Committee is asked:
1. To note the Internal Audit Progress Report – February 2026
2. To approve the adjustments to the internal audit plan 2025/26.
Minutes:
The Committee received the Internal Audit progress Report for February 2026 from Iona Bona, Deputy Head of Southern Internal Audit Partnership (SIAP) providing an overview of internal audit activity against assurance work completed in accordance with the approved audit plan for 2025-26 and outstanding management actions.
The Committee were advised that no audit fieldwork would be carried forward into 2026/27 which represented a significant improvement compared with the previous year and would support a robust annual internal audit conclusion. Officers’ engagement with the audit process had improved, contributing to timely delivery. It was confirmed that all audits for 2025/26 would be included in the annual audit conclusion.
Updates were provided on the following audits:
There had been no further amendments to the audit plan since the previous progress report. No limited or no assurance opinions had been issued since the last report. There were two low priority management actions running behind time but implementation of improvements was very good and prompt by the Council’s officers. One high?priority action nearing completion, delayed only by committee cycle timing.
The Deputy Chief Executive confirmed focus had been on ensuring prioritising responding to audits, with more focused approach around assurance focus on responses and this had been enforced by the Improvement and Recovery Plan. Regular liaison meetings had been held with SIAP and the Council was on track to have comprehensive conclusion for the audit plan, annual audit opinion and Annual Governance Statement. He also advised that management responses had been submitted the previous Friday on the Improvement and Recovery Plan audit.
Councillor Nichols returned to Philip Briggs’ earlier query regarding detail of audit scope and particularly in relation to completed audits and the basis on which assurance levels were awarded. Specific reference was made to contract management, where Committee members noted confusion between audits of individual contracts and the wider corporate framework. The Deputy Chief Executive acknowledged that greater clarity on audit scope for completed reviews would be helpful and agreed to consider with SIAP how this information might be shared with the Committee.
In response to questions on the National Non?Domestic Rates (NNDR) audit, it was explained that the high?priority management action that had been raised was due to weaknesses in data retention functionality, resulting in records being held beyond statutory periods. The management actions included a data cleansing exercise, particularly in preparation for Local Government Reorganisation (LGR).
RESOLVED:
Supporting documents: