THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

UGANDA NATIONAL ROADS AUTHORITY

REPORT OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE ROAD SECTOR SUPPORT PROJECT 4 (RSSP– 4) KIGUMBA – MASINDI – HOIMA – KABWOYA ROAD PROJECT ADF LOAN – PROJECT ID NO P-UG-DB0-021 FOR THE YEAR ENDED 3OTH JUNE 2016

OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL UGANDA TABLE OF CONTENTS

REPORT OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE ROAD SECTOR SUPPORT PROJECT (RSSP 4) ADF LOAN-PROJECT ID NO P-UG-DB0-021 FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30TH JUNE 2016 ...... iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND ...... 1 3.0 PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND COMPONENTS ...... 2 4.0 AUDIT OBJECTIVES ...... 2 5.0 AUDIT PROCEDURES PERFORMED ...... 3 6.0 CATEGORIZATION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ...... 4 6.1 Categorization of Findings ...... 4 6.2 Summary of Findings ...... 5 7.0 DETAILED FINDINGS ...... 5 7.1 Compliance with the Financing Agreement and Government of Uganda Provisions .... 5 7.1.1 Inter Project borrowing ...... 5 7.2 General Standard of Accounting and Internal Control ...... 6 7.2.1 Financial Management Manual ...... 6 7.2.2 Compensation of Projected affected persons ...... 6 7.2.3 Contractor Mobilization ...... 8 7.2.4 Consultant Mobilization ...... 11 7.2.5 Design Review Report ...... 12 7.2.6 Lack of an Inventory Register ...... 13

ii

REPORT OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE ROAD SECTOR SUPPORT PROJECT (RSSP 4) ADF LOAN-PROJECT ID NO P-UG-DB0-021 FOR THE YEAR ENDED 30TH JUNE 2016

THE RT. HON. SPEAKER OF PARLIAMENT

I have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Road Sector Support Project 4 (upgrading of the Kigumba – Masindi – Hoima – Kabwoya Road Project) for the year ended 30th June 2016. The financial statements comprise of;  Statement of financial performance  Statements of fund balance  Notes to the financial statements including a summary of significant accounting policies adopted.

Management’s Responsibility for the financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements, in accordance with Government of Uganda and African Development Bank Guidelines. This responsibility includes: designing, implementing and maintaining internal controls, relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatements, whether due to fraud or error, selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies and making estimates that are reasonable in the circumstances.

Auditor’s Responsibility My responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements based on my audit. I conducted the audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (ISA). Those standards require that I comply with the ethical requirements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatements.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the Auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatements of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the Auditor considers internal controls relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the

iii financial statements in order 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. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. I believe that the audit evidence I have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for my opinion.

Part “A” of this report sets out my opinion on the financial statements. Part “B” which forms an integral part of this report presents in detail all the significant audit findings made during the audit which have been brought to the attention of management.

PART “A”

Opinion In my opinion, the financial statements present fairly in all material respects Uganda National Roads Authority – RSSP 4 statement of receipts and expenditure, and statement of fund balance for the year ended 30th June 2016 in accordance with the terms and conditions of the ADF funding agreement and the cash basis of accounting under section 9 of the financial statements.

Other Reporting Requirements I report based on my audit, that;  UNRA complied with the loan agreement covenants. In particular UNRA complied with the Bank’s rules and policies, the loan covenants relating to procurement of goods and services. I have obtained all the information and explanations, and all expenses were eligible.

 As part of my audit scope and in accordance with International Standards on Auditing. I considered internal controls relevant to UNRA in the preparation and fair presentation of RSSP 4 financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate.

iv

The Internal Control structure for RSSP 4 was found to be appropriate other than the matters referred to in this report.

John F.S. Muwanga AUDITOR GENERAL

KAMPALA

16th December, 2016

v

REPORT OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

PART “B”

DETAILED REPORT OF THE AUDITOR GENERAL ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE ROAD SECTOR SUPPORT PROJECT 4 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDED 30TH JUNE 2016

This Section outlines the detailed audit findings, management responses, and my recommendations in respect thereof.

1.0 INTRODUCTION Article 163 (3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 (as amended), requires me to audit and report on the public accounts of Uganda and all public offices including the courts, the central and local government administrations, universities and public institutions of the like nature and any public corporation or other bodies or organizations established by an Act of Parliament. Accordingly, I appointed M/s Sejjaaka, Kaawaase & Co, Certified Public Accountants to carry out the audit on my behalf and report to me so as to enable me report to Parliament.

2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND Government of Uganda (GoU) in line with its transport infrastructure improvement strategy under the 10-year Road Sector Development Program (RSDP) applied for and received a loan of UA 72,940,000 million from the African Development Bank Group (the Bank) towards the Road Sector Support Project 4 (RSSP 4). Proceeds for the loan which were approved on 13th March 2013 are to finance the upgrading of Kigumba – Masindi – Hoima – Kabwoya Road (135 km) to bitumen standard, studies for the upgrading of Kazo-Buremba-Kabagole-Kyegegwa (82km) and Masindi-Bisso (50km), Road Safety Audit, mitigation of HIV/AIDS, STI and TB, monitoring of ESMP implementation and baseline data collection, capacity enhancement, consulting services for technical and financial audits and compensation and resettlement.

The United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) also extended a GBP 8,901,500 grant towards RSSP 4 on 16 December 2014, the proceeds of which shall be applied under eligible payments for the civil works of the upgrading of the Road (135km).

1

3.0 PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND COMPONENTS The project objectives include:- i) Improve sustainable road access and quality of transport service levels in the western and south western parts of Uganda by reducing road maintenance costs, vehicle operating costs and travel time; ii) Enable the rural people to access socio-economic facilities and contribute to their integration to the rest of the country thereby contributing to poverty reduction; iii) Support regional integration and cross border trade with Rwanda and DRC; and iv) Facilitate the oil exploration and extraction activities

The project is being implemented under the following categories, namely; i) Civil works Construction works for the upgrading of gravel surfaced road to bitumen standards from Kigumba to Bulima (69km) and Bulima to Kabwoya (66 km).

ii) Consultancy services  Studies consisting of; Road Users Charges Management framework for review of the Road Fund;  Feasibility study and detailed engineering design of Kazo-Buremba-Kabagole- Kyegegwa (82km);  Feasibility study and detailed engineering design of Masindi-Bisso (50km);  One Stop Border Post study for Bunagana, Kyanika, and Lamia  Construction Sector Transparency (CoST) Initiative to improve governance in the sector;  Road Safety Audit.

4.0 AUDIT OBJECTIVES The audit was conducted in accordance with International Standards on Auditing and included a review of the accounting records, accounting policies used and agreed procedures as was considered necessary. The Audit was carried out with regard to the following objectives; a. To express an opinion as to whether the financial statements for the year ended 30th June 2016 present fairly in all material respect the receipt and

2

payments of the project as well as the cash position and are in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. b. To establish whether the special account has been maintained in accordance with the provisions of the credit agreement. c. To evaluate and obtain a sufficient understanding of the internal control structure of the project, assess control risk and identify reportable conditions, including material internal control weaknesses. d. To establish whether project managers are managing the project in compliance with the covenants contained in the financing agreements as well as Government of Uganda financial regulations. e. To establish whether all procurements of goods and services under the project have been undertaken in accordance with GOU procurement guidelines and procedures as specified in the PPDA Act 2003. f. To establish whether all necessary supporting documents, accounting records as well as books of account have been kept in respect of all project activities. g. Whether project activities have been implemented as stated in the work plans and budgets.

5.0 AUDIT PROCEDURES PERFORMED The audit approach adopted followed risk based audit methodology and systematically considered the planning activities, the receipts, expenditure, internal control systems, procurement, fixed assets management, project reports and financial statements as per details below;

a. Revenue/Receipts Obtained a schedule of all project funds provided by ADB and Government of Uganda and reconciled the amounts to the project’s cash books and bank statements.

b. Expenditure Reviewed the Project funding Agreement to ascertain agreed budget line activities for the ADB and GOU funding and checked whether funds had been utilized in accordance with the approved work plan.

Vouched transactions of the project in particular funding received and expenditures incurred during the period covered by the audit in order to establish that documentation in support of expenditure agreed with the amount and description on

3

the payment vouchers and or applications, bank statements and was properly controlled and accounted for.

c. Internal control system Reviewed the internal control system and its operations to establish whether sound controls were applied throughout the period.

d. Procurement Reviewed procurement of goods and services for the project and reconciled with the approved procurement plan.

e. Fixed assets management Reviewed use and management of project assets during the period under review.

f. Periodic reports about project Activities Reviewed the project agreement provisions, and reconciled it to the project activities during the period under review.

g. Project financial statements Examined on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the project financial statements; assessed the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by project management as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.

6.0 CATEGORIZATION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS 6.1 Categorization of Findings

The following system of profiling of the audit findings is used to prioritise the implementation of audit recommendations: No Category Description 1 High Has a significant/material impact, has a high likelihood of reoccurrence, significance and in the opinion of the Auditor General, it requires urgent remedial action. It is a matter of high risk or high stakeholder interest. 2 Moderate Has a moderate impact, has a likelihood of reoccurrence, and in the significance opinion of the Auditor General, it requires remedial action. It is a matter of medium risk or moderate stakeholder interest. 3 Low Has a low impact, has a remote likelihood of reoccurrence, and in the significance opinion of the Auditor General, may not require much attention, though its remediation may add value to the entity. It is a matter of low risk or low stakeholder interest.

4

6.2 Summary of Findings

No Finding Significance 7.1.1 Inter – Project Borrowings UGX. 26,727,244,155/= High 7.2.1 Financial Management Manual High 7.2.2 Compensation of Projected affected persons Moderate 7.2.3 Contractor Mobilization Moderate 7.2.4 Consultant Mobilization Moderate 7.2.5 Design Review Report Moderate 7.2.6 Absence of Inventory Register Low

7.0 DETAILED FINDINGS 7.1 Compliance with the Financing Agreement and Government of Uganda Provisions It was noted that management had in all material respects complied with the covenants contained in the financing agreement and the Government of Uganda financial regulations except for the matter below;

7.1.1 Inter Project borrowing – UGX. 26,727,244,155 UGX.26,727,244,155 was borrowed from GoU project funds to fund other projects. However, I was not availed with the authority for the borrowing of funds to the tune of UGX.22,727,244,155. Further, the borrowed funds had not been refunded to the project by the end of the financial year.

Inter project borrowings may negatively affect the implementation arrangements of the project.

In their response, management explained that an administrative decision was taken to reallocate UGX 26,727,244,155, which was unutilized by this project to pay off debt on other projects. Further, they stated that the reallocation did not cause shortage of funding for the project activities during the year and if they had not taken the decision these funds would have been returned to the Consolidated Fund at the end of the financial year as per the Appropriation Act.

I advised Management to minimize the inter project borrowings and ensure project activities are on schedule to enable absorption of appropriated funds.

5

7.2 General Standard of Accounting and Internal Control A review was carried out on the system of accounting and internal control. It was noted that management had instituted adequate controls to manage project resources except for the following matters;

7.2.1 Financial Management Manual I noted that the financial management manual is still in draft form and not yet approved by the Board contrary to sections 6.2 and 6.4 of the African Development Bank disbursement Handbook that requires the existence of a comprehensive accounting procedures manual. Management relies on the Treasury Instructions (2016), the Public Finance Management Regulations 2016 and the African Development Bank Disbursement Handbook, to guide it in its financial, accounting and reporting system. The purpose of the manual is to harmonize these rules with the individual needs of the organization.

Lack of an approved financial management manual contravenes project financial management procedures of the Bank.

Management explained that it had submitted a final draft copy to the legal department for review and subsequent approval by the board at their next seating in December 2016.

I await management’s effort in this regard.

7.2.2 Compensation of Projected affected persons 7.2.2.1 Commencement of construction before payment to PAP’s I noted that seven (7) sampled Project Affected Persons (PAPs) who owed UGX.21,185,228 had not yet been compensated at the time of audit despite commencement of road works. This was contrary to section 5.02(b) of the Loan Agreement that requires UNRA to provide evidence, in the form and substance acceptable to the Fund, confirming that prior to commencement of construction on any section of the civil works, all PAPs have been compensated and/or resettled in accordance with the Resettlement Action Plan (RAP). Details are below;

6

Valuation Village Value to be Pending Documentation Reference No. Compensated (Ugx) KHMK02 - 7352 Kyamongi 2,899,541 Identification used to open Bank Account is pending KHMK02 - 6995 Mparo 1,314,189 Recommendation letter from South Bunyoro Kingdom is pending KHMK02 - 6986 Mparo 5,276,242 Letter of Administration is South pending KHMK02 - 6993 Mparo 2,672,902 Letter of Administration is South pending KHMK02 - 7043 Mparo 1,627,257 Sales Agreement and purchase North from Venance and Juliet is pending KHMK02 - 6441 Buhimba 7,395,097 Letter of Administration is East pending 21,185,228

Commencement of road works before compensation of PAPs exposes UNRA to a risk of wasteful litigation expenses.

Management attributed the above to several challenges faced which include lack of relevant documents such as sales agreements, valid I.Ds and letters of administration, land disputes, absentee PAPs, unresolved grievances and Court cases. Going forward, management explained that some mitigation measures had been put in place, that is; a “Customary land ownership confirmation Form” has been introduced, an escrow account will be set up to hold all compensation payments for PAPS lacking letters of administration and other relevant documents, developing a Grievance Redress Mechanism that will fast track grievance handling and members of Parliament and other District leaders will be approached to trace the missing PAPS.

I advised management to ensure that the compensation process is fast tracked, to enable payment of PAPs prior to commencement of construction.

7.2.2.2 Acknowledgement of receipt of funds before actual payment I noted that UNRA’s Transfer (Assignment) Form C for untitled plots is also an explicit acknowledgement of receipt of compensation by the Project Affected Person (PAP). The form is signed by the PAP, witnesses and the Project officer of Stanfield Property Partners Ltd before compensation is made.

7

The table below gives examples of such cases where PAPs were made to sign acknowledgement of receipt of funds before they were paid and their payments were still outstanding at UNRA at the time of audit:

Form Date Form Serial PAP Name Valuation Ref. Compensation No. No. Value (UGX) 28/10/2015 4401 Benjamin KHMK02 - 7431 1,118,207 Komulubunga 21/1/2016 4477 Yunia Otoa KHMK02 - 7131 1,781,279 Obua 06/01/2016 4729 David KHMK02 – 7182 15,142,320 Tumwesige 09/02/2016 4494 Gerrald KHMK02 – 7427 1,030,756 Tebaingana 04/02/2016 4495 Gerrald KHMK02 – 7428 1,848,432 Tebaingana

Management explained that they plan to amend all the verification forms (FORMS A, B and C) to indicate that the PAPS accept to receive a compensation award of a given amount.

I await management’s efforts in that regard.

7.2.3 Contractor Mobilization I reviewed the consultant’s reports for the period from commencement to June 30, 2016 to evaluate the contractor’s level of mobilization against the contractual provisions and noted that by the time of conducting the audit, the Contractor was already mobilized on ground, in terms of machinery, plant, equipment, human resource and materials except for the following; i) Personnel From the Engineer’s mobilization report issued on the 12th day of April 2016, the Contractor’s Key Personnel/Staff are listed according to positions, name and nationality, a summary and analysis of which is made as below:

No Bidding/contract Execution stage state Position Position Name Status 1 Project Manager Project Manager Zhang Weihua Approved 2 Highway Engineer Deputy Project Manager Liu Chengbing Approved / Highway Engineer 3 Geodetic Engineer Chief Surveyor Chen Qian Approved 4 Quantity Surveyor Quantity Surveyor Ke Xiaoping Not Approved 5 Materials Engineer Materials Engineer Xu Guochang Approved 6 Bridge/Structural Structural Engineer – 1 Jiang Xiaochang Not

8

Engineer & 2 Zhou Xing Approved 7 Environmental and Environmental Manager Gloria Asibo Not Social Manager Approved 8 Health and Safety Safety Manager Ntegka Nelson Not Manager Approved 9 Bituminous surface None None N/A Dressing Specialist 10 Programmer/Schedule Program/Schedule None Approved Engineer Engineer

The following exceptions were noted regarding the list of personnel:  The official request for some of the key staff replacement was made on the 27th of July and approval given on the 4th of September, 2016, I thus noted a delay to officially request for change of personnel and the subsequent approval from the Engineer.  Replacements for the Quantity surveyor, Bridge/Structural Engineer, Environment and Social Manager and Health and Safety Manager have not yet been made official.

Management explained that the Contractor had been instructed to either mobilize the personnel as per the Contract or submit replacement CVs for approval and onwards mobilization by November 30, 2016.

I advised management to ensure the Contractor mobilizes the rest of the personnel as per the Contract and proposed replacements in the positions of Quantity Surveyor, Bridge/Structural Engineer, Environmental and Safety Manager should equally be made official.

ii) Equipment The contract required the Contractor to have mobilized 119 pieces of equipment at various stages. However, at the time of audit on the 30th of June, 2016, the Engineer reported that only 95 pieces had been mobilized of which 70 pieces were as per the mobilization schedule in the Contract. Some delays were noted as follows;

 According to the equipment mobilization schedule in the contract, a time limit is provided within which each of the key and non-key equipment must be mobilized after commencement of works. Accordingly I noted that some key equipment necessary for the smooth operations of works were not mobilized by the 1st of March, 2016 (basing on 1st of December 2015 as the commencement date). The slow progress of works can easily be attributed to delayed mobilization.

9

 Some of the key equipment seems to have been substituted to carry out works. A case in point is the contractual provision of a concrete batching plant, concrete pump in addition to concrete trucks which by the 31st of March, 2016 had not been mobilized as per the contract. Instead, four (4) concrete mixers in addition to 5 dumpers were mobilized, the output of which was not comparable.

 I also noted that some key equipment was not yet necessary at this stage due to the sequencing of works. This applies to sets such as the chippings spreader, bitumen sprayer, and others, and priority would have been given to other due equipment. It is strongly recommended that these are mobilized as per the contract so that no further delays are experienced at the time of carrying out works requiring the above items.

Management explained that they had been repeatedly reminded the contractor of the requirement to mobilize the equipment in accordance with the contract through letters and at monthly progress meetings. Further, they stated that to date the contractor had mobilized 117 pieces of equipment of which 88 pieces are as per the mobilization schedule out of 119 specified in the Contract.

I advised management to ensure that the matter is drawn to the attention of the contractor and remind the firm of the consequences for late mobilization and substation of equipment.

iii) Borrow Areas

Borrow pits as sources of gravel were also identified by the Contractor as below:

Borrow Pit Serial Chainage Side Offset from the project No. Road BP1 10+380 LHS 0.4km BP2 10+380 LHS 0.7km BP3 9+080 LHS 0.8km BP4 2+850 LHS 0.3km BP5 129+400 RHS 0.1km

Review of the compliance matrix for borrow-pits shows that the necessary submissions were made to NEMA but approval of the same is yet to be given.

Management explained that the contractor through their letter reference CR5/BK/CEPA/595 indicated that NEMA had approved one borrow pit and

10

management would continue to engage NEMA to expedite processing of submissions on all UNRA projects.

I advised management to continuously engage NEMA to expedite the approval process or provide feedback to the project team as to why no approvals are being provided.

7.2.4 Consultant Mobilization I reviewed both the mobilization report and the services contract to assess the consultant’s level of mobilization. The services contract involves two phases namely the design review phase and the supervision phase, with each phase having a designated set of personnel. However, at the time of audit, I noted a change in contractual personnel for the position of Team leader/Resident Engineer which was not backed by any formal approval from Uganda National Roads Authority.

The formal approval of the replacement of the resident engineer was made on the 3rd of October 2016, about 10 months into the project period.

The table below provides a summary and analysis of the consultant’s level of mobilization:

CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISION PHASE SN. Position Name in Contract Name at Project Execution 1 Team Leader / Resident Albert K. Hammond Solomon Dickson Engineer 2 Deputy Resident Engineer Stephen Otto Kinyera Stephen Otto Kinyera / Measurement Engineer 3 Soils / Materials/Pavement Eric Opuku Asante Eric Opuku Asante Engineer 4 Senior Surveyor Frank Adjin Frank Adjin 5 Sociologist Gertrude Magezi Binta Gertrude Magezi Binta 6 Environmental Specialist Stephen A.K. Magezi Stephen A.K. Magezi 7 Highway Design Engineer William K. Dickson William K. Dickson 8 Structural Engineer Emmanuel K. Degbotse Emmanuel K. Degbotse 9 Contract / Claims Expert Solomon Dickson Albert K. Hammond 10 Senior Geotechnical Expert Dr. G.M. Gidigazu Dr. G.M. Gidigazu

Management explained that the replacement Resident Engineer was approved on 17 October 2016 and the outgoing Resident Engineer is currently acting as Deputy Resident Engineer. The Engineer has indicated that the CV for proposed Deputy

11

Resident Engineer will be submitted to UNRA by November 15, 2016 and mobilized to Site once approval is given.

I await management’s efforts in this regard.

7.2.5 Design Review Report Review of the final design review report revealed the following;

(i) Late submission of report

I noted a delay in submission of the final design review report by the Consultant to UNRA of 44 weeks contrary to the contract requirement that had provided for submission 12 weeks after commencement. The final design review report was submitted in August 2016, which was 14 months (56 weeks) after commencement of services.

(ii) Unclear UNRA position on proposed variations-UGX 21,125,417,389

A number of recommendations were made by the design review consultant in relation to the road structural layers based on the traffic and climatic / environmental reviews. Specifically, the design review consultant recommended an increase in the crushed stone base course layer thickness from 150mm in the contract to 225mm and the sub-base course layer thickness from 150mm to 275mm. However, I noted that the approval of the same was yet to be given by the time audit despite commencement for construction of trial sections in some parts of the road.

UNRA’s position on the proposed variation amounting to UGX 21,125,417,389/= representing a 14.88% percentage variation (as per subsection 3.4.11 and table 3-8 of the design review report) is not clear. Further, UNRA had not also provided a position on the proposed variation of the consultancy contract, where an additional USD 225,000 was presented.

Management attributed the delay in the approval of the design review to a protracted effort to agree on the recommendations of the Design Review Consultant and specifically on the pavement layers. Further, Management stated that agreement had now been reached and the consultant was advised accordingly on 14 October 2016.

12

In respect of the Consultants Contract, discussions on the proposed amendments are still ongoing and expected to be completed by 15 December 2016.

I advised Management to make its position clear, regarding the proposed variations.

7.2.6 Lack of an Inventory Register Pursuant to clauses 1407 and 1410 (a) of the Specific Specifications that form part of the contractor’s contract, motor vehicles and the Engineer’s laboratory equipment supplied and maintained throughout the contract period by the contractor, will revert back to ownership of the Employer upon completion of the contract. However, no inventory register was availed in regard to these assets.

Management explained that an inventory of the project assets is maintained at the project site by the supervisor who has delegated powers to administer the contract on behalf of UNRA. Further, management stated that the assets reverting to UNRA shall be handed over at the end of the project at which stage they will be entered into the UNRA assets register and inventory.

I advised management to maintain an inventory register to keep track of all project assets.

13

APPENDIX I

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

14