Para 3.8.20 — MSO (Audit)
Original Rule Text
3.8.20 Sample in terms of numerical and financial parameters should be defined in as much detail as possible with the appropriate sample annexed to the review. This annexure should be sufficiently explicit to present a clear picture for the State/Country as a whole. The sample annexure should indicate the names of the districts/administrative units; the targeted population such as families below the poverty line etc.; funds provided and expenditure incurred against the provision, etc. besides providing the overall picture for the State as a whole on the same parameters. Once the sample is defined in the scope of audit, it is presumed that all observations relate to the sample and it should not be necessary to use in the review expressions such as ‘test-check revealed’, ‘test check disclosed’, etc. A specimen sample is contained in Annexure-1.
# Overlapping Programmes
What This Means
The sample selected for a performance review must be clearly defined using both numerical and financial parameters, and presented as an annexure to the review report. This annexure should give a clear picture for the entire state or country, showing district/administrative unit names, targeted population, funds provided versus expenditure incurred, and overall state-level figures on the same parameters. Once the sample is defined in the scope, all observations are presumed to relate to the sample, eliminating the need for qualifiers like 'test-check revealed.'
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1Sample must be defined with both numerical and financial parameters
- 2A sample annexure must be attached to the review report
- 3The annexure should present both sample and state/national level data
- 4Once sample is defined, expressions like 'test-check revealed' become unnecessary
- 5All observations are presumed to relate to the defined sample
Practical Example
For a review of the mid-day meal scheme in Gujarat, the audit team defines their sample: 5 out of 33 districts, covering 1,200 schools (out of 35,000 state-wide), with funds of Rs 85 crores (out of Rs 520 crores state-wide). The sample annexure lists each district name, number of enrolled students, funds allocated and spent, and meals served. The same data is shown for all 33 districts at the bottom. In the review body, the team writes 'In 340 schools, meals were not served for 45 or more days' without needing to add 'as revealed in test-check of 1,200 schools.'
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why should 'test-check revealed' be avoided?▼
What should the sample annexure contain?▼
Is there a prescribed sample size?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.