WARNING - By their nature, text files cannot include scanned images and tables. 
The process of converting documents to text only, can cause formatting changes and 
misinterpretation of the contents can sometimes result. Wherever possible you 
should refer to the pdf version of this document.


CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 
Audit Committee Paper 6 23/03/07 

CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 


FOR INFORMATION 

Title: STANDING ITEM: UPDATE ON INTERNAL AUDIT 
RECOMMENDATIONS AND BALANCED SCORECARD 

Prepared by: DAVID CAMERON, HEAD OF CORPORATE SERVICES 


Purpose 

To present an update of progress made by officers on recommendations made in 
previous internal audit reports. 


Recommendation 

The Committee is requested to: 

a) note the progress made to date on previous internal audit recommendations, as 
summarised in the paper; 

b) note the current status of balanced scorecard measures for governance and risk 
management, as at December 2006. 


Executive Summary 

This paper presents a summary of Deloitte’s recommendations for improvements to the 
Authority’s internal control systems, together with comment on progress made to date by 
officers. 

A full follow-up review of each area will be undertaken by Deloitte as part of each year’s 
audit activity. The update provided here is intended to complement rather than replace 
Deloitte’s process, giving members an ongoing update on progress and hence avoiding 
lengthy periods elapsing between initial and follow up information. 

The Annex to this paper sets out progress on internal audit recommendations made since 
March 2005. Recommendations where actions are completed and were subject to internal 
audit follow-up review in August 2006 have now been removed from the schedule. 

The schedule of recommendations set out in Annex 1 now also includes a set of 
recommendations arising from an internal Best Value review of planning processes 
undertaken by the Head of Corporate Services. This review was initiated following an 
external request for an account of the Authority’s handling of a particular planning 
application. In responding to this request, the opportunity was taken to undertake a 
broader Best Value review of planning processes. 

The paper also sets out a summary of the balanced scorecard measures for governance and 
risk management, as at December 2006. 

This highlights a movement in one area: the Authority’s operations, with the response to 
Freedom of Information requests now flagged as amber following the identification of a 
delayed response to an information request in December 2006. The response was issued 22 
days following receipt, rather than within the required period of 20 working days. Our 
review of this case suggests that a combination of factors led to the delay, with no single 
issue requiring a change to control mechanisms at this time. 

All other balanced scorecard measures in this area remain “green” and in line with target 
performance levels.