Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study addresses challenges related to measurement and assessment of audit quality, particularly in Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs), which has been topical albeit with limited focus on the government sector. The research focuses on the Office of the Auditor General of Uganda (OAG) and aims to provide insights into the perspectives of auditors and auditees. The study poses three main questions: does the OAG have a framework for assessing and reporting audit impacts? What factors are utilized to measure the quality of government audit reports? Should these measures be publicly disclosed to enhance accountability? The research follows a qualitative approach with purposive sampling encompassing multiple case studies, including four public universities, the OAG Uganda, and five private audit firms involved in government audits. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 51 participants, and the data was analysed using Atlas. TI software. The findings indicate that the OAG lacks a formal framework for assessing and reporting audit impacts but engages in impact assessments through stakeholder involvement, automated tracking of recommendations, and reporting in the annual performance report. Key Audit Quality Indicators (AQIs) identified include the number of audit queries, actionable recommendations, and the inclusion of exceptions and key achievements in audit reporting. Regarding the public disclosure of AQIs, the study suggests limiting disclosure to non-technical indicators to avoid widening the audit expectation gap caused by inherent limitations in audits, biased mindsets, fluctuating stakeholder expectations, and potential premature and inaccurate judgments. The study’s findings and recommendations have implications not only for government sector auditing in Uganda but also for other countries, international regulators, and standards setters, providing universal value.
Simon Peter Mulati (Sun,) studied this question.