Ref Procedures Standard factual finding Result (C / E / N.A.) 27) The ‘annual productive used for calculating the hourly rate were consistent with the usual cost accounting practices of the Beneficiary and were equivalent to at least 90 % of the ‘annual workable hours’. A.3 HOURLY PERSONNEL For unit costs calculated in accordance to the Beneficiary's usual cost accounting practice (unit costs): If the Beneficiary has a "Certificate on Methodology to calculate unit costs " (CoMUC) approved by the Commission, the Beneficiary provides the Auditor with a description of the approved methodology and the Commission’s letter of acceptance. The Auditor verified that the Beneficiary has indeed used the methodology approved. If so, no further verification is necessary. If the Beneficiary does not have a "Certificate on Methodology" (CoMUC) approved by the Commission, or if the methodology approved was not applied, then the Auditor: reviewed the documentation provided by the Beneficiary, including manuals and internal guidelines that explain how to calculate hourly rates; recalculated the unit (hourly rates) of staff included in the sample following the results of the procedures carried out in A.1 and A.2. For individual hourly The Auditor: reviewed the documentation provided by the Beneficiary, including manuals and internal guidelines that explain how to calculate hourly rates; 28) The Beneficiary applied [choose one option and delete the other]: [Option I: “Unit costs (hourly rates) were calculated in accordance with the Beneficiary’s usual cost accounting practices”] [Option II: Individual hourly rates were applied] For option I concerning unit costs and if the Beneficiary applies the methodology approved by the Commission (CoMUC): 29) The Beneficiary used the Commission-approved metho- dology to calculate hourly rates. It corresponded to the organisation's usual cost accounting practices and was applied consistently for all
they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents such as delivery note invoice or any proof demonstrating the link to the action) they were entered in the accounting system; the extent to which the assets were used for the action (as a percentage) was supported by reliable documentation (e.g. usage overview table); The Auditor recalculated the depreciation costs and verified that they were in line with the applicable rules in the Beneficiary’s country and with the Beneficiary’s usual accounting policy (e.g. depreciation calculated on the acquisition value). The Auditor verified that no ineligible costs such as deductible VAT, exchange rate losses, excessive or reckless expenditure were declared (see Article 6.5 GA). 50) The depreciation method used to charge the asset to the action was in line with the applicable rules of the Beneficiary's country and the Beneficiary's usual accounting policy. 51) The amount charged corresponded to the actual usage for the action. 52) No ineligible or excessive or reckless expenditure were declared. D.3 COSTS OF OTHER GOODS AND SERVICES 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 highest). For the purchase of goods, works or services included in the sample the Auditor verified that: the contracts did not cover tasks described in Annex 1; they were correctly identified, allocated to the proper action, entered in the accounting system (traceable to underlying documents such as purchase orders, invoices and accounting); the goods were not placed in the inventory of durable equipment; the charged to the action were accounted in line with the Beneficiary’s usual accounting practices; no ineligible or excessive or reckless expenditure were declared (see Article 6 GA). In addition, the Auditor verified that these goods and services were acquired in conformity with 53) Contracts for works or services did not cover tasks described in Annex 1. 54) Costs were allocated to the correct action and the goods were not placed in the inventory of durable equipment. 55) The costs were charged in line with the Beneficiary’s accounting policy and were adequately supported. 56) No ineligible costs or excessive or reckless expenditure were declared. For internal invoices/charges only the cost element was charged, without any mark-ups.