its actual implementation; time records were signed at least monthly by the employees (on paper or electronically) and authorised by the project manager or another manager; the hours declared were worked within the project period; there were no hours declared as worked for the action if HR-records showed absence due to holidays or sickness (further cross-checks with travels are carried out in B.1 below) ; the hours charged to the action matched those in the time recording system. Only the hours worked on the action can be charged. All working time to be charged should be recorded throughout the duration of the project, adequately supported by evidence of their reality and reliability (see specific provisions below for persons working exclusively for the action without time records). Their time-records were authorised at least monthly by the project manager or other superior. Hours declared were worked within the project period and were consistent with the presences/absences recorded in HR-records. There were no discrepancies between the number of hours charged to the action and the number of hours recorded. If the persons are working exclusively for the action and without time records For the persons selected that worked exclusively for the action without time records, the Auditor verified evidence available demonstrating that they were in reality exclusively dedicated to the action and that the Beneficiary signed a declaration confirming that they have worked exclusively for the action. The exclusive dedication is supported by a declaration signed by the Beneficiary’s and by any other evidence gathered. B COSTS OF SUBCONTRACTING B.1 The Auditor obtained the detail/breakdown of subcontracting costs and sampled ______ cost items selected randomly (full coverage is required if there are fewer than 10 items, otherwise the sample should have a minimum of 10 item, or 10% of the total, whichever number is highest). To confirm standard factual findings 38-42 listed in the next column, the Auditor reviewed the The use of claimed subcontracting costs was foreseen in Annex 1 and costs were declared in the Financial Statements under the subcontracting category.
following for the items included in the sample: the use of subcontractors was foreseen in Annex 1; subcontracting costs were declared in the subcontracting category of the Financial Statement; supporting documents on the selection and award procedure were followed; the Beneficiary ensured best value for money (key elements to appreciate the respect of this principle are the award of the subcontract to the bid offering best price-quality ratio, under conditions of transparency and equal treatment. In case an existing framework contract was used the Beneficiary ensured it was established on the basis of the principle of best value for money under conditions of transparency and equal treatment). In particular, if the Beneficiary acted as a contracting authority within the meaning of Directive 2004/18/EC or of Directive 2004/17/EC, the Auditor verified that the applicable national law on public procurement was followed and that the subcontracting complied with the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement. if the Beneficiary did not fall under the above-mentioned category the Auditor verified that the Beneficiary followed their usual procurement rules and respected the Terms and Conditions of the Agreement.. For the items included in the sample the Auditor also verified that: the subcontracts were not awarded to other Beneficiaries in the consortium; there were signed agreements between the Beneficiary and the subcontractor; there was evidence that the services were provided by subcontractor; There were documents of requests to different providers, different offers and assessment of the offers before selection of the provider in line with internal procedures and procurement rules. Subcontracts were awarded in accordance with the principle of best value for money. (When different offers were not collected the Auditor explains the reasons provided by the Beneficiary under the caption “Exceptions” of the Report. The Commission will analyse this information to evaluate whether these costs might be accepted as eligible) The subcontracts were not awarded to other Beneficiaries of the consortium. All subcontracts were supported by signed agreements between the Beneficiary and the subcontractor.
D OTHER ACTUAL DIRECT COSTS D.1 COSTS OF TRAVEL AND RELATED SUBSISTENCE ALLOWANCES The Auditor sampled ______ cost items selected randomly (full coverage is required if there are fewer than 10 items, otherwise the sample should have a minimum of 10 item, or 10% of the total, whichever number is the highest). The Auditor inspected the sample and verified that: travel and subsistence costs were consistent with the Beneficiary's usual policy for travel. In this context, the Beneficiary provided evidence of its normal policy for travel costs (e.g. use of first class tickets, reimbursement by the Beneficiary on the basis of actual costs, a lump sum or per diem) to enable the Auditor to compare the travel costs charged with this policy; travel costs are correctly identified and allocated to the action (e.g. trips are directly linked to the action) by reviewing relevant supporting documents such as minutes of meetings, workshops or conferences, their registration in the correct project account, their consistency with time records or with the dates/duration of the workshop/conference; no ineligible costs or excessive or reckless expenditure was declared. Costs were incurred, approved and reimbursed in line with the Beneficiary's usual policy for travels. There was a link between the trip and the action. The supporting documents were consistent with each other regarding subject of the trip, dates, duration and reconciled with time records and accounting. No ineligible costs or excessive or reckless expenditure was declared. D.2 DEPRECIATION COSTS FOR EQUIPMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE OR OTHER ASSETS The Auditor sampled ______ cost items selected randomly (full coverage is required if there are fewer than 10 items, otherwise the sample should have a minimum of 10 item, or 10% of the total, whichever number is the highest). For “equipment, infrastructure or other assets” [from now on called “asset(s)”] selected in the sample the Auditor verified that: the assets were acquired in conformity with the Beneficiary's internal guidelines and procedures; they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents such as delivery Procurement rules, principles and guides were followed. There was a link between the grant agreement and the asset charged to the action. The asset charged to the action was traceable to the accounting records and the underlying documents.