the Audit Authority with assurance that the management and control systems in the Partner
State are functioning effectively and in compliance with the Framework Agreement and national law
of the Partner State.
The crucial bodies to be audited are the National Coordination Unit, the Paying Authority (the tasks of
which are also taken on by the National Coordination Unit) and any Intermediate Bodies that carry out
tasks of the Cooperation Facility. Those bodies shall be audited at least once during the
implementation period of the Cooperation Facility.
Additionally, there are crucial aspects of the implementation of the Cooperation Facility that shall also
be audited at least once during the implementation period, either along with the audits of the bodies
carrying out the implementation of those aspects, or separately. Those are the following.
- The definition of the functions of the bodies involved in the management and control of the
Cooperation Facility and the allocation of functions within each body.
- Compliance with the principle of separation of functions between and within such bodies.
- The procedures and embedded controls for ensuring the correctness and regularity of
expenditure.
- The reliability of the accounting, monitoring and financial reporting.
- The reporting and monitoring systems where the responsible body entrusts the execution of tasks
to another body.
- The system to ensure that all documents regarding expenditures and audits are held to ensure an
adequate audit trail.
- The procedures ensuring that the rules on public procurement are correctly applied.
- The procedures for preventing, detecting, reporting, correcting and prosecuting irregularities.
Audits of Support Measures
The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out the audits of support
measures. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the
Department of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the
implementation of the second Swiss Contribution.
The Audit Authority has prepared a general checklist to be used in audits of Support Measures. This
checklist has been annexed to the audit strategy as Annex 1.
The planning of the audit of Support Measures will be based on the following
- Accounts presented to the Audit Authority, that will be tested in full.
- Expenditure presented to the Audit Authority, that will be audited in accordance with a non-
statistical or statistical sampling.
- Risk assessment of the management and control system, based on which audits of management
and control system are carried out.
Audits of Support Measures shall be carried out by the Audit Authority to obtain assurance and to
express the opinion on the following crucial matters.
- Accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the accounts.
- Legality and regularity of expenditure.
- Existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system.
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the
accounts, an audit of accounts shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.
The audit of accounts shall consider the results of audits of the management and control systems as
well as the results of audits on the legality and regularity of expenditure along with the existence,
adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system. In addition, the audit of accounts
shall consider the results of any other audits or checks carried out at the Cooperation Facility.
The audit of accounts shall aim to provide reasonable assurance on the completeness, accuracy, and
veracity of the amounts declared in the accounts.
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on legality and regularity of expenditure, audits of
expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.
The audits of expenditure shall be carried out on the entirety of the expenditure for each accounting
year and with a sampling method that shall ensure a random selection of each sampling unit from the
population. If possible, a statistical sampling method shall be used for making that selection. However,
the Audit Authority assumes at this stage that the population for each accounting year will be less than
50 units, making a non-statistical sampling method the reasonable option of choice.
In composing the random sample, the following principles shall be used.
- At least 10% of items (either projects or other programme components) for which expenditure has
been declared during an accounting year and at least 15% of the expenditure which has been
declared during the same accounting year must be included in the sample.
- The selection of those items shall be done with a simple random equal probability principle.
- Any negative items in the population shall be separated from the population before drawing a
sample and examined as a separate population.
- Any irregularities found because of the audits of expenditure shall be extrapolated in line with the
principles of non-statistical sampling and this extrapolation shall form the basis for the assurance
obtained and opinion given on those audits.
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the
management and control system, the Audit Authority considers both the results of audits of the
management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility and the results of the audits
of expenditure for each accounting year.
For results considered this way, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any errors
detected in those audits that are related to existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management
and control system are random or systemic.
In addition to that, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any such errors point to
a risk of fraud, corruption, conflict of interest, or double funding. Any of those risks shall be treated as
the highest priority.
AUDIT WORK PLANNED
The first audit of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be
carried out by the Audit Authority during the year 2025. Thereon, at least one such audit shall be
carried out for each accounting year, unless otherwise proposed by the Audit Authority in the Annual
Audit Report and agreed on with the acceptance of the same Annual Audit Report.
The audits of expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year for which
expenditure has been declared and in line with the principles of sampling approved in the Audit
Strategy. In addition to that, an audit of accounts shall also be carried out by the Audit Authority for
each accounting year for which expenditure has been declared.
RESOURCES
The Audit Authority resources allocated by the Financial Control Department for the Swiss-Estonian
Cooperation Facility amount to 0,75 full-time equivalent. This may be divided between more than one
auditor of the Financial Control Department, to ensure the best possible audit team for the tasks at
hand as well as the principles and necessities of the work in the Financial Control Department.
Approved by
(Signed electronically)
Anu Alber
Head of the Financial Control Department of the Ministry of Finance
Head of the Audit Authority
Annex 1: General checklist for auditing Support Measures
Second Swiss Contribution
Estonia
Annual Audit Report
Reporting Period: 21.02.23-30.06.24
Report Number: 1
Report Submission Date: 31.03.2025
Template version 28.11.23
TABLE OF CONTENT
AUDIT OPINION ................................................................................................................................................................ 3
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND OTHER BODIES THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN PREPARING THE REPORT ..... 4
1.2 REFERENCE PERIOD (I.E. THE REPORTING PERIOD ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS 9.3 (4)) ............................................................... 4
1.3 AUDIT PERIOD (DURING WHICH THE AUDIT WORK TOOK PLACE)................................................................................................. 4
1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF THE COOPERATION PROGRAMME COVERED BY THE REPORT AND OF ITS MANAGING AND PAYING AUTHORITIES. ....... 4
1.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE STEPS TAKEN TO PREPARE THE REPORT AND TO DRAW THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................... 5
2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ................................................................... 6
2.1 DETAILS OF ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS RELATED WITH MANAGING AND PAYING
AUTHORITIES' RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 THE DATES FROM WHICH THESE CHANGES APPLY, AS WELL AS THE IMPACT OF THESE CHANGES TO THE AUDIT WORK ARE TO BE INDICATED
6
3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY .................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 DETAILS OF ANY CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY, AND EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS. .............................................................. 7
3.2 DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE CHANGES MADE OR PROPOSED AT A LATE STAGE, WHICH DO NOT AFFECT THE WORK DONE DURING THE
REFERENCE PERIOD AND THE CHANGES MADE DURING THE REFERENCE PERIOD, THAT AFFECT THE AUDIT WORK AND RESULTS ................ 7
4. SYSTEM AUDITS .................................................................................................................................................. 8
4.1 DETAILS OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM OF THE PROGRAMME .................................................................................................... 8
4.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BASIS FOR THE AUDITS CARRIED OUT, INCLUDING A REFERENCE TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY APPLICABLE, MORE
PARTICULARLY TO THE RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND THE RESULTS THAT LED TO ESTABLISHING THE AUDIT PLAN FOR SYSTEM
AUDITS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM SYSTEM AUDITS................................................................ 8
4.4 INDICATION OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE CONSIDERED TO BE OF A SYSTEMIC CHARACTER ....................................... 8
4.5 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SYSTEM AUDITS FROM PREVIOUS ACCOUNTING YEARS ........... 8
4.6 LEVEL OF ASSURANCE OBTAINED FOLLOWING THE SYSTEM AUDITS (LOW/AVERAGE/HIGH) AND JUSTIFICATION ................................... 8
5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES .................................................................................................................................. 9
5.1 INDICATION OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT CARRIED OUT THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES ............................ 9
5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLING METHODOLOGY APPLIED AND INFORMATION WHETHER THE METHODOLOGY IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
AUDIT STRATEGY .............................................................................................................................................................. 9
5.3 INDICATION OF THE PARAMETERS USED FOR STATISTICAL SAMPLING AND EXPLANATION OF THE UNDERLYING CALCULATIONS AND
PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT APPLIED .................................................................................................................................... 9
5.4 IN CASE OF THE USE OF NON-STATISTICAL SAMPLING, INDICATE THE REASONS FOR USING A DIFFERENT METHOD AND PRESENT THE
PERCENTAGE OF PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS/EXPENDITURE COVERED THROUGH AUDITS, THE STEPS TAKEN TO ENSURE
RANDOMNESS OF THE SAMPLE (AND THUS ITS REPRESENTATIVITY) AND TO ENSURE A SUFFICIENT SIZE OF THE SAMPLE ENABLING THE
AUDIT AUTHORITY TO DRAW UP A VALID AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10
5.5 ANALYSIS OF THE PRINCIPAL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES, DESCRIBING THE NUMBER OF SAMPLE ITEMS AUDITED, THE
RESPECTIVE AMOUNT AND TYPES OF ERRORS BY PROJECT/PROGRAMME COMPONENT, THE NATURE OF ERRORS FOUND, THE STRATUM
ERROR RATE AND CORRESPONDING MAIN DEFICIENCIES OR IRREGULARITIES, THE UPPER LIMIT OF THE ERROR RATE (WHERE APPLICABLE),
ROOT CAUSES, CORRECTIVE MEASURES PROPOSED (INCLUDING THOSE INTENDING TO AVOID THESE ERRORS IN SUBSEQUENT PAYMENT
APPLICATIONS) AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10
5.6 COMPARISON OF THE TOTAL ERROR RATE AND THE RESIDUAL TOTAL ERROR RATE WITH THE SET MATERIALITY LEVEL, TO ASCERTAIN IF THE
POPULATION IS MATERIALLY MISSTATED AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................................... 10
5.7 INFORMATION ON THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT OF THE COMPLEMENTARY SAMPLE ....................................................................... 10
5.8 DETAILS OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE SYSTEMIC IN NATURE, AND THE MEASURES TAKEN, INCLUDING A QUANTIFICATION
OF THE IRREGULAR EXPENDITURE AND ANY RELATED FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS ............................................................................ 10
5.9 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES CARRIED OUT IN PREVIOUS YEARS, ON DEFICIENCIES OF SYSTEMIC
NATURE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10
5.10 CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE OVERALL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................... 11
1
6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ...................................................................................................................................... 12
6.1 INDICATION OF THE AUTHORITIES/BODIES THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ........................................................... 12
6.2 DESCRIPTION OF AUDIT APPROACH USED TO VERIFY THE ELEMENTS OF THE ACCOUNTS ................................................................. 12
6.3 INDICATION OF THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE RESULTS OF THE AUDITS REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY AND VERACITY
OF THE ACCOUNTS, INCLUDING AN INDICATION ON THE FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS MADE AND REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNTS AS A FOLLOW -
UP TO THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND/OR AUDIT OF EXPENDITURES............................................................................ 12
7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY .................... 14
7.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND ANY AUDIT BODY THAT CARRIES OUT AUDITS
14
7.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR SUPERVISION AND QUALITY REVIEW APPLIED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY TO SUCH AUDIT BODY(IES)
14
8. OTHER INFORMATION....................................................................................................................................... 15
8.1 WHERE APPLICABLE, INFORMATION ON REPORTED FRAUD AND SUSPICIONS OF FRAUD DETECTED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AUDITS
PERFORMED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY (INCLUDING THE CASES REPORTED BY OTHER BODIES AND RELATED TO PROJECTS/PROGRAMME
COMPONENTS AUDITED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY), TOGETHER WITH THE MEASURES TAKEN ........................................................ 15
8.2 WHERE APPLICABLE, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS OCCURRED AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF THE ACCOUNTS TO THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND BEFORE
THE TRANSMISSION OF THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT AND CONSIDERED WHEN ESTABLISHING THE LEVEL OF ASSURANCE AND OPINION BY
THE AUDIT AUTHORITY ................................................................................................................................................... 15
9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 16
9.1 INDICATION OF THE OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM, AND
EXPLANATION OF HOW SUCH LEVEL WAS OBTAINED FROM THE COMBINATION OF THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND AUDITS OF
PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ............................................................................................................................. 16
9.2 ASSESSMENT OF ANY MITIGATING ACTIONS IMPLEMENTED, SUCH AS FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED FOR ANY
ADDITIONAL CORRECTIVE MEASURES NECESSARY, BOTH FROM A SYSTEM AND FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. ........................................... 16
ANNEX 1 – INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT (ACCOUNTS) .......................................................................................... 17
ANNEX 2 – AUDIT OPINION ON THE LEGALITY AND REGULARITY OF EXPENDITURE AND FUNCTIONING OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................ 18
ANNEX 3 – OVERVIEW OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 19
2
AUDIT OPINION
The following summary report presents the significant findings of the examination of Support
Measures, systems and expenses of the Second Swiss Contribution by the Audit Authority.
The audit opinion to be provided annually by the Audit Authority for the Swiss Cooperation
Programme is based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained.
The report covers the three elements of the assurance:
- Accounts (audit opinion Annex 1)
- Legality & regularity of expenditure (separate audit opinion in Annex 2)
- Functioning of the management and control system (separate audit opinion in Annex 2)
Three types of opinions are foreseen:
- Unqualified opinion
- Qualified opinion (either with limited or significant impact)
- Adverse opinion
The following cover the Programme Components and Projects listed in Annex 3.
Findings on the accounts
No findings
Findings on legality & regularity of expenditure
No findings
Findings on functioning of the management and control system
No findings
Audit result
Unqualified opinion
3
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Identification of the responsible Audit Authority and other bodies that have been
involved in preparing the report
The Annual Audit Report is prepared by the Audit Authority of the second Swiss Contribution between
the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Estonia (“Swiss-Estonian
Cooperation Facility”)
Identification of the Audit Authority:
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia
Financial Control Department
Suur-Ameerika 1A
Tallinn, Estonia
Contacts:
Anu Alber
Head of the Financial Control Department, Head of the Audit Authority
Mobile: +372 5885 1318
Email:
[email protected]
Mart Pechter
Head of the Audit Unit II
Mobile: +372 611 3152
Email:
[email protected]
The Audit Authority has been solely responsible for the preparation of this report.
1.2 Reference period (i.e. the reporting period according to Regulations 9.3 (4))
The Annual Audit Report covers the period from 21.02.2023 till 30.06.2024.
1.3 Audit period (during which the audit work took place)
This is the first Annual Audit Report of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility and information
contained herein covers the audit work period from the beginning date of 21.02.2023 until the
submission of this report in 31.03.2025. Please note that the audit work carried out in this period
covers only the costs and activities within the reference period (21.02.2023-30.06.2024).
All audit work that has been carried out is in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards
(Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors) and
the work plan of the Financial Control Department.
1.4 Identification of the Cooperation Programme covered by the report and of its
Managing and Paying authorities.
The Annual Audit Report covers the second Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the
European Union that was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the
Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of the Swiss
Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth again be referred to as “Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility”. The respective Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit)
4
and Paying Authority of Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility are situated in the State Shared Service
Centre of Estonia.
1.5 Description of the steps taken to prepare the report and to draw the audit
opinion
The Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) has submitted one overall payment claim
concerning the period (containing claim No. 1 for technical assistance, claim No. 1 for preparation
fund presented by the Ministry of Climate and claim No. 1 for preparation fund presented by the
Ministry of Culture). The Audit Authority has ensured correctness of the data by reconciling it against
the expenditure in amounts included in audit population.
The Audit Authority has considered the results of audits of operations and the audit of accounts in the
preparation of the Annual Audit Report and in the audit opinion. No system system audits have
currently been carried out. The Audit Authority has also assessed that information provided by the
Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) is not inconsistent with the audit results for the
purpose of audit opinion.
5
2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL
SYSTEMS
2.1 Details of any significant changes in the management and control systems
related with Managing and Paying Authorities' responsibilities
The Description of the Management and Control Systems for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility
has been drawn up. Currently, this has not been updated because the Managing Authority (the
National Coordination Unit) is going through a few changes, including choosing a new Head of
Authority.
The Audit Authority is aware of the process and has already planned the task of reviewing the
Description of the Management and Control Systems once the new Head of Authority has been
chosen, and the Description of the Management and Control Systems has been updated and
approved. However, this process will not begin until the second half of the year 2025.
2.2 The dates from which these changes apply, as well as the impact of these
changes to the audit work are to be indicated
The information regarding these points will be addressed in the next Annual Audit Report.
6
3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY
3.1 Details of any changes to the audit strategy, and explanation of the reasons.
The Audit Authority has drawn up the audit strategy, and has updated it in March 2025 in line with the
recommendations received during communications with the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility.
3.2 Differentiation between the changes made or proposed at a late stage, which do
not affect the work done during the reference period and the changes made
during the reference period, that affect the audit work and results
The updates have no effect to the audit work or results.
7
4. SYSTEM AUDITS
4.1 Details of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that have carried out audits
on the proper functioning of the management and control system of the
Programme
Only the Audit Authority carries out the system audits. No other body has been given the right to do
so.
4.2 Description of the basis for the audits carried out, including a reference to the
audit strategy applicable, more particularly to the risk assessment methodology
and the results that led to establishing the audit plan for system audits
The system audits are carried out in accordance with the Audit Strategy, the annual risk assessment
and the annual working plan of the Financial Control Department.
For the reporting covered in this Annual Audit Report, no system audits have yet been carried out.
This has been agreed in communication with the Audit Authority and the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation
Facility. The first system audit will be carried out in the year 2025.
4.3 Description of the main findings and conclusions drawn from system audits1
There are no findings and conclusions, as no system audits have been carried out yet.
4.4 Indication of whether any problems identified were considered to be of a
systemic character
There are no problems of systemic character.
4.5 Information on the follow-up of audit recommendations from system audits from
previous accounting years
There are no previous recommendations to be followed up.
4.6 Level of assurance obtained following the system audits (low/average/high) and
justification
As no system audits have been carried out, the Audit Authority currently gives no opinion on the
management and control system based on that. However, based on the audit of expenditures carried
out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from the audit, the
management and control system can be assessed at least as average.
1 If several system audits took place during the reporting period, it is possible to add a list as an annex at the
end of the document, to facilitate the overview. As an example for the list, Chapter 10.1 of the Annex II of the
EU regulations 2018/1291 can be used. This should be done in addition to the description of the main findings
and conclusions under 4.3.
8
5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES
5.1 Indication of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that carried out the
audits of expenditures
Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of expenditures. No other body has been given the right
to do so.
5.2 Description of the sampling methodology2 applied and information whether the
methodology is in accordance with the audit strategy
When carrying out the audits of expenditures, the sampling methodology was applied in two ways,
both of which were consistent with the audit strategy.
During the first audit of expenditures, all costs in total amounts of 89 977,50 euros were included in
the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat projects or
other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that 87 cost
items were included. From them, a statistical sample was drawn using monetary unit sampling. The
statistical sampling was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.
This resulted in a sample of 30 cost items with a total amount of 61 511,74 euros (68,4% of the
population total amount).
During an additional audit of expenditures, all additional costs in amounts of 56 462,25 euros were
included in the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat
projects or other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that
in number, 41 additional cost items were included. From them, a non-statistical sample was drawn
using the principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of costs. The non-statistical sampling
was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.
This resulted in a sample of 5 cost items with a total amount of 11 388,45 euros (20,2% of the
population total amount).
In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited in two separate sub-populations, using
two separate methods of sampling. Both methods were consistent with the principles of statistical and
non-statistical sampling as well as with the audit strategy.
In total, 72 900,19 euros was audited, totaling 49,8% of the total amounts in the population.
5.3 Indication of the parameters used for statistical sampling and explanation of the
underlying calculations and professional judgement applied
For the statistical sampling, monetary unit sampling (probability proportional to cost) was applied. The
general principles in the methodology of the Financial Control Department were used: confidence
level of 80%, expected error rate of 1,13% and materiality level of 2% from which then the respective
sampling interval was calculated, given the population size of 89 977,50 euros and 87 cost items.
There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no
need to apply additional professional judgment.
2 The Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1291 as well as the European Commission’s Guidance on
sampling methods (EGESIF_16-0014-01) can be taken as references.
9
5.4 In case of the use of non-statistical sampling, indicate the reasons for using a
different method and present the percentage of Projects/Programme
Components/expenditure covered through audits, the steps taken to ensure
randomness of the sample (and thus its representativity) and to ensure a
sufficient size of the sample enabling the Audit Authority to draw up a valid
audit opinion
For the non-statistical sampling, the general principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of
costs were applied and simple random sampling with equal probability was carried out on the
population of 56 462,25 euros and 41 cost items.
There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no
need to apply additional professional judgment.
5.5 Analysis of the principal results of the audits of expenditures, describing the
number of sample items audited, the respective amount and types of errors by
Project/Programme Component, the nature of errors found, the stratum error
rate and corresponding main deficiencies or irregularities, the upper limit of the
error rate (where applicable), root causes, corrective measures proposed
(including those intending to avoid these errors in subsequent payment
applications) and the impact on the audit opinion
In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited, containing 128 items. The number of
items audited together was 35, with a total amount of 72 900,19 euros. No deficiencies or
irregularities were detected.
5.6 Comparison of the total error rate and the residual total error rate with the set
materiality level, to ascertain if the population is materially misstated and the
impact on the audit opinion3
The total error rate and the residual error rate are both 0.
5.7 Information on the results of the audit of the complementary sample
There has been no need for a complementary sample, and none has been drawn by the Audit
Authority.
5.8 Details of whether any problems identified were systemic in nature, and the
measures taken, including a quantification of the irregular expenditure and any
related financial corrections
There were no problems or irregularities identified and none that were systemic in nature. There has
been no irregular expenditure and no financial corrections.
5.9 Information on the follow-up of audits of expenditures carried out in previous
years, on deficiencies of systemic nature
3 The European Commission’s “Guidance for Member States on the Annual Control Report and Audit Opinion to
be reported by audit authorities and on the treatment of errors detected by audit authorities in view of
establishing and reporting reliable total residual error rates” (EGESIF_15-0002-04) can be taken as a reference.
10
There has been no follow-up of audits of expenditures as none have been conducted previously.
5.10 Conclusions drawn from the overall results of the audits of expenditures
regarding the effectiveness of the management and control system
There were no findings related to audits of expenditures. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audits of
expenditures can be assessed as high.
11
6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS
6.1 Indication of the authorities/bodies that have carried out audits of accounts
Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of accounts. No other body has been given the right to
do so.
6.2 Description of audit approach used to verify the elements of the accounts
The Audit Authority has verified the elements of the accounts in full by carrying out the audits of
expenditures that have included in its entirety the following costs.
1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.
2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount
of 2 603,73 euros.
3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of
6 514,90 euros.
4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in
the amount of 11 987,71 euros.
5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of
14 952,61 euros.
6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of
30 804,23 euros.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.
This was in turn compared with the amounts declared by the Managing Authority (the National
Coordination Unit).
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared
Service Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical
assistance audited under point 1.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry
of Climate covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund
audited under point 5.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry
of Culture covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds
audited under points 2, 3, 4 and 6.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.
6.3 Indication of the conclusions drawn from the results of the audits regarding the
completeness, accuracy and veracity of the accounts, including an indication on
the financial corrections made and reflected in the accounts as a follow-up to
the results of the system audits and/or audit of expenditures
There were no findings related to audit of accounts. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audit of accounts can
12
be assessed as high. There are no findings resulting from the audits of expenditures and thus no
effect in that regard exists to the accounts. No financial corrections are made, and no follow-up is
necessary.
13
7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY
WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY
7.1 Description of the procedure for coordination between the Audit Authority and
any audit body that carries out audits
No body other than the Audit Authority has carried out any audits.
7.2 Description of the procedure for supervision and quality review applied by the
Audit Authority to such audit body(ies)
Whenever audit work may be outsourced by the Audit Authority, full quality control in accordance with
the methodology will be carried out by the Audit Authority before accepting any final audit work from
other bodies.
14
8. OTHER INFORMATION
8.1 Where applicable, information on reported fraud and suspicions of fraud detected in
the context of the audits performed by the Audit Authority (including the cases
reported by other bodies and related to Projects/Programme Components audited
by the Audit Authority), together with the measures taken
There has been no reported fraud or suspicions of fraud detected.
8.2 Where applicable, subsequent events occurred after the submission of the
accounts to the Audit Authority and before the transmission of the Annual Audit
Report and considered when establishing the level of assurance and opinion by the
Audit Authority
No subsequent events that occurred after the submission of the accounts are there to be considered.
15
9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE
9.1 Indication of the overall level of assurance on the proper functioning of the
management and control system, and explanation of how such level was
obtained from the combination of the results of the system audits and audits of
Projects/Programme Components
The overall level of assurance is reflected in the audit opinion, which is unqualified.
Assurance on the accounts – the Audit Authority concludes that the accounts contain complete,
accurate and truthful information.
Assurance on the effective functioning of the management and control systems – the Audit Authority
concludes that although no system audits have been carried out, the results of the audits of
expenditures carried out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from
the audit, the management and control system can be assessed at least as average. Looking at the
results of the audit of expenditures separately, since no findings have been detected from there, the
assurance can even be assessed as high.
However, the Audit Authority is of the opinion that when no system audits have yet been carried out,
an overall level of assurance cannot be given as high. Therefore, an overall level of assurance of
average should be indicated for now.
9.2 Assessment of any mitigating actions implemented, such as financial
corrections and assessment of the need for any additional corrective measures
necessary, both from a system and financial perspective.
There are no mitigating actions necessary for now.
16
Annex 1 – Independent auditor’s report (accounts)
Independent auditor’s report on financial information
Opinion
We have audited the financial information for Projects and Programme components listed in Annex 3, which
comprise the annual accounts for the year 2024 (21.02.2023-30.06.2024)
In our opinion, the accompanying financial information on the above-mentioned Projects and Programme
Components for the year 2024 ended 30.06.2024 are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with
national law and jurisdiction of the Republic of Estonia as well as with the rules and requirements of Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility.
Basis for opinion
We conducted our audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards issued by the Institute of Internal
Auditors. Our responsibilities under those provisions and standards are further described in this report.
We are independent of the entity in accordance with the requirements of the Global Internal Audit Standards,
and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that
the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.
Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Information
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial information. This
responsibility includes designing, implementing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation and
fair presentation of financial information that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error;
selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies; and making accounting estimates that are reasonable in
the circumstances.
Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial information
Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial information is free from material
misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion.
Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in
accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards always detect a material misstatement when it exists.
Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they
could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken based on this financial
information.
As part of an audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards, we exercise professional judgment and
maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. We also:
• Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial information, whether due to fraud
or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that
is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material
misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve
collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.
• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit to design audit procedures that are
appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness
of the entity’s internal control.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting
estimates and related disclosures made by Management.
Signed electronically
Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority
31.03.2025
Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia
Tallinn, Estonia
Annex: Audited accounts (Annex 3)
17
Annex 2 – Audit opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure and
functioning of the management and control system
Independent auditor’s report on financial information on the legality and regularity of expenditure and
functioning of the management and control system
Opinion
We have audited the institutions, Projects and Programme Components listed in Annex 3.
In our opinion and based on the audit work performed:
- the expenditure in the accounts for which reimbursement has been requested is legal and regular,
- the management and control systems put in place function properly.
The examination of the institutions, Projects and Programme Components have been conducted in accordance
with defined audit strategy and taking into consideration internationally accepted audit standards.
Signed electronically
Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority
31.03.2025
Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia
Tallinn, Estonia
18
Annex 3 – Overview of Projects and Programme Components
The following projects were audited by the Audit Authority.
1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.
2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount
of 2 603,73 euros.
3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of
6 514,90 euros.
4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in
the amount of 11 987,71 euros.
5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of 14
952,61 euros.
6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of 30
804,23 euros.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared Service
Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical assistance audited
under point 1.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Climate
covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund audited under point 5.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Culture
covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds audited under points
2, 3, 4 and 6.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.
19
Christoph Liechti
Embassy of Switzerland to Latvia, Lithuania
and Estonia
[email protected] Ours 31.03.2025 no 11.1-5/25/728-1
Smilšu iela 8 Riga
LV-1050 LATVIA
Submission of the Annual Audit Report and
the Audit Strategy
Dear Mr Liechti,
The National Coordination Unit of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme hereby submits
the first Annual Audit Report for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme, covering the period
from 21.02.2023 to 30.06.2024, along with the updated Audit Strategy.
Yours sincerely,
(signed digitally)
Urmo Merila
Deputy Director General
Annexes:
Annual Audit Report
Audit Strategy
General Checklist
Helena Musthallik 56466003
[email protected]
Lõkke 4 / 10122 Tallinn / 663 8200 /
[email protected] / www.rtk.ee / Registrikood 70007340
RAHANDUSMINISTEERIUM, Finantskontrolli osakond
Dokumendi nimetus Kuupäev Täitja
Üldine kontroll-leht (Šveitsi-Eesti koostööprogramm)
Jrk nr Küsimused Viited Jah Ei N/A
Kas projekti või programmi tegevused vastavad toetuse andmise tingimustes toodud nõuetele? Kas tegevused on teostatud otstarbekalt ja sihipäraselt?
1
Hinnangute andmisel tuleb lähtuda Šveitsi programmi spetsiifikast.
Toetuse andmine ja kulude planeerimine projekti eelarves
Kas projekt, toetuse saaja ja/või partner vastab Šveitsi raamkokkuleppes ja regulatsioonis sätestatud:
1) temaatilisele jaotusele; Raamkokkulepe lisa 1 punkt 3
1.1 2) eelnevalt määratletud parameetritele teemavaldkonna kohta; Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3) täiendavalt sotsiaalse kaasatuse ning kliimamuutuste leevendamise ja nendega kohanemise artiklid 2.4, 2.5 ja 2.6
teemadele?
Kas projekti, toetuse saaja ja/või partneri valik on toimunud kooskõlas Šveitsi raamkokkuleppes ja Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.2
regulatsioonis sätestatuga? artiklid 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 ja 4.6
Kas põhjendatuks on loetud sellised kulud, mis on rahastamiskõlblikud, sobivad, vajalikud ja tõhusad
Šveitsi raamkokkuleppes ja regulatsioonis sätestatud eesmärkide ja tulemuste saavutamiseks ning mis
tekivad vastavalt nimetatud toetatavate tegevuste käigus?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
Kas kõik kulud on seotud vaid selliste tegevustega, mis on vajalikud programmlepingus sätestatud
1.3 artiklid 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6,
eesmärkide saavutamiseks?
6.7 ja 6.8
Kulu on sobiv, kui see soodustab projekti tulemuste saavutamist. Kulu on vajalik, kui projekti tulemust ei
ole võimalik saavutada odavama kuluga, mis on vähemalt sama efektiivne. Kulu on tõhus, kui selle
maksumus kajastab parimat võimalikku suhet kasutatud vahendite ja saavutatud tulemuste vahel.
Kas projekti tegevused ei ole füüsiliselt lõpetatud või täielikult ellu viidud enne, kui toetuse saaja on
esitanud rahastamistaotluse (olenemata sellest, kas toetuse saaja on kõik asjassepuutuvad maksed ära
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.5 teinud või mitte)?
artikkel 6.1
Kui on, siis ei tohiks sellist projekti toetada!
Kas vajadusel on kirjalikult vormistatud muudatus, kui projekti rakendamisel on toimunud muututuseid?
Näiteks on muudetud:
1) toetatavat tegevust või selle ulatust või jäetakse tegevus ära või lisatakse täiendav tegevus;
2) toetatava tegevusega saavutatavat väljundinäitajat või selle sihttaset;
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.6 3) projekti tulemusnäitaja sihttaset;
artiklid 4.11, 4.12
4) projekti abikõlblike kulude kogumahtu või toetuse osakaalu abikõlblikest kuludest;
5) projekti abikõlblikkuse perioodi;
6) kulude hüvitamise korda, kui korra muutmine seisneb tegelike ja tasutud kulude alusel või kulude
lihtsustatud hüvitamisviiside alusel toetuse maksmises või
7) muud asjaolu.
Projekti tulemuste saavutamine
Kas toetuse saaja on tõendanud kõikide kokku lepitud tulemuste, väljundite ja tegevuste
täitmist/saavutamist?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.8 Projekti tulemus on muutus ehk situatsioon, mida soovitakse saavutada projekti lõpuks.
artikkel 6.1
Projekti väljund on tingimused, mis tagavad muutuse (seatakse väljundindikaatorid).
Projekti ülesanne on sisendite abil läbiviidatavate tegevustega toota väljundid otseste eesmärkide
(tulemuste) saavutamiseks
Kas toetusest soetatud/ehitatud objektid (varad) on tegelikult olemas (ja sihipäraselt kasutuses) ja
teenused tegelikult saadud?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.9
artikkel 6.1
Kas ilma füüsilise väljundita teenuste puhul (koolitused, seminarid, tugiteenused vms) on tegevust
planeeritud kujul tegelikult ellu viidud ning kas teenust osutati sihtrühmale, kellele see oli planeeritud?
Kas toetuse saajal/partneril/lõppsaajal on olemas kõik abikõlblikkust tõendavad dokumendid ja muud
tõendid, mis annab tervikliku ülevaate projekti rakendamisest? Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.11
artikkel 6.1
Abikõlblikkust tõendavad dokumendid tuleb lisada auditi kausta tõendusmaterjalide hulka.
Kas auditi raames kättesaadavaks saanud informatsioon viitab sellele, et:
1) võrdõiguslikkuse;
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
1.12 2) sotsiaalse kaasatuse;
artiklid 2.5 ja 2.6
3) keskkonnakaitse;
4) kliimamuutuste leevendamise või nende mõjudega kohanemise nõudeid ei ole rikutud?
2 Kas deklareeritud kulud vastavad toetuse saaja raamatupidamisaruannetele ja raamatupidamise algdokumentidele?
Organisatsiooni raamatupidamise sise-eeskiri ja asjaajamiskord
Kas kõiki tõendavaid dokumente kulude ja kohta hoitakse kas originaalide kujul või variantides, mille puhul Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
2.1
on kinnitatud originaalile vastavus, üldiselt aktsepteeritud andmekandjatel? artikkel 6.1
Kas toetuse saaja/partner on eristanud enda raamatupidamises projektiga seotud kulud muudest kuludest
ning projektist teenitud tulud (laekumised) muudest tuludest?
Kas projekti abikõlblikud kulud on eristatavad ja kontrollitavad, eelkõige projekti elluviija ja/või projekti
partneri raamatupidamisdokumentides kajastatuna ja määratud kindlaks vastavalt selle riigi kohaldavatele Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
2.2
raamatupidamisstandarditele, kus projekti elluviija ja/või projekti partner on asutatud, ning vastavalt heale artikkel 6.1
raamatupidamistavale?
Kulude eristamiseks võib kasutada kas eraldiseisvat arvestussüsteemi või raamatupidamiskoode (näiteks
kasutada raamatupidamisarvestuse tarkvaras eraldi kontosid või projekti tunnuseid)
Kulud toetuse saaja raamatupidamises
Kas deklareeritud kulud vastavad toetuse saaja/partneri raamatupidamises kajastatule?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
2.3 Kas projekti elluviija raamatupidamise siseeeskirjad ja auditeerimise kord peavad võimaldama projekti
artikkel 6.1
kohta deklareeritud kulude ja tulude otsest võrdlust vastavate raamatupidamisaruannete ja tõendavate
dokumentidega?
Kas kulusid tõendavad kuludokumendid (ja muud kulude abikõlblikkust tõendavad dokumendid, nt aktid, Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
2.4
tööajatabelid jne) on olemas ja asjakohased ning vastavad raamatupidamisnõuetele? artikkel 6.1
Kas tasumist tõendavad dokumendid (panga väljavõte, maksekorraldus, kassa väljamineku order või e- Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
2.5
riigikassa konto väljavõte) on olemas ja asjakohased? artikkel 6.1
Tulud toetuse saaja raamatupidamises
Kas projekt, mis teenib tulu (projekti perioodil) on sõlminud kokkuleppe riikliku koordineerimisüksuse ja Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
2.6
Šveitsiga tulude kasutamise põhimõtete osas? artikkel 4.15
3 Kas toetuse saaja poolt deklareeritud kulud on vastavuses Šveitsi raamkokkuleppe ja regulatsiooni ning Eesti õigusaktidega?
Kulude tekkimine ja abikõlblikkus
Kas kulu on tekkinud abikõlblikkuse perioodil?
Kas abikõlblikud kulud on tehtud lepingus sätestatud rahastamiskõlblikkuse esimese ja viimase kuupäeva
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.1 vahel?
artikkel 6.1
Kas kulud on reaalselt tehtud ja kulu kohta on koostatud kuludokument, see on makstud ja selle objekt
kohale toimetatud (kaupade puhul) või teostatud (teenuste ja tööde puhul)?
Kas kulu tekkimine on tõendatud?
Kas toetuse saaja on lähtuvalt rahvusvahelistest tunnustatud raamatupidamise ja finantsaruandluse
põhimõtetest kulu aluseks oleva arve või muu sarnase tõendusjõuga raamatupidamisdokumendi alusel
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.2 kajastanud kulu oma raamatupidamises kohustusena?
artikkel 6.1
Kas kulud on reaalselt tehtud ja kulu kohta on koostatud kuludokument, see on makstud ja selle objekt
kohale toimetatud (kaupade puhul) või teostatud (teenuste ja tööde puhul)?
Kas kulu on makstud toetuse saaja või partneri poolt projekti abikõlblikkuse perioodil või pärast
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.3 abikõlblikkuse perioodi selleks ettenähtud aja jooksul (arve on väljastatud järgneval kuul ja tasutud 30p
artikkel 6.1
jooksul peale väljastamist)?
Kululiikide abikõlblikkus
Kas on tehtud ainult kulusid, mis tulenevad projekti või programmikomponendi elluviimiseks sõlmitud
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.4 lepingutest või nõuetest, mis on kehtestatud projekte või programmikomponente käsitlevas toetusmeetme
artikkel 6.2
lepingus?
Kas ehitiste soetamise, ehitamise, renoveerimise ja ümberehitamise kulud on tehtud ainult toetusmeetme Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.5
lepingus sõnaselgelt lubatud ulatuses ja kooskõlas artikkel 4.15 nõuetega? artiklid 4.15 ja 6.2
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.6 Kas tehtud tarbekaupade ja tarvikute kulud on eristatavad ja hõlmatud toetusmeetmega?
artikkel 6.2
Kas tehtud sõidu-, majutus- ja elamiskulud hõlmavad ainult projektis või programmikomponendis osalevat
personali?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.7
artikkel 6.2
Kas projektis osalevate töötajate päevaraha arvestus on kooskõlas ka siseriiklike määradega? Kas
projektis osalevate töötajate reisikulude tegemisel on järgitud Riigihangete seadust?
Kas projektide või programmikomponentide rakendamisega seotud personali kulud:
1) koosnevad tegelikust töötasust;
2) millele lisanduvad sotsiaalkindlustusmaksed ja muud töötasuga kaasnevad seadusjärgsed kulud;
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.8 3) täiendavad toetusmeetme rakendamist ning on selleks tõendatult vajalikud;
artikkel 6.2
4) on toetusmeetme lepingu eelarves kokku lepitud või ette nähtud programmikomponendi eelarves
Kas projekti heaks tööle määratud töötajate kulu vastab ka projekti elluviija tavalisele töötasupoliitikale?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.9 Kas toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondi puhul on toetatud projekti teise etapi taotluste koostamist?
artikkel 6.3
Kas toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondi puhul vastavad teenuste kulud kumulatiivselt järgmistele
tingimustele?
1) teenused on projektitaotluste koostamiseks, mis esitatakse Šveitsile teises etapis heaks kiitmiseks;
2) teenuseid osutavad taotlejaga mitteseotud tehnilised või õiguseksperdid, kelle eksperditeadmised Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.10
täiendavad taotleja teadmisi; artikkel 6.3
3) teenuste tulemused on: a) dokumendid/uuringud, mis on vajalikud taotleja esitatava toetusmeetme
taotluse täiendamiseks; või b) kavandatava toetusmeetme osana hangitavate kaupade ja teenuste
hankedokumentide kavandid
Kas toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondi puhul on toetatud programmioperaatorite kantavate ja Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.11
programmide ettevalmistamisega seotud kulusid? artikkel 6.3
Kas toetatud on programmioperaatori halduskulusid, mis kuuluvad järgmistesse kategooriatesse:
a) programmi ettevalmistamisega, sealhulgas programmi kavandi, tulemuste raamistiku ja
sidusrühmadega konsulteerimisega, otseselt seotud kulud;
b) programmi rakendamise ettevalmistamisega, sealhulgas programmikomponentide valimise ja
rahavoogude menetluse väljatöötamisega, seotud kulud;
c) programmikomponentide valimisega seotud kulud, sealhulgas välisekspertide kulud ning koosolekute ja
kaebustega seotud kulud;
d) kulud, mida kantakse võimalike taotlejate ja programmikomponentide operaatorite abistamiseks
programmioperaatori poolt programmikomponentide rakendustele ja/või programmikomponentide
rakendamisele seatud nõuete täitmisel;
e) müügiedendus- ja teavitustegevuse kulud, sealhulgas taotlusvoorude ja teabetööga seotud kulud Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.12
taotlusperioodi jooksul, aga ka teabeürituste kulud kogemuste ja hea tava jagamiseks; artikkel 6.4
f) kulud, mis on kantud kulude kontrollimiseks, maksete kinnitamiseks ja maksete ülekandmiseks
programmikomponentide operaatoritele;
g) kulud, mis on kantud seoses programmikomponentide seire, programmi või selle komponentide
kontrollimise ja hindamisega ning programmi mõju, asjakohasuse ja jätkusuutlikkuse hindamisega;
h) raamkokkuleppe artiklites 9.1, 9.2 ja 9.4 sätestatud audititest erinevate auditite ning
programmikomponentide kohapealse kontrolli kulud;
i) kulud seoses kohustusega anda aru Šveitsile või partnerriigi riiklikele üksustele artikli 3.2 alusel;
j) toetusmeetme juhtkomitee töö korraldamise ja juhtimisega seotud kulud;
k) kulud, mis tulenevad regulatsioonis või toetusmeetme lepingus nõutud pangakontode avamise ja
kasutamisega seotud tasudest, sealhulgas sisse- ja väljamaksete kulud.
Kas toetatud on programmioperaatori halduskulusid, mis on korrektselt määratletud kui Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.13
rahastamiskõlblikud toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondist? artikkel 6.4
Kas programmioperaatorite halduskuludega seotud personali kulud:
1) koosnevad tegelikust töötasust;
2) millele lisanduvad sotsiaalkindlustusmaksed ja muud töötasuga kaasnevad seadusjärgsed kulud;
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.14 3) täiendavad toetusmeetme rakendamist ning on selleks tõendatult vajalikud;
artikkel 6.4
4) on toetusmeetme lepingu eelarves kokku lepitud või ette nähtud programmikomponendi eelarves
Kas projekti heaks tööle määratud töötajate kulu vastab ka projekti elluviija tavalisele töötasupoliitikale?
Kas tehnilise abiga seonduvad kulud:
a) on seotud koostööprogrammi raames Šveitsi ametiasutustega peetud kohtumistega, sealhulgas
osalejate sõidu-, majutus- ja elamiskulud;
b) on seotud koostööprogrammi raames moodustatud komiteede koosolekutega ja sidusrühmadega
peetavate konsultatsioonidega, kui need kulud ei ole juba kantud toetusmeetme eelarvesse;
c) on toetusmeetmete taotlusvoorude avalikustamise kulud;
d) on kulud seoses teabeüritustega, kogemuste vahetamisega ja suutlikkuse suurendamisega tagamaks,
et riikliku koordineerimisüksuse, vahendusasutuste, makseasutuse, auditeerimisüksuse ja elluviivate
asutuste töötajad on täielikult teadlikud oma kohustustest ja on võimelised täitma neile määratud
ülesandeid, sealhulgas osalejate sõidu-, majutus- ja elamiskulud;
e) on toetusmeetme taotluste läbivaatamisega seotud tehnilise konsultatsiooni ja õigusteenuste kulud;
f) on hankedokumentide läbivaatamisega seotud tehnilise konsultatsiooni ja õigusteenuste kulud;
g) on toetusmeetmete seirega seotud tehniliste konsultatsiooniteenuste kulud, sealhulgas toetusmeetmete
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.15 kohapealse kontrolliga seotud kulud;
artikkel 6.5
h) on kontrollimise, hindamise ja kapitaliseerimisprotsessidega seotud kulud koostööprogrammi tasandil
või teemavaldkonna raames;
i) on kulud seoses toetusmeetmete audititega ning koostööprogrammi tasandi juhtimis- ja
kontrollisüsteemide audititega, mille korraldavad auditeerimisüksuse määratud sõltumatud ja
sertifitseeritud audiitorid;
j) on koostööprogrammi nähtavuse tagamiseks osutatavate teenuste kulud;
k) on kirjaliku ja suulise tõlke kulud;
l) on raamkokkuleppe artiklis 3.2 loetletud ametiasutuste kulud seoses lisaseadmetega, sealhulgas
koostööprogrammi rakendamiseks spetsiaalselt hangitud tarkvaraga;
m) on seotud töötasuga, sotsiaalkindlustusmaksetega ja muude seadusjärgsete kuludega
raamkokkuleppe artiklis 3.2 nimetatud riiklike üksuste ametnike puhul või ekspertide puhul, kellel on
vajalikud valdkondlikud õiguslikud või tehnilised eksperditeadmised ja kes on ajutiselt määratud täitma
lisaülesandeid üksnes koostööprogrammi heaks
Käibemaks:
Kas käibemaks on abikõlblik vaid juhul, kui see ei ole käibemaksu reguleerivate õigusaktide alusel tagasi
nõutav?
NB! Kontrolli, kas toetuse saaja/partner on auditi teostamise ajal KM-kohustuslane. Sest juhul kui soetati Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.16
põhivara ja KM oli abikõlblik (toetuse saaja/partner ei olnud käibemaksukohustuslane), kuid selgub, et artikkel 6.6
toetuse saaja on vahepeal muutunud KM kohustuseks, siis on põhivara sisendkäibemaks KMS alusel
tagasi saadav ega ole seetõttu abikõlblik. (Oluline ei ole seejuures, kas toetuse saaja oma õigust
sisendkäibemaksu maha arvata tegelikult kasutab või mitte)
Mitteabikõlblikud / välistatud kulud
Kas kulu katteks ei ole toetust eraldatud või makstud teisest meetmest või riigieelarve või muu avaliku
sektori või muudest välisabi vahenditest? Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.17
artikkel 6.6
Teha ristkontroll (SFCS) lähtuvalt audiitori hinnatavast riskist. Tulemus lisada kommentaari lahtrisse.
Kas projekti eelarvesse ei ole planeeritud ega projekti kuludega hüvitatud järgmiseid kulusid:
a) võlaintressid, võlateeninduskulud ja viivised;
b) finantstehingute tasud ja muud puhtalt rahalised kulud, välja arvatud kulud, mis on seotud riikliku
koordineerimisüksuse või makseasutuse nõutavate või kehtivas õiguses ette nähtud kontodega, ning
toetusmeetme lepingu alusel nõutavate finantsteenuste kulud;
c) kahjueraldised või eraldised võimalike tulevaste kohustuste katteks;
d) vahetuskursikahju, välja arvatud kahju, mis tuleneb Šveitsi partnerite kaasamisest;
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.18 e) maa soetamiseks kantud kulud;
artikkel 6.6
f) käibemaks, mis on abstraktselt mis tahes vahendite arvelt tagastatav, isegi kui toetusesaaja ise faktiliselt
käibemaksu tagasi ei saa;
g) kulud, mis kaetakse muudest allikatest;
h) trahvid, sunniraha, hüvitised või muud sellega seotud hüvitatavad summad, sealhulgas saamata jäänud
kasum ja kohtuvaidluste kulud, välja arvatud juhul, kui kohtuvaidlus on toetusmeetme tulemuste
saavutamiseks lahutamatu ja vajalik, ja
i) ülemäärased või ebamõistlikud kulud.
Kas auditeeritud kuludes ei esine pettuse tunnusjooni/tingimusi, mis võib viidata seotusele pettusega?
Lahknevused arvestusandmetes, sealhulgas alljärgnev:
• tehingud, mis ei ole kajastatud täielikult või õigeaegselt või on summa, arvestusperioodi, klassifikatsiooni
või majandusüksuse poliitika osas ebaõigesti kajastatud;
• alusdokumentideta tehingud;
• viimasel hetkel tehtud korrigeerimised;
• vihjed või kaebused audiitorile väidetava pettuse kohta.
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.19 Vastuoluline või puuduv tõendusmaterjal, sealhulgas:
artikkel 6.6
• puuduvad dokumendid;
• dokumendid, mis tunduvad olevat muudetud;
• ainult fotokoopiate või elektrooniliselt edastatud dokumentide kättesaadavus siis, kui eeldatakse
originaaldokumentide olemasolu;
• märkimisväärsed selgituseta näitajad kooskõlastavates võrdlemistes;
• juhtkonna või töötajate mittejärjepidevad, ebamäärased või mittemõistlikud vastused järelepärimistele või
analüütilistele protseduuridele;
• mittekättesaadav või puuduv elektrooniline tõendusmaterjal, mis on mittejärjepidev majandusüksuse
arvestusandmete säilitamise praktikate või poliitikatega
Riigihanked
Riigihanked (riigihangete läbiviimise kontrollimiseks täida hangete kontroll-leht)
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.17 Kas toetuse saaja / partner on järginud projektiga seotud hangete tegemisel RHS-is sätestatud nõudeid,
artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted
kui toetuse saaja/partner on hankija RHS tähenduses (projekti on kantud hanke maksumusest alates 20
000 EUR või hanke maksumus on alates 20 000EUR)?
Juhul kui toetuse saaja või partner on määratlenud end mittehankijana, siis kas see on vastavuses hankija
mõistega RHS-is (vt RHS-i §10 (enne 01.09.17 kehtinud RHS) / §5 (pärast 01.09.17 kehtinud RHS))?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.18
artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted
On oht, et MTÜ-d, SA-d jms määratlevad end mittehankijatena ning seetõttu ei ole ostude tegemisel
järginud RHS, kuigi lähtuvalt RHS-ist on tegemist hankijatega ning RHS-i tuleb neil järgida.
Kas toetuse saaja või partner, kes ei pea järgima RHS-i ja teenuse, asja või ehitustöö eeldatav maksumus
on ilma käibemaksuta võrdne 20 000 euroga või sellest suurem, on järgitud parimaid majanduspraktikaid
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.19 sh aruandekohustust, võimaldavad täielikku ja õiglast konkurentsi pakkujate vahel, näiteks tõhusa
artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted
hinnavõrdluse teel ja tagavad Norra vahendite optimaalse kasutuse?
Vastav detailne info kajastada Võrdluse kontroll-lehel (lisa 4)
Kas toetuse saaja või partner, kes ei pea järgima RHS-i ja teenuse, asja või ehitustöö eeldatav maksumus
on ilma käibemaksuta võrdne 20 000 euroga või sellest suurem, on ostude sooritamisel vältinud
konkurentsi kahjustavat huvide konflikti?
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.20 RHS §4 p8 - huvide konflikt on olukord, kus hankija või tema nimel tegutseva isiku töötajal, ametnikul,
artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted
juhatuse liikmel või muul pädeval esindajal, kes on kaasatud riigihanke ettevalmistamisse või
korraldamisse või kes võib muul moel mõjutada selle riigihanke tulemust, on otseselt või kaudselt
finantsalaseid, majanduslikke või muid isiklikke huvisid, mida võib käsitada tema erapooletust ja
sõltumatust kahjustavatena.
Kas toetuse saaja või partner, kes ei pea järgima RHS-i, kuid saab 50% või rohkem projekti abikõlblikest Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
kuludest projekti toetusena, on viinud läbi riigihanke? artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted
Kas toetuse saaja, kes on hankija RHS tähenduses, on andnud riigihanke korraldamise STS § 27 lõike 2
alusel määratud kompetentsikeskusele, kui nii on sätestatud TAT-is ja hankelepingu maksumus ilma Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.21
käibemaksuta on võrdne riigihanke piirmääraga või ületab seda ja on sõlminud kompetentsikeskusega artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted
hanke korraldamise lepingu?
Riigiabi
Riigiabi
Kas projektile (sh programmile) antud toetus sisaldab riigiabi?
3.16 Raamkokkuleppe artikkel 4
Kui JAH, siis täida vastav kontroll-leht
Kontroll-küsimused tuvastamaks, kas toetus sisaldab riigiabi (küs 3.16.1 -3.16.2)?
Kas tegu on majandustegevusega-ettevõtjaga-ettevõtmisega?
Ettevõtjaks võib mh olla MTÜ; spordiklubi; arst. Vt mõisteid ja detailseimaid selgitusi Lisas 18 toodud
3.16.1 juhenditest "1.b_Riigiabi_kasiraamat_2016" lk5 (riigiabi mõiste) ja "1._State_aid_draft_guidance_en"
punkti 2 (punkti 2 alampunktides on erinevad näited tegevustest, mis esmapilgul ei pruugi tunduda
majandustegevusena). Näiteks võib seaduses olla kirjas, et looduskaitse ei ole majandustegevus, kuid
tegelikkuses sõltub see toetuse saaja (majandus)tegevusest.
Kas abi andmine kahjustab/moonutab liikmesriikide vahelist kaubandust?
Vt detailseimaid selgitusi ja näiteid Lisas 18 toodud juhenditest "1.b_Riigiabi_kasiraamat_2016" lk7 - 4.
Mõju konkurentsile ja kaubandusele ja "1._State_aid_draft_guidance_en" punkt 6.3.
3.16.2
Kaubandus on kahjustatud, kui toetuse tõttu toimub kaupade/rahade liikumine siia või on tegu ekspordiga.
Nt: toetuse saaja on põllumees ja ekspordib liha. Toetuse tõttu on näha, et välismaised ettevõtted
investeerivad siia, et saada toetust. Toetuse saajate seas on välismaised firmad või on eesti firma
omanikuks välismaalased.
Kas infrastruktuuriprojektide puhul on tuvastatud kõik võimalikud kasusaajad/riigiabi saajad ja arvestatud
nendega riigiabi andmisel?
Võimalikeks kasusaajateks on: omanik (enamjaolt toetuse saaja), operaator, kasusaaja/kasutaja.
Nt: kortermajade renoveerimisel on toetuse saajaks KÜ, kuid kasusaaja on korteri või muu majas oleva
3.16.3
pinna omanik, kelleks võib olla ettevõte; praamide ostmisel on toetuse saajaks riik, kuid kui praam antakse
ilma hanketa mingi ettevõtte kasutusse, võib operaator olla riigiabi saaja; toetuse saaja on KOV, kes
remondib/ehitab tee keset metsa/tühermaad, mis viib vaid ühe ettevõteni, kes võib olla kasusaajaks;
prügila/reostatud maa (jääkreostuse likvideerimine) likvideerib/puhastab riigiasutus, kasusaajaks on aga
ettevõtted, kelle omandis korrastatud maa on.
Olenemata küsimuse 3.16 vastusest. Kas juhul kui toetust antakse teadusorganisatsiooni, teadmisi levitav
organisatsiooni ja/või teadusuuringute TARISTULE ja väidetakse, et riigiabi ei esine, siis kas on täidetud
3.16.4
riigiabi välistavad tingimused, vt Teadus- ja arendustegevuseks ning innovatsiooniks antava riigiabi
raamistiku peatükis 2 toodud tingimusi?
Kui toetus sisaldab riigiabi, siis kas on tegu EL poolt lubatud (seadusliku) riigiabiga, mida on antud kas EK
juhiste või raamistike, EK grupierandi määruse või vähese tähtsusega abi määruse alusel?
3.16.5
Kommentaaris tuua välja, millist tüüpi riigiabiga on tegemist.
Kas EK riigiabi otsuse nõudeid on järgitud, kui toetust on antud EK riigiabi otsuse alusel?
Näiteks: EK otsus "Euroopa Komisjoni 20. detsembri 2011. a otsusele (2012/21) „Euroopa Liidu toimimise
3.16.6 lepingu artikli 106 lõike 2 kohaldamise kohta üldist majandushuvi pakkuvaid teenuseid osutavatele
ettevõtjatele avalike teenuste eest makstava hüvitisena antava riigiabi suhtes” või muu EK riigiabi otsus.
Vaata paremalt lingilt SGEI – üldist majandushuvi pakkuvate teenuste paketti, kus viidatakse edasi otsuse
tingimusele. Toodud ka PA käsiraamatu lisas 18 -> 14._SGEI_Yldist_majandushuvi_pak_teen_pakett.
Finantskorrektsioonide rakendamine
Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.21 Kas auditi ulatuses olevate kuludega seotud finantskorrektsioonid on asjakohased ja piisavad?
artikkel 14.1
Teavitamine ja avalikustamine
Kas toetuse saaja/partner kasutab toetuse abil elluviidava projekti puhul ettenähtud sümboolikat ja Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni
3.22
teavitustegevusi? artiklid 13.1, 13.2 ja 13.3
4 Kas toetuse saajale on toetus makstud õigeaegselt ja ettenähtud mahus?
Kas toetuse väljamaksmine toetuse saajale on toimunud täies mahus ja õigeaegselt?
4.1
4.2 Kas väljamaksed on tehtud proportsioonis korrektse toetuse määraga?
Kas toetuse lõppmakse on tehtud pärast seda, kui projekti tegevused on lõpetatud ja lõpetamine
4.3
tõendatud?
Tööpaberi koostaja/auditi juht/auditi eest vastutav isik on allkirjastanud tööpaberi digitaalselt (nimed ja vastavad rollid on nähtavad digikonteineris)
Lisa 5
Viide
Kommentaarid
Ka positiivse vastuse korral lisada lühike selgitus või viide, milliseid
dokumente audiitor kontrollis ja või milliste toimingute läbiviimise
tulemusena audiitor vastavale järeldusele jõudis.
äraselt?
Second Swiss Contribution
Estonia
Annual Audit Report
Reporting Period: 21.02.23-30.06.24
Report Number: 1
Report Submission Date: 31.03.2025
Template version 28.11.23
TABLE OF CONTENT
AUDIT OPINION ................................................................................................................................................................ 3
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND OTHER BODIES THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN PREPARING THE REPORT ..... 4
1.2 REFERENCE PERIOD (I.E. THE REPORTING PERIOD ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS 9.3 (4)) ............................................................... 4
1.3 AUDIT PERIOD (DURING WHICH THE AUDIT WORK TOOK PLACE)................................................................................................. 4
1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF THE COOPERATION PROGRAMME COVERED BY THE REPORT AND OF ITS MANAGING AND PAYING AUTHORITIES. ....... 4
1.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE STEPS TAKEN TO PREPARE THE REPORT AND TO DRAW THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................... 5
2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ................................................................... 6
2.1 DETAILS OF ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS RELATED WITH MANAGING AND PAYING
AUTHORITIES' RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 THE DATES FROM WHICH THESE CHANGES APPLY, AS WELL AS THE IMPACT OF THESE CHANGES TO THE AUDIT WORK ARE TO BE INDICATED
6
3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY .................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 DETAILS OF ANY CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY, AND EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS. .............................................................. 7
3.2 DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE CHANGES MADE OR PROPOSED AT A LATE STAGE, WHICH DO NOT AFFECT THE WORK DONE DURING THE
REFERENCE PERIOD AND THE CHANGES MADE DURING THE REFERENCE PERIOD, THAT AFFECT THE AUDIT WORK AND RESULTS ................ 7
4. SYSTEM AUDITS .................................................................................................................................................. 8
4.1 DETAILS OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM OF THE PROGRAMME .................................................................................................... 8
4.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BASIS FOR THE AUDITS CARRIED OUT, INCLUDING A REFERENCE TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY APPLICABLE, MORE
PARTICULARLY TO THE RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND THE RESULTS THAT LED TO ESTABLISHING THE AUDIT PLAN FOR SYSTEM
AUDITS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8
4.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM SYSTEM AUDITS................................................................ 8
4.4 INDICATION OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE CONSIDERED TO BE OF A SYSTEMIC CHARACTER ....................................... 8
4.5 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SYSTEM AUDITS FROM PREVIOUS ACCOUNTING YEARS ........... 8
4.6 LEVEL OF ASSURANCE OBTAINED FOLLOWING THE SYSTEM AUDITS (LOW/AVERAGE/HIGH) AND JUSTIFICATION ................................... 8
5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES .................................................................................................................................. 9
5.1 INDICATION OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT CARRIED OUT THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES ............................ 9
5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLING METHODOLOGY APPLIED AND INFORMATION WHETHER THE METHODOLOGY IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
AUDIT STRATEGY .............................................................................................................................................................. 9
5.3 INDICATION OF THE PARAMETERS USED FOR STATISTICAL SAMPLING AND EXPLANATION OF THE UNDERLYING CALCULATIONS AND
PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT APPLIED .................................................................................................................................... 9
5.4 IN CASE OF THE USE OF NON-STATISTICAL SAMPLING, INDICATE THE REASONS FOR USING A DIFFERENT METHOD AND PRESENT THE
PERCENTAGE OF PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS/EXPENDITURE COVERED THROUGH AUDITS, THE STEPS TAKEN TO ENSURE
RANDOMNESS OF THE SAMPLE (AND THUS ITS REPRESENTATIVITY) AND TO ENSURE A SUFFICIENT SIZE OF THE SAMPLE ENABLING THE
AUDIT AUTHORITY TO DRAW UP A VALID AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10
5.5 ANALYSIS OF THE PRINCIPAL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES, DESCRIBING THE NUMBER OF SAMPLE ITEMS AUDITED, THE
RESPECTIVE AMOUNT AND TYPES OF ERRORS BY PROJECT/PROGRAMME COMPONENT, THE NATURE OF ERRORS FOUND, THE STRATUM
ERROR RATE AND CORRESPONDING MAIN DEFICIENCIES OR IRREGULARITIES, THE UPPER LIMIT OF THE ERROR RATE (WHERE APPLICABLE),
ROOT CAUSES, CORRECTIVE MEASURES PROPOSED (INCLUDING THOSE INTENDING TO AVOID THESE ERRORS IN SUBSEQUENT PAYMENT
APPLICATIONS) AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10
5.6 COMPARISON OF THE TOTAL ERROR RATE AND THE RESIDUAL TOTAL ERROR RATE WITH THE SET MATERIALITY LEVEL, TO ASCERTAIN IF THE
POPULATION IS MATERIALLY MISSTATED AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................................... 10
5.7 INFORMATION ON THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT OF THE COMPLEMENTARY SAMPLE ....................................................................... 10
5.8 DETAILS OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE SYSTEMIC IN NATURE, AND THE MEASURES TAKEN, INCLUDING A QUANTIFICATION
OF THE IRREGULAR EXPENDITURE AND ANY RELATED FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS ............................................................................ 10
5.9 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES CARRIED OUT IN PREVIOUS YEARS, ON DEFICIENCIES OF SYSTEMIC
NATURE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10
5.10 CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE OVERALL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................... 11
1
6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ...................................................................................................................................... 12
6.1 INDICATION OF THE AUTHORITIES/BODIES THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ........................................................... 12
6.2 DESCRIPTION OF AUDIT APPROACH USED TO VERIFY THE ELEMENTS OF THE ACCOUNTS ................................................................. 12
6.3 INDICATION OF THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE RESULTS OF THE AUDITS REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY AND VERACITY
OF THE ACCOUNTS, INCLUDING AN INDICATION ON THE FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS MADE AND REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNTS AS A FOLLOW -
UP TO THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND/OR AUDIT OF EXPENDITURES............................................................................ 12
7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY .................... 14
7.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND ANY AUDIT BODY THAT CARRIES OUT AUDITS
14
7.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR SUPERVISION AND QUALITY REVIEW APPLIED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY TO SUCH AUDIT BODY(IES)
14
8. OTHER INFORMATION....................................................................................................................................... 15
8.1 WHERE APPLICABLE, INFORMATION ON REPORTED FRAUD AND SUSPICIONS OF FRAUD DETECTED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AUDITS
PERFORMED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY (INCLUDING THE CASES REPORTED BY OTHER BODIES AND RELATED TO PROJECTS/PROGRAMME
COMPONENTS AUDITED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY), TOGETHER WITH THE MEASURES TAKEN ........................................................ 15
8.2 WHERE APPLICABLE, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS OCCURRED AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF THE ACCOUNTS TO THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND BEFORE
THE TRANSMISSION OF THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT AND CONSIDERED WHEN ESTABLISHING THE LEVEL OF ASSURANCE AND OPINION BY
THE AUDIT AUTHORITY ................................................................................................................................................... 15
9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 16
9.1 INDICATION OF THE OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM, AND
EXPLANATION OF HOW SUCH LEVEL WAS OBTAINED FROM THE COMBINATION OF THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND AUDITS OF
PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ............................................................................................................................. 16
9.2 ASSESSMENT OF ANY MITIGATING ACTIONS IMPLEMENTED, SUCH AS FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED FOR ANY
ADDITIONAL CORRECTIVE MEASURES NECESSARY, BOTH FROM A SYSTEM AND FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. ........................................... 16
ANNEX 1 – INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT (ACCOUNTS) .......................................................................................... 17
ANNEX 2 – AUDIT OPINION ON THE LEGALITY AND REGULARITY OF EXPENDITURE AND FUNCTIONING OF THE
MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................ 18
ANNEX 3 – OVERVIEW OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 19
2
AUDIT OPINION
The following summary report presents the significant findings of the examination of Support
Measures, systems and expenses of the Second Swiss Contribution by the Audit Authority.
The audit opinion to be provided annually by the Audit Authority for the Swiss Cooperation
Programme is based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained.
The report covers the three elements of the assurance:
- Accounts (audit opinion Annex 1)
- Legality & regularity of expenditure (separate audit opinion in Annex 2)
- Functioning of the management and control system (separate audit opinion in Annex 2)
Three types of opinions are foreseen:
- Unqualified opinion
- Qualified opinion (either with limited or significant impact)
- Adverse opinion
The following cover the Programme Components and Projects listed in Annex 3.
Findings on the accounts
No findings
Findings on legality & regularity of expenditure
No findings
Findings on functioning of the management and control system
No findings
Audit result
Unqualified opinion
3
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Identification of the responsible Audit Authority and other bodies that have been
involved in preparing the report
The Annual Audit Report is prepared by the Audit Authority of the second Swiss Contribution between
the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Estonia (“Swiss-Estonian
Cooperation Facility”)
Identification of the Audit Authority:
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia
Financial Control Department
Suur-Ameerika 1A
Tallinn, Estonia
Contacts:
Anu Alber
Head of the Financial Control Department, Head of the Audit Authority
Mobile: +372 5885 1318
Email:
[email protected]
Mart Pechter
Head of the Audit Unit II
Mobile: +372 611 3152
Email:
[email protected]
The Audit Authority has been solely responsible for the preparation of this report.
1.2 Reference period (i.e. the reporting period according to Regulations 9.3 (4))
The Annual Audit Report covers the period from 21.02.2023 till 30.06.2024.
1.3 Audit period (during which the audit work took place)
This is the first Annual Audit Report of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility and information
contained herein covers the audit work period from the beginning date of 21.02.2023 until the
submission of this report in 31.03.2025. Please note that the audit work carried out in this period
covers only the costs and activities within the reference period (21.02.2023-30.06.2024).
All audit work that has been carried out is in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards
(Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors) and
the work plan of the Financial Control Department.
1.4 Identification of the Cooperation Programme covered by the report and of its
Managing and Paying authorities.
The Annual Audit Report covers the second Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the
European Union that was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the
Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of the Swiss
Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth again be referred to as “Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility”. The respective Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit)
4
and Paying Authority of Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility are situated in the State Shared Service
Centre of Estonia.
1.5 Description of the steps taken to prepare the report and to draw the audit
opinion
The Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) has submitted one overall payment claim
concerning the period (containing claim No. 1 for technical assistance, claim No. 1 for preparation
fund presented by the Ministry of Climate and claim No. 1 for preparation fund presented by the
Ministry of Culture). The Audit Authority has ensured correctness of the data by reconciling it against
the expenditure in amounts included in audit population.
The Audit Authority has considered the results of audits of operations and the audit of accounts in the
preparation of the Annual Audit Report and in the audit opinion. No system system audits have
currently been carried out. The Audit Authority has also assessed that information provided by the
Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) is not inconsistent with the audit results for the
purpose of audit opinion.
5
2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL
SYSTEMS
2.1 Details of any significant changes in the management and control systems
related with Managing and Paying Authorities' responsibilities
The Description of the Management and Control Systems for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility
has been drawn up. Currently, this has not been updated because the Managing Authority (the
National Coordination Unit) is going through a few changes, including choosing a new Head of
Authority.
The Audit Authority is aware of the process and has already planned the task of reviewing the
Description of the Management and Control Systems once the new Head of Authority has been
chosen, and the Description of the Management and Control Systems has been updated and
approved. However, this process will not begin until the second half of the year 2025.
2.2 The dates from which these changes apply, as well as the impact of these
changes to the audit work are to be indicated
The information regarding these points will be addressed in the next Annual Audit Report.
6
3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY
3.1 Details of any changes to the audit strategy, and explanation of the reasons.
The Audit Authority has drawn up the audit strategy, and has updated it in March 2025 in line with the
recommendations received during communications with the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility.
3.2 Differentiation between the changes made or proposed at a late stage, which do
not affect the work done during the reference period and the changes made
during the reference period, that affect the audit work and results
The updates have no effect to the audit work or results.
7
4. SYSTEM AUDITS
4.1 Details of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that have carried out audits
on the proper functioning of the management and control system of the
Programme
Only the Audit Authority carries out the system audits. No other body has been given the right to do
so.
4.2 Description of the basis for the audits carried out, including a reference to the
audit strategy applicable, more particularly to the risk assessment methodology
and the results that led to establishing the audit plan for system audits
The system audits are carried out in accordance with the Audit Strategy, the annual risk assessment
and the annual working plan of the Financial Control Department.
For the reporting covered in this Annual Audit Report, no system audits have yet been carried out.
This has been agreed in communication with the Audit Authority and the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation
Facility. The first system audit will be carried out in the year 2025.
4.3 Description of the main findings and conclusions drawn from system audits1
There are no findings and conclusions, as no system audits have been carried out yet.
4.4 Indication of whether any problems identified were considered to be of a
systemic character
There are no problems of systemic character.
4.5 Information on the follow-up of audit recommendations from system audits from
previous accounting years
There are no previous recommendations to be followed up.
4.6 Level of assurance obtained following the system audits (low/average/high) and
justification
As no system audits have been carried out, the Audit Authority currently gives no opinion on the
management and control system based on that. However, based on the audit of expenditures carried
out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from the audit, the
management and control system can be assessed at least as average.
1 If several system audits took place during the reporting period, it is possible to add a list as an annex at the
end of the document, to facilitate the overview. As an example for the list, Chapter 10.1 of the Annex II of the
EU regulations 2018/1291 can be used. This should be done in addition to the description of the main findings
and conclusions under 4.3.
8
5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES
5.1 Indication of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that carried out the
audits of expenditures
Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of expenditures. No other body has been given the right
to do so.
5.2 Description of the sampling methodology2 applied and information whether the
methodology is in accordance with the audit strategy
When carrying out the audits of expenditures, the sampling methodology was applied in two ways,
both of which were consistent with the audit strategy.
During the first audit of expenditures, all costs in total amounts of 89 977,50 euros were included in
the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat projects or
other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that 87 cost
items were included. From them, a statistical sample was drawn using monetary unit sampling. The
statistical sampling was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.
This resulted in a sample of 30 cost items with a total amount of 61 511,74 euros (68,4% of the
population total amount).
During an additional audit of expenditures, all additional costs in amounts of 56 462,25 euros were
included in the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat
projects or other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that
in number, 41 additional cost items were included. From them, a non-statistical sample was drawn
using the principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of costs. The non-statistical sampling
was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.
This resulted in a sample of 5 cost items with a total amount of 11 388,45 euros (20,2% of the
population total amount).
In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited in two separate sub-populations, using
two separate methods of sampling. Both methods were consistent with the principles of statistical and
non-statistical sampling as well as with the audit strategy.
In total, 72 900,19 euros was audited, totaling 49,8% of the total amounts in the population.
5.3 Indication of the parameters used for statistical sampling and explanation of the
underlying calculations and professional judgement applied
For the statistical sampling, monetary unit sampling (probability proportional to cost) was applied. The
general principles in the methodology of the Financial Control Department were used: confidence
level of 80%, expected error rate of 1,13% and materiality level of 2% from which then the respective
sampling interval was calculated, given the population size of 89 977,50 euros and 87 cost items.
There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no
need to apply additional professional judgment.
2 The Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1291 as well as the European Commission’s Guidance on
sampling methods (EGESIF_16-0014-01) can be taken as references.
9
5.4 In case of the use of non-statistical sampling, indicate the reasons for using a
different method and present the percentage of Projects/Programme
Components/expenditure covered through audits, the steps taken to ensure
randomness of the sample (and thus its representativity) and to ensure a
sufficient size of the sample enabling the Audit Authority to draw up a valid
audit opinion
For the non-statistical sampling, the general principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of
costs were applied and simple random sampling with equal probability was carried out on the
population of 56 462,25 euros and 41 cost items.
There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no
need to apply additional professional judgment.
5.5 Analysis of the principal results of the audits of expenditures, describing the
number of sample items audited, the respective amount and types of errors by
Project/Programme Component, the nature of errors found, the stratum error
rate and corresponding main deficiencies or irregularities, the upper limit of the
error rate (where applicable), root causes, corrective measures proposed
(including those intending to avoid these errors in subsequent payment
applications) and the impact on the audit opinion
In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited, containing 128 items. The number of
items audited together was 35, with a total amount of 72 900,19 euros. No deficiencies or
irregularities were detected.
5.6 Comparison of the total error rate and the residual total error rate with the set
materiality level, to ascertain if the population is materially misstated and the
impact on the audit opinion3
The total error rate and the residual error rate are both 0.
5.7 Information on the results of the audit of the complementary sample
There has been no need for a complementary sample, and none has been drawn by the Audit
Authority.
5.8 Details of whether any problems identified were systemic in nature, and the
measures taken, including a quantification of the irregular expenditure and any
related financial corrections
There were no problems or irregularities identified and none that were systemic in nature. There has
been no irregular expenditure and no financial corrections.
5.9 Information on the follow-up of audits of expenditures carried out in previous
years, on deficiencies of systemic nature
3 The European Commission’s “Guidance for Member States on the Annual Control Report and Audit Opinion to
be reported by audit authorities and on the treatment of errors detected by audit authorities in view of
establishing and reporting reliable total residual error rates” (EGESIF_15-0002-04) can be taken as a reference.
10
There has been no follow-up of audits of expenditures as none have been conducted previously.
5.10 Conclusions drawn from the overall results of the audits of expenditures
regarding the effectiveness of the management and control system
There were no findings related to audits of expenditures. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audits of
expenditures can be assessed as high.
11
6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS
6.1 Indication of the authorities/bodies that have carried out audits of accounts
Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of accounts. No other body has been given the right to
do so.
6.2 Description of audit approach used to verify the elements of the accounts
The Audit Authority has verified the elements of the accounts in full by carrying out the audits of
expenditures that have included in its entirety the following costs.
1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.
2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount
of 2 603,73 euros.
3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of
6 514,90 euros.
4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in
the amount of 11 987,71 euros.
5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of
14 952,61 euros.
6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of
30 804,23 euros.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.
This was in turn compared with the amounts declared by the Managing Authority (the National
Coordination Unit).
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared
Service Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical
assistance audited under point 1.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry
of Climate covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund
audited under point 5.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry
of Culture covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds
audited under points 2, 3, 4 and 6.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.
6.3 Indication of the conclusions drawn from the results of the audits regarding the
completeness, accuracy and veracity of the accounts, including an indication on
the financial corrections made and reflected in the accounts as a follow-up to
the results of the system audits and/or audit of expenditures
There were no findings related to audit of accounts. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audit of accounts can
12
be assessed as high. There are no findings resulting from the audits of expenditures and thus no
effect in that regard exists to the accounts. No financial corrections are made, and no follow-up is
necessary.
13
7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY
WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY
7.1 Description of the procedure for coordination between the Audit Authority and
any audit body that carries out audits
No body other than the Audit Authority has carried out any audits.
7.2 Description of the procedure for supervision and quality review applied by the
Audit Authority to such audit body(ies)
Whenever audit work may be outsourced by the Audit Authority, full quality control in accordance with
the methodology will be carried out by the Audit Authority before accepting any final audit work from
other bodies.
14
8. OTHER INFORMATION
8.1 Where applicable, information on reported fraud and suspicions of fraud detected in
the context of the audits performed by the Audit Authority (including the cases
reported by other bodies and related to Projects/Programme Components audited
by the Audit Authority), together with the measures taken
There has been no reported fraud or suspicions of fraud detected.
8.2 Where applicable, subsequent events occurred after the submission of the
accounts to the Audit Authority and before the transmission of the Annual Audit
Report and considered when establishing the level of assurance and opinion by the
Audit Authority
No subsequent events that occurred after the submission of the accounts are there to be considered.
15
9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE
9.1 Indication of the overall level of assurance on the proper functioning of the
management and control system, and explanation of how such level was
obtained from the combination of the results of the system audits and audits of
Projects/Programme Components
The overall level of assurance is reflected in the audit opinion, which is unqualified.
Assurance on the accounts – the Audit Authority concludes that the accounts contain complete,
accurate and truthful information.
Assurance on the effective functioning of the management and control systems – the Audit Authority
concludes that although no system audits have been carried out, the results of the audits of
expenditures carried out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from
the audit, the management and control system can be assessed at least as average. Looking at the
results of the audit of expenditures separately, since no findings have been detected from there, the
assurance can even be assessed as high.
However, the Audit Authority is of the opinion that when no system audits have yet been carried out,
an overall level of assurance cannot be given as high. Therefore, an overall level of assurance of
average should be indicated for now.
9.2 Assessment of any mitigating actions implemented, such as financial
corrections and assessment of the need for any additional corrective measures
necessary, both from a system and financial perspective.
There are no mitigating actions necessary for now.
16
Annex 1 – Independent auditor’s report (accounts)
Independent auditor’s report on financial information
Opinion
We have audited the financial information for Projects and Programme components listed in Annex 3, which
comprise the annual accounts for the year 2024 (21.02.2023-30.06.2024)
In our opinion, the accompanying financial information on the above-mentioned Projects and Programme
Components for the year 2024 ended 30.06.2024 are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with
national law and jurisdiction of the Republic of Estonia as well as with the rules and requirements of Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility.
Basis for opinion
We conducted our audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards issued by the Institute of Internal
Auditors. Our responsibilities under those provisions and standards are further described in this report.
We are independent of the entity in accordance with the requirements of the Global Internal Audit Standards,
and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that
the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.
Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Information
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial information. This
responsibility includes designing, implementing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation and
fair presentation of financial information that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error;
selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies; and making accounting estimates that are reasonable in
the circumstances.
Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial information
Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial information is free from material
misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion.
Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in
accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards always detect a material misstatement when it exists.
Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they
could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken based on this financial
information.
As part of an audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards, we exercise professional judgment and
maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. We also:
• Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial information, whether due to fraud
or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that
is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material
misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve
collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.
• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit to design audit procedures that are
appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness
of the entity’s internal control.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting
estimates and related disclosures made by Management.
Signed electronically
Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority
31.03.2025
Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia
Tallinn, Estonia
Annex: Audited accounts (Annex 3)
17
Annex 2 – Audit opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure and
functioning of the management and control system
Independent auditor’s report on financial information on the legality and regularity of expenditure and
functioning of the management and control system
Opinion
We have audited the institutions, Projects and Programme Components listed in Annex 3.
In our opinion and based on the audit work performed:
- the expenditure in the accounts for which reimbursement has been requested is legal and regular,
- the management and control systems put in place function properly.
The examination of the institutions, Projects and Programme Components have been conducted in accordance
with defined audit strategy and taking into consideration internationally accepted audit standards.
Signed electronically
Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority
31.03.2025
Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia
Tallinn, Estonia
18
Annex 3 – Overview of Projects and Programme Components
The following projects were audited by the Audit Authority.
1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.
2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount
of 2 603,73 euros.
3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of
6 514,90 euros.
4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in
the amount of 11 987,71 euros.
5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of 14
952,61 euros.
6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of 30
804,23 euros.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared Service
Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical assistance audited
under point 1.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Climate
covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund audited under point 5.
The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Culture
covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds audited under points
2, 3, 4 and 6.
This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.
19
SWISS-ESTONIAN COOPERATION FACILITY
AUDIT STRATEGY
As prepared by:
AUDIT AUTHORITY
SITUATED IN
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia
31st of March 2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3
RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................... 3
METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................................................... 4
Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 4
Walkthrough ........................................................................................................................................ 4
Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility ................. 5
Audits of Support Measures ................................................................................................................ 6
AUDIT WORK PLANNED ........................................................................................................................... 7
RESOURCES.............................................................................................................................................. 7
INTRODUCTION
The Framework Agreement for the implementation of the second Swiss Contribution to selected
Member States of the European Union was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the
Government of the Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of
the Swiss Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth referred to as “Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility”.
As per the country-specific setup, the Audit Authority is the Financial Control Department of the
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia. The Audit Authority is solely responsible for drawing up,
monitoring, and updating the audit strategy.
The functions of the Audit Authority are set out in Regulations on the implementation of the second
Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the European Union. In addition to that, the tasks of
the Financial Control Department are stipulated with the statute of the Ministry of Finance and
specified with the statute of Financial Control Department, which functions as the audit charter.
With the decree of the Government of Estonia No 177 from 22nd of December 2011, the Financial
Control Department as the Audit Authority is subordinated directly to the Secretary General of the
Ministry of Finance. That ensures its functional and organizational independence within the Swiss-
Estonian Cooperation Facility, as the National Coordination Unit and the Paying Authority of the Facility
are situated in the State Shared Service Centre.
RISK ASSESSMENT
National Coordination Unit is responsible for the overall risk assessment of the Swiss-Estonian
Cooperation Facility, including the methodology, coordination, and consolidation of the results of the
risk assessment.
In addition to the risk assessment exercise coordinated by the National Coordination Unit, the Audit
Authority carries out its own, independent risk assessment to compose the annual audit plan, including
audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well as audits
of Support Measures.
The risk assessment is carried out annually, before the composition of annual audit plan, considering
the risk components of impact, likelihood and implemented internal control measures. The risk factors
to be considered for risk assessment exercise are the following:
- Results of risk assessment carried out by the National Coordination Unit.
- Results of audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures.
- The quantity and frequency of errors and the error rate of previous accounting year or years.
- Any other indications of significant risks or weaknesses.
METHODOLOGY
Overview
According to the statute of the Financial Control Department, all the auditors of the department must
follow the Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal
Auditors.
There are no discrepancies between the standards for professional practice of internal auditors which
are established by the decree of Minister of Finance of Estonia and International Standards for the
Professional Practice of Internal Auditing issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors.
To obtain assurance of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility as a whole, the Audit Authority shall
carry out audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well
as audits of Support Measures.
The Audit Authority shall carry out those audits for each accounting year running from 1st of July on
the year N-1 to 30th of June on the year N (with an exception for the first accounting year which shall
cover the period from the signing of the Framework Agreement on the year N-1 until the 30th of June
on the year N).
It is the sole responsibility of the Audit Authority to prepare and submit to Switzerland for each of
those accounting years and not later than 31st of March of the year N+1 an Annual Audit Report along
with the Audit Opinion signed by the head of the Audit Authority. The Annual Audit Report shall include
all data of the audits carried out for the accounting year, including findings and measures taken.
The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out those audits. Instead, the
Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department of Financial Control
as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the second Swiss
Contribution.
However, a short description of audit principles along with the main elements to be verified shall be
outlined in the audit strategy. The Audit Authority will also prepare general checklists to be used in
audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures. Those checklists
will be annexed to the audit strategy.
Also, every audit will be thoroughly planned with the reasons, processes, risks, goals, and extent of
defined and agreed on in detail during the planning process. This thorough planning process precludes
the need for a separate manual.
Walkthrough
The methodology used by the Audit Authority is compliant with the Global Internal Audit Standards as
operated by the Institute of Internal Auditors.
The audits are carried out assuming full and unhindered access by the auditors for all documents and
information necessary.
All auditors included in the audit activities must sign a declaration of independence and objectivity in
relation to the audit scope.
All engagements are communicated to the auditees beforehand. The audit engagements include desk-
based checks of documents and other information, with additional on-site visits, if necessary.
The communication of all results, including irregularities, errors and corrective measures, is always
provided to the auditee as well as the Managing Authority. The auditee has always the right to
comment on the results of the audit before the final report is issued.
The corrective measures recommended by the Audit Authority are always reviewed later to ensure
that they are carried out in a sufficient manner.
All audit documents are archived in accordance with the principles of the Cooperation Facility.
The materiality level for the annual reporting is set at 2% of the amounts included. For annual
reporting, any extrapolated final residual error rates above should be met with corrective action at the
level of the Cooperation Facility.
Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility
The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for the audits of management and control
systems. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department
of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the
second Swiss Contribution
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on the functioning of the management and control
systems, audits at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be carried out. Those audits shall aim to
provide the Audit Authority with assurance that the management and control systems in the Partner
State are functioning effectively and in compliance with the Framework Agreement and national law
of the Partner State.
The crucial bodies to be audited are the National Coordination Unit, the Paying Authority (the tasks of
which are also taken on by the National Coordination Unit) and any Intermediate Bodies that carry out
tasks of the Cooperation Facility. Those bodies shall be audited at least once during the
implementation period of the Cooperation Facility.
Additionally, there are crucial aspects of the implementation of the Cooperation Facility that shall also
be audited at least once during the implementation period, either along with the audits of the bodies
carrying out the implementation of those aspects, or separately. Those are the following.
- The definition of the functions of the bodies involved in the management and control of the
Cooperation Facility and the allocation of functions within each body.
- Compliance with the principle of separation of functions between and within such bodies.
- The procedures and embedded controls for ensuring the correctness and regularity of
expenditure.
- The reliability of the accounting, monitoring and financial reporting.
- The reporting and monitoring systems where the responsible body entrusts the execution of tasks
to another body.
- The system to ensure that all documents regarding expenditures and audits are held to ensure an
adequate audit trail.
- The procedures ensuring that the rules on public procurement are correctly applied.
- The procedures for preventing, detecting, reporting, correcting and prosecuting irregularities.
Audits of Support Measures
The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out the audits of support
measures. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the
Department of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the
implementation of the second Swiss Contribution.
The Audit Authority has prepared a general checklist to be used in audits of Support Measures. This
checklist has been annexed to the audit strategy as Annex 1.
The planning of the audit of Support Measures will be based on the following
- Accounts presented to the Audit Authority, that will be tested in full.
- Expenditure presented to the Audit Authority, that will be audited in accordance with a non-
statistical or statistical sampling.
- Risk assessment of the management and control system, based on which audits of management
and control system are carried out.
Audits of Support Measures shall be carried out by the Audit Authority to obtain assurance and to
express the opinion on the following crucial matters.
- Accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the accounts.
- Legality and regularity of expenditure.
- Existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system.
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the
accounts, an audit of accounts shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.
The audit of accounts shall consider the results of audits of the management and control systems as
well as the results of audits on the legality and regularity of expenditure along with the existence,
adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system. In addition, the audit of accounts
shall consider the results of any other audits or checks carried out at the Cooperation Facility.
The audit of accounts shall aim to provide reasonable assurance on the completeness, accuracy, and
veracity of the amounts declared in the accounts.
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on legality and regularity of expenditure, audits of
expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.
The audits of expenditure shall be carried out on the entirety of the expenditure for each accounting
year and with a sampling method that shall ensure a random selection of each sampling unit from the
population. If possible, a statistical sampling method shall be used for making that selection. However,
the Audit Authority assumes at this stage that the population for each accounting year will be less than
50 units, making a non-statistical sampling method the reasonable option of choice.
In composing the random sample, the following principles shall be used.
- At least 10% of items (either projects or other programme components) for which expenditure has
been declared during an accounting year and at least 15% of the expenditure which has been
declared during the same accounting year must be included in the sample.
- The selection of those items shall be done with a simple random equal probability principle.
- Any negative items in the population shall be separated from the population before drawing a
sample and examined as a separate population.
- Any irregularities found because of the audits of expenditure shall be extrapolated in line with the
principles of non-statistical sampling and this extrapolation shall form the basis for the assurance
obtained and opinion given on those audits.
To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the
management and control system, the Audit Authority considers both the results of audits of the
management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility and the results of the audits
of expenditure for each accounting year.
For results considered this way, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any errors
detected in those audits that are related to existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management
and control system are random or systemic.
In addition to that, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any such errors point to
a risk of fraud, corruption, conflict of interest, or double funding. Any of those risks shall be treated as
the highest priority.
AUDIT WORK PLANNED
The first audit of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be
carried out by the Audit Authority during the year 2025. Thereon, at least one such audit shall be
carried out for each accounting year, unless otherwise proposed by the Audit Authority in the Annual
Audit Report and agreed on with the acceptance of the same Annual Audit Report.
The audits of expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year for which
expenditure has been declared and in line with the principles of sampling approved in the Audit
Strategy. In addition to that, an audit of accounts shall also be carried out by the Audit Authority for
each accounting year for which expenditure has been declared.
RESOURCES
The Audit Authority resources allocated by the Financial Control Department for the Swiss-Estonian
Cooperation Facility amount to 0,75 full-time equivalent. This may be divided between more than one
auditor of the Financial Control Department, to ensure the best possible audit team for the tasks at
hand as well as the principles and necessities of the work in the Financial Control Department.
Approved by
(Signed electronically)
Anu Alber
Head of the Financial Control Department of the Ministry of Finance
Head of the Audit Authority
Annex 1: General checklist for auditing Support Measures
VALIDITY CONFIRMATION SHEET
SIGNED FILES
FILE NAME FILE SIZE
Annual_Audit_Report_FINAL.pdf 423 KB
SIGNERS
NO. NAME PERSONAL CODE TIME
1 ANU ALBER 47008272711 31.03.2025 20:25:59 +03:00
VALIDITY OF SIGNATURE
SIGNATURE IS VALID
ROLE / RESOLUTION
PLACE OF CONFIRMATION (CITY, STATE, ZIP, COUNTRY)
SERIAL NUMBER OF SIGNER CERTIFICATE
45:a8:79:76:2e:d8:36:36:06:61:83:1d:5a:c8:13:83
ISSUER OF CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY KEY IDENTIFIER
ESTEID2018 D9 AC 70 DB 5F 7E BE 94 F8 A0 E4 BE 47 A2 D0 34 AD 9A 2A 12
HASH VALUE OF SIGNATURE
30 31 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 05 00 04 20 49 FC AD AC DD DD A6 CA 49 5B C9 C7 C6 D5 E0 0D 47 5C 6E A5 1D 3E 0A F8 B0 E2
B7 11 D0 62 73 45
The print out of files listed in the section "Signed Files" are inseparable part of this Validity Confirmation Sheet.
NOTES
Presented print summary is informative to confirm existence of signed file with given hash value. The print summary itself does not have
independent verification value. Declaration of signers’ signature can be verified only through digitally signed file.
VALIDITY CONFIRMATION SHEET
SIGNED FILES
FILE NAME FILE SIZE
Audit Strategy 2025.pdf 236 KB
SIGNERS
NO. NAME PERSONAL CODE TIME
1 ANU ALBER 47008272711 31.03.2025 20:24:40 +03:00
VALIDITY OF SIGNATURE
SIGNATURE IS VALID
ROLE / RESOLUTION
PLACE OF CONFIRMATION (CITY, STATE, ZIP, COUNTRY)
SERIAL NUMBER OF SIGNER CERTIFICATE
45:a8:79:76:2e:d8:36:36:06:61:83:1d:5a:c8:13:83
ISSUER OF CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY KEY IDENTIFIER
ESTEID2018 D9 AC 70 DB 5F 7E BE 94 F8 A0 E4 BE 47 A2 D0 34 AD 9A 2A 12
HASH VALUE OF SIGNATURE
30 31 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 05 00 04 20 F0 3A 80 25 63 5A 59 94 93 5C 51 CB 31 72 A5 EC B8 9A 8F 08 B0 8B A3 CF 11 B5 02
FC 90 18 C6 83
The print out of files listed in the section "Signed Files" are inseparable part of this Validity Confirmation Sheet.
NOTES
Presented print summary is informative to confirm existence of signed file with given hash value. The print summary itself does not have
independent verification value. Declaration of signers’ signature can be verified only through digitally signed file.
VALIDITY CONFIRMATION SHEET
SIGNED FILES
FILE NAME FILE SIZE
Audit Strategy 2025.asice 212 KB
Annual_Audit_Report_FINAL.asice 342 KB
Submission of the Annual Audit Report and the Audit Strategy.pdf 362 KB
Annex 1 General checklist.pdf 437 KB
SIGNERS
NO. NAME PERSONAL CODE TIME
1 URMO MERILA 38005150268 31.03.2025 21:43:30 +03:00
VALIDITY OF SIGNATURE
SIGNATURE IS VALID
ROLE / RESOLUTION
PLACE OF CONFIRMATION (CITY, STATE, ZIP, COUNTRY)
SERIAL NUMBER OF SIGNER CERTIFICATE
52:ef:36:99:5b:27:7a:36:62:17:76:4e:6a:82:9e:8e
ISSUER OF CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY KEY IDENTIFIER
ESTEID-SK 2015 B3 AB 88 BC 99 D5 62 A4 85 2A 08 CD B4 1D 72 3B 83 72 47 51
HASH VALUE OF SIGNATURE
30 31 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 05 00 04 20 F5 D5 B6 9C 25 22 1A 85 4B 60 B5 5E 75 50 56 4E AC 62 50 AD 34 B2 0D 5F C5 64 D2
47 EF 59 FF 7F
The print out of files listed in the section "Signed Files" are inseparable part of this Validity Confirmation Sheet.
NOTES
Presented print summary is informative to confirm existence of signed file with given hash value. The print summary itself does not have
independent verification value. Declaration of signers’ signature can be verified only through digitally signed file.
Christoph Liechti
Embassy of Switzerland to Latvia, Lithuania
and Estonia
[email protected] Ours 31.03.2025 no 11.1-5/25/728-1
Smilšu iela 8 Riga
LV-1050 LATVIA
Submission of the Annual Audit Report and
the Audit Strategy
Dear Mr Liechti,
The National Coordination Unit of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme hereby submits
the first Annual Audit Report for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme, covering the period
from 21.02.2023 to 30.06.2024, along with the updated Audit Strategy.
Yours sincerely,
(signed digitally)
Urmo Merila
Deputy Director General
Annexes:
Annual Audit Report
Audit Strategy
General Checklist
Helena Musthallik 56466003
[email protected]
Lõkke 4 / 10122 Tallinn / 663 8200 /
[email protected] / www.rtk.ee / Registrikood 70007340