Submission of the Annual Audit Report and the Audit Strategy

Kuupäev

Jrk nr Küsimused Viited Jah Ei N/A

1

1.1

Kas projekt, toetuse saaja ja/või partner vastab Šveitsi raamkokkuleppes ja regulatsioonis sätestatud:

1) temaatilisele jaotusele;

2) eelnevalt määratletud parameetritele teemavaldkonna kohta;

3) täiendavalt sotsiaalse kaasatuse ning kliimamuutuste leevendamise ja nendega kohanemise

teemadele?

Raamkokkulepe lisa 1 punkt 3

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 2.4, 2.5 ja 2.6

1.2 Kas projekti, toetuse saaja ja/või partneri valik on toimunud kooskõlas Šveitsi raamkokkuleppes ja

regulatsioonis sätestatuga?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 ja 4.6

1.3

Kas põhjendatuks on loetud sellised kulud, mis on rahastamiskõlblikud, sobivad, vajalikud ja tõhusad

Šveitsi raamkokkuleppes ja regulatsioonis sätestatud eesmärkide ja tulemuste saavutamiseks ning mis

tekivad vastavalt nimetatud toetatavate tegevuste käigus?

Kas kõik kulud on seotud vaid selliste tegevustega, mis on vajalikud programmlepingus sätestatud

eesmärkide saavutamiseks?

Kulu on sobiv, kui see soodustab projekti tulemuste saavutamist. Kulu on vajalik, kui projekti tulemust ei

ole võimalik saavutada odavama kuluga, mis on vähemalt sama efektiivne. Kulu on tõhus, kui selle

maksumus kajastab parimat võimalikku suhet kasutatud vahendite ja saavutatud tulemuste vahel.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6,

6.7 ja 6.8

1.5

Kas projekti tegevused ei ole füüsiliselt lõpetatud või täielikult ellu viidud enne, kui toetuse saaja on

esitanud rahastamistaotluse (olenemata sellest, kas toetuse saaja on kõik asjassepuutuvad maksed ära

teinud või mitte)?

Kui on, siis ei tohiks sellist projekti toetada!

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

Kas projekti või programmi tegevused vastavad toetuse andmise tingimustes toodud nõuetele? Kas tegevused on teostatud otstarbekalt ja sihipäraselt?

Hinnangute andmisel tuleb lähtuda Šveitsi programmi spetsiifikast.

Toetuse andmine ja kulude planeerimine projekti eelarves

RAHANDUSMINISTEERIUM, Finantskontrolli osakond

Dokumendi nimetus

Üldine kontroll-leht (Šveitsi-Eesti koostööprogramm)

Täitja

1.6

Kas vajadusel on kirjalikult vormistatud muudatus, kui projekti rakendamisel on toimunud muututuseid?

Näiteks on muudetud:

1) toetatavat tegevust või selle ulatust või jäetakse tegevus ära või lisatakse täiendav tegevus;

2) toetatava tegevusega saavutatavat väljundinäitajat või selle sihttaset;

3) projekti tulemusnäitaja sihttaset;

4) projekti abikõlblike kulude kogumahtu või toetuse osakaalu abikõlblikest kuludest;

5) projekti abikõlblikkuse perioodi;

6) kulude hüvitamise korda, kui korra muutmine seisneb tegelike ja tasutud kulude alusel või kulude

lihtsustatud hüvitamisviiside alusel toetuse maksmises või

7) muud asjaolu.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 4.11, 4.12

1.8

Kas toetuse saaja on tõendanud kõikide kokku lepitud tulemuste, väljundite ja tegevuste

täitmist/saavutamist?

Projekti tulemus on muutus ehk situatsioon, mida soovitakse saavutada projekti lõpuks.

Projekti väljund on tingimused, mis tagavad muutuse (seatakse väljundindikaatorid).

Projekti ülesanne on sisendite abil läbiviidatavate tegevustega toota väljundid otseste eesmärkide

(tulemuste) saavutamiseks

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

1.9

Kas toetusest soetatud/ehitatud objektid (varad) on tegelikult olemas (ja sihipäraselt kasutuses) ja

teenused tegelikult saadud?

Kas ilma füüsilise väljundita teenuste puhul (koolitused, seminarid, tugiteenused vms) on tegevust

planeeritud kujul tegelikult ellu viidud ning kas teenust osutati sihtrühmale, kellele see oli planeeritud?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

1.11

Kas toetuse saajal/partneril/lõppsaajal on olemas kõik abikõlblikkust tõendavad dokumendid ja muud

tõendid, mis annab tervikliku ülevaate projekti rakendamisest?

Abikõlblikkust tõendavad dokumendid tuleb lisada auditi kausta tõendusmaterjalide hulka.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

1.12

Kas auditi raames kättesaadavaks saanud informatsioon viitab sellele, et:

1) võrdõiguslikkuse;

2) sotsiaalse kaasatuse;

3) keskkonnakaitse;

4) kliimamuutuste leevendamise või nende mõjudega kohanemise nõudeid ei ole rikutud?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 2.5 ja 2.6

2

2.1 Kas kõiki tõendavaid dokumente kulude ja kohta hoitakse kas originaalide kujul või variantides, mille puhul

on kinnitatud originaalile vastavus, üldiselt aktsepteeritud andmekandjatel?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

Kas deklareeritud kulud vastavad toetuse saaja raamatupidamisaruannetele ja raamatupidamise algdokumentidele?

Organisatsiooni raamatupidamise sise-eeskiri ja asjaajamiskord

Projekti tulemuste saavutamine

2.2

Kas toetuse saaja/partner on eristanud enda raamatupidamises projektiga seotud kulud muudest kuludest

ning projektist teenitud tulud (laekumised) muudest tuludest?

Kas projekti abikõlblikud kulud on eristatavad ja kontrollitavad, eelkõige projekti elluviija ja/või projekti

partneri raamatupidamisdokumentides kajastatuna ja määratud kindlaks vastavalt selle riigi kohaldavatele

raamatupidamisstandarditele, kus projekti elluviija ja/või projekti partner on asutatud, ning vastavalt heale

raamatupidamistavale?

Kulude eristamiseks võib kasutada kas eraldiseisvat arvestussüsteemi või raamatupidamiskoode (näiteks

kasutada raamatupidamisarvestuse tarkvaras eraldi kontosid või projekti tunnuseid)

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

2.3

Kas deklareeritud kulud vastavad toetuse saaja/partneri raamatupidamises kajastatule?

Kas projekti elluviija raamatupidamise siseeeskirjad ja auditeerimise kord peavad võimaldama projekti

kohta deklareeritud kulude ja tulude otsest võrdlust vastavate raamatupidamisaruannete ja tõendavate

dokumentidega?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

2.4 Kas kulusid tõendavad kuludokumendid (ja muud kulude abikõlblikkust tõendavad dokumendid, nt aktid,

tööajatabelid jne) on olemas ja asjakohased ning vastavad raamatupidamisnõuetele?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

2.5 Kas tasumist tõendavad dokumendid (panga väljavõte, maksekorraldus, kassa väljamineku order või e-

riigikassa konto väljavõte) on olemas ja asjakohased?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

2.6 Kas projekt, mis teenib tulu (projekti perioodil) on sõlminud kokkuleppe riikliku koordineerimisüksuse ja

Šveitsiga tulude kasutamise põhimõtete osas?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 4.15

3

3.1

Kas kulu on tekkinud abikõlblikkuse perioodil?

Kas abikõlblikud kulud on tehtud lepingus sätestatud rahastamiskõlblikkuse esimese ja viimase kuupäeva

vahel?

Kas kulud on reaalselt tehtud ja kulu kohta on koostatud kuludokument, see on makstud ja selle objekt

kohale toimetatud (kaupade puhul) või teostatud (teenuste ja tööde puhul)?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

Kas toetuse saaja poolt deklareeritud kulud on vastavuses Šveitsi raamkokkuleppe ja regulatsiooni ning Eesti õigusaktidega?

Kulude tekkimine ja abikõlblikkus

Tulud toetuse saaja raamatupidamises

Kulud toetuse saaja raamatupidamises

3.2

Kas kulu tekkimine on tõendatud?

Kas toetuse saaja on lähtuvalt rahvusvahelistest tunnustatud raamatupidamise ja finantsaruandluse

põhimõtetest kulu aluseks oleva arve või muu sarnase tõendusjõuga raamatupidamisdokumendi alusel

kajastanud kulu oma raamatupidamises kohustusena?

Kas kulud on reaalselt tehtud ja kulu kohta on koostatud kuludokument, see on makstud ja selle objekt

kohale toimetatud (kaupade puhul) või teostatud (teenuste ja tööde puhul)?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

3.3

Kas kulu on makstud toetuse saaja või partneri poolt projekti abikõlblikkuse perioodil või pärast

abikõlblikkuse perioodi selleks ettenähtud aja jooksul (arve on väljastatud järgneval kuul ja tasutud 30p

jooksul peale väljastamist)?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.1

3.4

Kas on tehtud ainult kulusid, mis tulenevad projekti või programmikomponendi elluviimiseks sõlmitud

lepingutest või nõuetest, mis on kehtestatud projekte või programmikomponente käsitlevas toetusmeetme

lepingus?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.2

3.5 Kas ehitiste soetamise, ehitamise, renoveerimise ja ümberehitamise kulud on tehtud ainult toetusmeetme

lepingus sõnaselgelt lubatud ulatuses ja kooskõlas artikkel 4.15 nõuetega?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 4.15 ja 6.2

3.6 Kas tehtud tarbekaupade ja tarvikute kulud on eristatavad ja hõlmatud toetusmeetmega? Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.2

3.7

Kas tehtud sõidu-, majutus- ja elamiskulud hõlmavad ainult projektis või programmikomponendis osalevat

personali?

Kas projektis osalevate töötajate päevaraha arvestus on kooskõlas ka siseriiklike määradega? Kas

projektis osalevate töötajate reisikulude tegemisel on järgitud Riigihangete seadust?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.2

3.8

Kas projektide või programmikomponentide rakendamisega seotud personali kulud:

1) koosnevad tegelikust töötasust;

2) millele lisanduvad sotsiaalkindlustusmaksed ja muud töötasuga kaasnevad seadusjärgsed kulud;

3) täiendavad toetusmeetme rakendamist ning on selleks tõendatult vajalikud;

4) on toetusmeetme lepingu eelarves kokku lepitud või ette nähtud programmikomponendi eelarves

Kas projekti heaks tööle määratud töötajate kulu vastab ka projekti elluviija tavalisele töötasupoliitikale?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.2

3.9 Kas toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondi puhul on toetatud projekti teise etapi taotluste koostamist? Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.3

Kululiikide abikõlblikkus

3.10

Kas toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondi puhul vastavad teenuste kulud kumulatiivselt järgmistele

tingimustele?

1) teenused on projektitaotluste koostamiseks, mis esitatakse Šveitsile teises etapis heaks kiitmiseks;

2) teenuseid osutavad taotlejaga mitteseotud tehnilised või õiguseksperdid, kelle eksperditeadmised

täiendavad taotleja teadmisi;

3) teenuste tulemused on: a) dokumendid/uuringud, mis on vajalikud taotleja esitatava toetusmeetme

taotluse täiendamiseks; või b) kavandatava toetusmeetme osana hangitavate kaupade ja teenuste

hankedokumentide kavandid

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.3

3.11 Kas toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondi puhul on toetatud programmioperaatorite kantavate ja

programmide ettevalmistamisega seotud kulusid?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.3

3.12

Kas toetatud on programmioperaatori halduskulusid, mis kuuluvad järgmistesse kategooriatesse:

a) programmi ettevalmistamisega, sealhulgas programmi kavandi, tulemuste raamistiku ja

sidusrühmadega konsulteerimisega, otseselt seotud kulud;

b) programmi rakendamise ettevalmistamisega, sealhulgas programmikomponentide valimise ja

rahavoogude menetluse väljatöötamisega, seotud kulud;

c) programmikomponentide valimisega seotud kulud, sealhulgas välisekspertide kulud ning koosolekute ja

kaebustega seotud kulud;

d) kulud, mida kantakse võimalike taotlejate ja programmikomponentide operaatorite abistamiseks

programmioperaatori poolt programmikomponentide rakendustele ja/või programmikomponentide

rakendamisele seatud nõuete täitmisel;

e) müügiedendus- ja teavitustegevuse kulud, sealhulgas taotlusvoorude ja teabetööga seotud kulud

taotlusperioodi jooksul, aga ka teabeürituste kulud kogemuste ja hea tava jagamiseks;

f) kulud, mis on kantud kulude kontrollimiseks, maksete kinnitamiseks ja maksete ülekandmiseks

programmikomponentide operaatoritele;

g) kulud, mis on kantud seoses programmikomponentide seire, programmi või selle komponentide

kontrollimise ja hindamisega ning programmi mõju, asjakohasuse ja jätkusuutlikkuse hindamisega;

h) raamkokkuleppe artiklites 9.1, 9.2 ja 9.4 sätestatud audititest erinevate auditite ning

programmikomponentide kohapealse kontrolli kulud;

i) kulud seoses kohustusega anda aru Šveitsile või partnerriigi riiklikele üksustele artikli 3.2 alusel;

j) toetusmeetme juhtkomitee töö korraldamise ja juhtimisega seotud kulud;

k) kulud, mis tulenevad regulatsioonis või toetusmeetme lepingus nõutud pangakontode avamise ja

kasutamisega seotud tasudest, sealhulgas sisse- ja väljamaksete kulud.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.4

3.13 Kas toetatud on programmioperaatori halduskulusid, mis on korrektselt määratletud kui

rahastamiskõlblikud toetusmeetme ettevalmistamise fondist?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.4

3.14

Kas programmioperaatorite halduskuludega seotud personali kulud:

1) koosnevad tegelikust töötasust;

2) millele lisanduvad sotsiaalkindlustusmaksed ja muud töötasuga kaasnevad seadusjärgsed kulud;

3) täiendavad toetusmeetme rakendamist ning on selleks tõendatult vajalikud;

4) on toetusmeetme lepingu eelarves kokku lepitud või ette nähtud programmikomponendi eelarves

Kas projekti heaks tööle määratud töötajate kulu vastab ka projekti elluviija tavalisele töötasupoliitikale?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.4

3.15

Kas tehnilise abiga seonduvad kulud:

a) on seotud koostööprogrammi raames Šveitsi ametiasutustega peetud kohtumistega, sealhulgas

osalejate sõidu-, majutus- ja elamiskulud;

b) on seotud koostööprogrammi raames moodustatud komiteede koosolekutega ja sidusrühmadega

peetavate konsultatsioonidega, kui need kulud ei ole juba kantud toetusmeetme eelarvesse;

c) on toetusmeetmete taotlusvoorude avalikustamise kulud;

d) on kulud seoses teabeüritustega, kogemuste vahetamisega ja suutlikkuse suurendamisega tagamaks,

et riikliku koordineerimisüksuse, vahendusasutuste, makseasutuse, auditeerimisüksuse ja elluviivate

asutuste töötajad on täielikult teadlikud oma kohustustest ja on võimelised täitma neile määratud

ülesandeid, sealhulgas osalejate sõidu-, majutus- ja elamiskulud;

e) on toetusmeetme taotluste läbivaatamisega seotud tehnilise konsultatsiooni ja õigusteenuste kulud;

f) on hankedokumentide läbivaatamisega seotud tehnilise konsultatsiooni ja õigusteenuste kulud;

g) on toetusmeetmete seirega seotud tehniliste konsultatsiooniteenuste kulud, sealhulgas toetusmeetmete

kohapealse kontrolliga seotud kulud;

h) on kontrollimise, hindamise ja kapitaliseerimisprotsessidega seotud kulud koostööprogrammi tasandil

või teemavaldkonna raames;

i) on kulud seoses toetusmeetmete audititega ning koostööprogrammi tasandi juhtimis- ja

kontrollisüsteemide audititega, mille korraldavad auditeerimisüksuse määratud sõltumatud ja

sertifitseeritud audiitorid;

j) on koostööprogrammi nähtavuse tagamiseks osutatavate teenuste kulud;

k) on kirjaliku ja suulise tõlke kulud;

l) on raamkokkuleppe artiklis 3.2 loetletud ametiasutuste kulud seoses lisaseadmetega, sealhulgas

koostööprogrammi rakendamiseks spetsiaalselt hangitud tarkvaraga;

m) on seotud töötasuga, sotsiaalkindlustusmaksetega ja muude seadusjärgsete kuludega

raamkokkuleppe artiklis 3.2 nimetatud riiklike üksuste ametnike puhul või ekspertide puhul, kellel on

vajalikud valdkondlikud õiguslikud või tehnilised eksperditeadmised ja kes on ajutiselt määratud täitma

lisaülesandeid üksnes koostööprogrammi heaks

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.5

3.16

Käibemaks:

Kas käibemaks on abikõlblik vaid juhul, kui see ei ole käibemaksu reguleerivate õigusaktide alusel tagasi

nõutav?

NB! Kontrolli, kas toetuse saaja/partner on auditi teostamise ajal KM-kohustuslane. Sest juhul kui soetati

põhivara ja KM oli abikõlblik (toetuse saaja/partner ei olnud käibemaksukohustuslane), kuid selgub, et

toetuse saaja on vahepeal muutunud KM kohustuseks, siis on põhivara sisendkäibemaks KMS alusel

tagasi saadav ega ole seetõttu abikõlblik. (Oluline ei ole seejuures, kas toetuse saaja oma õigust

sisendkäibemaksu maha arvata tegelikult kasutab või mitte)

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.6

3.17

Kas kulu katteks ei ole toetust eraldatud või makstud teisest meetmest või riigieelarve või muu avaliku

sektori või muudest välisabi vahenditest?

Teha ristkontroll (SFCS) lähtuvalt audiitori hinnatavast riskist. Tulemus lisada kommentaari lahtrisse.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.6

3.18

Kas projekti eelarvesse ei ole planeeritud ega projekti kuludega hüvitatud järgmiseid kulusid:

a) võlaintressid, võlateeninduskulud ja viivised;

b) finantstehingute tasud ja muud puhtalt rahalised kulud, välja arvatud kulud, mis on seotud riikliku

koordineerimisüksuse või makseasutuse nõutavate või kehtivas õiguses ette nähtud kontodega, ning

toetusmeetme lepingu alusel nõutavate finantsteenuste kulud;

c) kahjueraldised või eraldised võimalike tulevaste kohustuste katteks;

d) vahetuskursikahju, välja arvatud kahju, mis tuleneb Šveitsi partnerite kaasamisest;

e) maa soetamiseks kantud kulud;

f) käibemaks, mis on abstraktselt mis tahes vahendite arvelt tagastatav, isegi kui toetusesaaja ise faktiliselt

käibemaksu tagasi ei saa;

g) kulud, mis kaetakse muudest allikatest;

h) trahvid, sunniraha, hüvitised või muud sellega seotud hüvitatavad summad, sealhulgas saamata jäänud

kasum ja kohtuvaidluste kulud, välja arvatud juhul, kui kohtuvaidlus on toetusmeetme tulemuste

saavutamiseks lahutamatu ja vajalik, ja

i) ülemäärased või ebamõistlikud kulud.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.6

Mitteabikõlblikud / välistatud kulud

3.19

Kas auditeeritud kuludes ei esine pettuse tunnusjooni/tingimusi, mis võib viidata seotusele pettusega?

Lahknevused arvestusandmetes, sealhulgas alljärgnev:

• tehingud, mis ei ole kajastatud täielikult või õigeaegselt või on summa, arvestusperioodi, klassifikatsiooni

või majandusüksuse poliitika osas ebaõigesti kajastatud;

• alusdokumentideta tehingud;

• viimasel hetkel tehtud korrigeerimised;

• vihjed või kaebused audiitorile väidetava pettuse kohta.

Vastuoluline või puuduv tõendusmaterjal, sealhulgas:

• puuduvad dokumendid;

• dokumendid, mis tunduvad olevat muudetud;

• ainult fotokoopiate või elektrooniliselt edastatud dokumentide kättesaadavus siis, kui eeldatakse

originaaldokumentide olemasolu;

• märkimisväärsed selgituseta näitajad kooskõlastavates võrdlemistes;

• juhtkonna või töötajate mittejärjepidevad, ebamäärased või mittemõistlikud vastused järelepärimistele või

analüütilistele protseduuridele;

• mittekättesaadav või puuduv elektrooniline tõendusmaterjal, mis on mittejärjepidev majandusüksuse

arvestusandmete säilitamise praktikate või poliitikatega

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 6.6

3.17

Riigihanked (riigihangete läbiviimise kontrollimiseks täida hangete kontroll-leht)

Kas toetuse saaja / partner on järginud projektiga seotud hangete tegemisel RHS-is sätestatud nõudeid,

kui toetuse saaja/partner on hankija RHS tähenduses (projekti on kantud hanke maksumusest alates 20

000 EUR või hanke maksumus on alates 20 000EUR)?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted

3.18

Juhul kui toetuse saaja või partner on määratlenud end mittehankijana, siis kas see on vastavuses hankija

mõistega RHS-is (vt RHS-i §10 (enne 01.09.17 kehtinud RHS) / §5 (pärast 01.09.17 kehtinud RHS))?

On oht, et MTÜ-d, SA-d jms määratlevad end mittehankijatena ning seetõttu ei ole ostude tegemisel

järginud RHS, kuigi lähtuvalt RHS-ist on tegemist hankijatega ning RHS-i tuleb neil järgida.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted

3.19

Kas toetuse saaja või partner, kes ei pea järgima RHS-i ja teenuse, asja või ehitustöö eeldatav maksumus

on ilma käibemaksuta võrdne 20 000 euroga või sellest suurem, on järgitud parimaid majanduspraktikaid

sh aruandekohustust, võimaldavad täielikku ja õiglast konkurentsi pakkujate vahel, näiteks tõhusa

hinnavõrdluse teel ja tagavad Norra vahendite optimaalse kasutuse?

Vastav detailne info kajastada Võrdluse kontroll-lehel (lisa 4)

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted

Riigihanked

3.20

Kas toetuse saaja või partner, kes ei pea järgima RHS-i ja teenuse, asja või ehitustöö eeldatav maksumus

on ilma käibemaksuta võrdne 20 000 euroga või sellest suurem, on ostude sooritamisel vältinud

konkurentsi kahjustavat huvide konflikti?

RHS §4 p8 - huvide konflikt on olukord, kus hankija või tema nimel tegutseva isiku töötajal, ametnikul,

juhatuse liikmel või muul pädeval esindajal, kes on kaasatud riigihanke ettevalmistamisse või

korraldamisse või kes võib muul moel mõjutada selle riigihanke tulemust, on otseselt või kaudselt

finantsalaseid, majanduslikke või muid isiklikke huvisid, mida võib käsitada tema erapooletust ja

sõltumatust kahjustavatena.

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted

Kas toetuse saaja või partner, kes ei pea järgima RHS-i, kuid saab 50% või rohkem projekti abikõlblikest

kuludest projekti toetusena, on viinud läbi riigihanke?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted

3.21

Kas toetuse saaja, kes on hankija RHS tähenduses, on andnud riigihanke korraldamise STS § 27 lõike 2

alusel määratud kompetentsikeskusele, kui nii on sätestatud TAT-is ja hankelepingu maksumus ilma

käibemaksuta on võrdne riigihanke piirmääraga või ületab seda ja on sõlminud kompetentsikeskusega

hanke korraldamise lepingu?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 7.1 ja riiklikud põhimõtted

3.16

Riigiabi

Kas projektile (sh programmile) antud toetus sisaldab riigiabi?

Kui JAH, siis täida vastav kontroll-leht

Raamkokkuleppe artikkel 4

3.16.1

Kas tegu on majandustegevusega-ettevõtjaga-ettevõtmisega?

Ettevõtjaks võib mh olla MTÜ; spordiklubi; arst. Vt mõisteid ja detailseimaid selgitusi Lisas 18 toodud

juhenditest "1.b_Riigiabi_kasiraamat_2016" lk5 (riigiabi mõiste) ja "1._State_aid_draft_guidance_en"

punkti 2 (punkti 2 alampunktides on erinevad näited tegevustest, mis esmapilgul ei pruugi tunduda

majandustegevusena). Näiteks võib seaduses olla kirjas, et looduskaitse ei ole majandustegevus, kuid

tegelikkuses sõltub see toetuse saaja (majandus)tegevusest.

3.16.2

Kas abi andmine kahjustab/moonutab liikmesriikide vahelist kaubandust?

Vt detailseimaid selgitusi ja näiteid Lisas 18 toodud juhenditest "1.b_Riigiabi_kasiraamat_2016" lk7 - 4.

Mõju konkurentsile ja kaubandusele ja "1._State_aid_draft_guidance_en" punkt 6.3.

Kaubandus on kahjustatud, kui toetuse tõttu toimub kaupade/rahade liikumine siia või on tegu ekspordiga.

Nt: toetuse saaja on põllumees ja ekspordib liha. Toetuse tõttu on näha, et välismaised ettevõtted

investeerivad siia, et saada toetust. Toetuse saajate seas on välismaised firmad või on eesti firma

omanikuks välismaalased.

Kontroll-küsimused tuvastamaks, kas toetus sisaldab riigiabi (küs 3.16.1 -3.16.2)?

Riigiabi

3.16.3

Kas infrastruktuuriprojektide puhul on tuvastatud kõik võimalikud kasusaajad/riigiabi saajad ja arvestatud

nendega riigiabi andmisel?

Võimalikeks kasusaajateks on: omanik (enamjaolt toetuse saaja), operaator, kasusaaja/kasutaja.

Nt: kortermajade renoveerimisel on toetuse saajaks KÜ, kuid kasusaaja on korteri või muu majas oleva

pinna omanik, kelleks võib olla ettevõte; praamide ostmisel on toetuse saajaks riik, kuid kui praam antakse

ilma hanketa mingi ettevõtte kasutusse, võib operaator olla riigiabi saaja; toetuse saaja on KOV, kes

remondib/ehitab tee keset metsa/tühermaad, mis viib vaid ühe ettevõteni, kes võib olla kasusaajaks;

prügila/reostatud maa (jääkreostuse likvideerimine) likvideerib/puhastab riigiasutus, kasusaajaks on aga

ettevõtted, kelle omandis korrastatud maa on.

3.16.4

Olenemata küsimuse 3.16 vastusest. Kas juhul kui toetust antakse teadusorganisatsiooni, teadmisi levitav

organisatsiooni ja/või teadusuuringute TARISTULE ja väidetakse, et riigiabi ei esine, siis kas on täidetud

riigiabi välistavad tingimused, vt Teadus- ja arendustegevuseks ning innovatsiooniks antava riigiabi

raamistiku peatükis 2 toodud tingimusi?

3.16.5

Kui toetus sisaldab riigiabi, siis kas on tegu EL poolt lubatud (seadusliku) riigiabiga, mida on antud kas EK

juhiste või raamistike, EK grupierandi määruse või vähese tähtsusega abi määruse alusel?

Kommentaaris tuua välja, millist tüüpi riigiabiga on tegemist.

3.16.6

Kas EK riigiabi otsuse nõudeid on järgitud, kui toetust on antud EK riigiabi otsuse alusel?

Näiteks: EK otsus "Euroopa Komisjoni 20. detsembri 2011. a otsusele (2012/21) „Euroopa Liidu toimimise

lepingu artikli 106 lõike 2 kohaldamise kohta üldist majandushuvi pakkuvaid teenuseid osutavatele

ettevõtjatele avalike teenuste eest makstava hüvitisena antava riigiabi suhtes” või muu EK riigiabi otsus.

Vaata paremalt lingilt SGEI – üldist majandushuvi pakkuvate teenuste paketti, kus viidatakse edasi otsuse

tingimusele. Toodud ka PA käsiraamatu lisas 18 -> 14._SGEI_Yldist_majandushuvi_pak_teen_pakett.

3.21 Kas auditi ulatuses olevate kuludega seotud finantskorrektsioonid on asjakohased ja piisavad? Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artikkel 14.1

3.22 Kas toetuse saaja/partner kasutab toetuse abil elluviidava projekti puhul ettenähtud sümboolikat ja

teavitustegevusi?

Raamkokkuleppe regulatsiooni

artiklid 13.1, 13.2 ja 13.3

4

4.1 Kas toetuse väljamaksmine toetuse saajale on toimunud täies mahus ja õigeaegselt?

4.2 Kas väljamaksed on tehtud proportsioonis korrektse toetuse määraga?

4.3 Kas toetuse lõppmakse on tehtud pärast seda, kui projekti tegevused on lõpetatud ja lõpetamine

tõendatud?

Kas toetuse saajale on toetus makstud õigeaegselt ja ettenähtud mahus?

Teavitamine ja avalikustamine

Finantskorrektsioonide rakendamine

Tööpaberi koostaja/auditi juht/auditi eest vastutav isik on allkirjastanud tööpaberi digitaalselt (nimed ja vastavad rollid on nähtavad digikonteineris)

Lisa 5

Viide

Kommentaarid

Ka positiivse vastuse korral lisada lühike selgitus või viide, milliseid

dokumente audiitor kontrollis ja või milliste toimingute läbiviimise

tulemusena audiitor vastavale järeldusele jõudis.

Kas projekti või programmi tegevused vastavad toetuse andmise tingimustes toodud nõuetele? Kas tegevused on teostatud otstarbekalt ja sihipäraselt?

Hinnangute andmisel tuleb lähtuda Šveitsi programmi spetsiifikast.

Toetuse andmine ja kulude planeerimine projekti eelarves

Kas deklareeritud kulud vastavad toetuse saaja raamatupidamisaruannetele ja raamatupidamise algdokumentidele?

Organisatsiooni raamatupidamise sise-eeskiri ja asjaajamiskord

Projekti tulemuste saavutamine

Kas toetuse saaja poolt deklareeritud kulud on vastavuses Šveitsi raamkokkuleppe ja regulatsiooni ning Eesti õigusaktidega?

Kulude tekkimine ja abikõlblikkus

Tulud toetuse saaja raamatupidamises

Kulud toetuse saaja raamatupidamises

Kululiikide abikõlblikkus

Mitteabikõlblikud / välistatud kulud

Riigihanked

Riigiabi

Kas toetuse saajale on toetus makstud õigeaegselt ja ettenähtud mahus?

Teavitamine ja avalikustamine

Finantskorrektsioonide rakendamine

Template version 28.11.23

Second Swiss Contribution

Estonia

Annual Audit Report

Reporting Period: 21.02.23-30.06.24

Report Number: 1

Report Submission Date: 31.03.2025

1

TABLE OF CONTENT

AUDIT OPINION ................................................................................................................................................................ 3

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND OTHER BODIES THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN PREPARING THE REPORT ..... 4 1.2 REFERENCE PERIOD (I.E. THE REPORTING PERIOD ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS 9.3 (4)) ............................................................... 4 1.3 AUDIT PERIOD (DURING WHICH THE AUDIT WORK TOOK PLACE) ................................................................................................. 4 1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF THE COOPERATION PROGRAMME COVERED BY THE REPORT AND OF ITS MANAGING AND PAYING AUTHORITIES. ....... 4 1.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE STEPS TAKEN TO PREPARE THE REPORT AND TO DRAW THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................... 5

2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ................................................................... 6

2.1 DETAILS OF ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS RELATED WITH MANAGING AND PAYING

AUTHORITIES' RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 THE DATES FROM WHICH THESE CHANGES APPLY, AS WELL AS THE IMPACT OF THESE CHANGES TO THE AUDIT WORK ARE TO BE INDICATED

6

3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY .................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 DETAILS OF ANY CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY, AND EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS. .............................................................. 7 3.2 DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE CHANGES MADE OR PROPOSED AT A LATE STAGE, WHICH DO NOT AFFECT THE WORK DONE DURING THE

REFERENCE PERIOD AND THE CHANGES MADE DURING THE REFERENCE PERIOD, THAT AFFECT THE AUDIT WORK AND RESULTS ................ 7

4. SYSTEM AUDITS .................................................................................................................................................. 8

4.1 DETAILS OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM OF THE PROGRAMME .................................................................................................... 8 4.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BASIS FOR THE AUDITS CARRIED OUT, INCLUDING A REFERENCE TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY APPLICABLE, MORE

PARTICULARLY TO THE RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND THE RESULTS THAT LED TO ESTABLISHING THE AUDIT PLAN FOR SYSTEM

AUDITS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM SYSTEM AUDITS................................................................ 8 4.4 INDICATION OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE CONSIDERED TO BE OF A SYSTEMIC CHARACTER ....................................... 8 4.5 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SYSTEM AUDITS FROM PREVIOUS ACCOUNTING YEARS ........... 8 4.6 LEVEL OF ASSURANCE OBTAINED FOLLOWING THE SYSTEM AUDITS (LOW/AVERAGE/HIGH) AND JUSTIFICATION ................................... 8

5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES .................................................................................................................................. 9

5.1 INDICATION OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT CARRIED OUT THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES ............................ 9 5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLING METHODOLOGY APPLIED AND INFORMATION WHETHER THE METHODOLOGY IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

AUDIT STRATEGY .............................................................................................................................................................. 9 5.3 INDICATION OF THE PARAMETERS USED FOR STATISTICAL SAMPLING AND EXPLANATION OF THE UNDERLYING CALCULATIONS AND

PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT APPLIED .................................................................................................................................... 9 5.4 IN CASE OF THE USE OF NON-STATISTICAL SAMPLING, INDICATE THE REASONS FOR USING A DIFFERENT METHOD AND PRESENT THE

PERCENTAGE OF PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS/EXPENDITURE COVERED THROUGH AUDITS, THE STEPS TAKEN TO ENSURE

RANDOMNESS OF THE SAMPLE (AND THUS ITS REPRESENTATIVITY) AND TO ENSURE A SUFFICIENT SIZE OF THE SAMPLE ENABLING THE

AUDIT AUTHORITY TO DRAW UP A VALID AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10 5.5 ANALYSIS OF THE PRINCIPAL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES, DESCRIBING THE NUMBER OF SAMPLE ITEMS AUDITED, THE

RESPECTIVE AMOUNT AND TYPES OF ERRORS BY PROJECT/PROGRAMME COMPONENT, THE NATURE OF ERRORS FOUND, THE STRATUM

ERROR RATE AND CORRESPONDING MAIN DEFICIENCIES OR IRREGULARITIES, THE UPPER LIMIT OF THE ERROR RATE (WHERE APPLICABLE),

ROOT CAUSES, CORRECTIVE MEASURES PROPOSED (INCLUDING THOSE INTENDING TO AVOID THESE ERRORS IN SUBSEQUENT PAYMENT

APPLICATIONS) AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10 5.6 COMPARISON OF THE TOTAL ERROR RATE AND THE RESIDUAL TOTAL ERROR RATE WITH THE SET MATERIALITY LEVEL, TO ASCERTAIN IF THE

POPULATION IS MATERIALLY MISSTATED AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................................... 10 5.7 INFORMATION ON THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT OF THE COMPLEMENTARY SAMPLE ....................................................................... 10 5.8 DETAILS OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE SYSTEMIC IN NATURE, AND THE MEASURES TAKEN, INCLUDING A QUANTIFICATION

OF THE IRREGULAR EXPENDITURE AND ANY RELATED FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS ............................................................................ 10 5.9 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES CARRIED OUT IN PREVIOUS YEARS, ON DEFICIENCIES OF SYSTEMIC

NATURE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10 5.10 CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE OVERALL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................... 11

2

6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ...................................................................................................................................... 12

6.1 INDICATION OF THE AUTHORITIES/BODIES THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ........................................................... 12 6.2 DESCRIPTION OF AUDIT APPROACH USED TO VERIFY THE ELEMENTS OF THE ACCOUNTS ................................................................. 12 6.3 INDICATION OF THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE RESULTS OF THE AUDITS REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY AND VERACITY

OF THE ACCOUNTS, INCLUDING AN INDICATION ON THE FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS MADE AND REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNTS AS A FOLLOW-

UP TO THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND/OR AUDIT OF EXPENDITURES ............................................................................ 12

7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY .................... 14

7.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND ANY AUDIT BODY THAT CARRIES OUT AUDITS

14 7.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR SUPERVISION AND QUALITY REVIEW APPLIED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY TO SUCH AUDIT BODY(IES)

14

8. OTHER INFORMATION....................................................................................................................................... 15

8.1 WHERE APPLICABLE, INFORMATION ON REPORTED FRAUD AND SUSPICIONS OF FRAUD DETECTED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AUDITS

PERFORMED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY (INCLUDING THE CASES REPORTED BY OTHER BODIES AND RELATED TO PROJECTS/PROGRAMME

COMPONENTS AUDITED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY), TOGETHER WITH THE MEASURES TAKEN ........................................................ 15 8.2 WHERE APPLICABLE, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS OCCURRED AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF THE ACCOUNTS TO THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND BEFORE

THE TRANSMISSION OF THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT AND CONSIDERED WHEN ESTABLISHING THE LEVEL OF ASSURANCE AND OPINION BY

THE AUDIT AUTHORITY ................................................................................................................................................... 15

9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 16

9.1 INDICATION OF THE OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM, AND

EXPLANATION OF HOW SUCH LEVEL WAS OBTAINED FROM THE COMBINATION OF THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND AUDITS OF

PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ............................................................................................................................. 16 9.2 ASSESSMENT OF ANY MITIGATING ACTIONS IMPLEMENTED, SUCH AS FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED FOR ANY

ADDITIONAL CORRECTIVE MEASURES NECESSARY, BOTH FROM A SYSTEM AND FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. ........................................... 16

ANNEX 1 – INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT (ACCOUNTS) .......................................................................................... 17

ANNEX 2 – AUDIT OPINION ON THE LEGALITY AND REGULARITY OF EXPENDITURE AND FUNCTIONING OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................ 18

ANNEX 3 – OVERVIEW OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 19

3

AUDIT OPINION

The following summary report presents the significant findings of the examination of Support

Measures, systems and expenses of the Second Swiss Contribution by the Audit Authority.

The audit opinion to be provided annually by the Audit Authority for the Swiss Cooperation Programme is based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. The report covers the three elements of the assurance:

- Accounts (audit opinion Annex 1) - Legality & regularity of expenditure (separate audit opinion in Annex 2) - Functioning of the management and control system (separate audit opinion in Annex 2)

Three types of opinions are foreseen:

- Unqualified opinion - Qualified opinion (either with limited or significant impact) - Adverse opinion

The following cover the Programme Components and Projects listed in Annex 3.

Findings on the accounts No findings Findings on legality & regularity of expenditure No findings Findings on functioning of the management and control system No findings

Audit result Unqualified opinion

4

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Identification of the responsible Audit Authority and other bodies that have been involved in preparing the report

The Annual Audit Report is prepared by the Audit Authority of the second Swiss Contribution between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Estonia (“Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility”)

Identification of the Audit Authority: Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia Financial Control Department Suur-Ameerika 1A Tallinn, Estonia Contacts: Anu Alber Head of the Financial Control Department, Head of the Audit Authority Mobile: +372 5885 1318 Email: [email protected] Mart Pechter Head of the Audit Unit II Mobile: +372 611 3152 Email: [email protected]

The Audit Authority has been solely responsible for the preparation of this report.

1.2 Reference period (i.e. the reporting period according to Regulations 9.3 (4))

The Annual Audit Report covers the period from 21.02.2023 till 30.06.2024.

1.3 Audit period (during which the audit work took place)

This is the first Annual Audit Report of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility and information contained herein covers the audit work period from the beginning date of 21.02.2023 until the submission of this report in 31.03.2025. Please note that the audit work carried out in this period covers only the costs and activities within the reference period (21.02.2023-30.06.2024). All audit work that has been carried out is in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards (Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors) and the work plan of the Financial Control Department.

1.4 Identification of the Cooperation Programme covered by the report and of its Managing and Paying authorities.

The Annual Audit Report covers the second Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the European Union that was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of the Swiss Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth again be referred to as “Swiss- Estonian Cooperation Facility”. The respective Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit)

5

and Paying Authority of Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility are situated in the State Shared Service Centre of Estonia.

1.5 Description of the steps taken to prepare the report and to draw the audit opinion

The Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) has submitted one overall payment claim concerning the period (containing claim No. 1 for technical assistance, claim No. 1 for preparation fund presented by the Ministry of Climate and claim No. 1 for preparation fund presented by the Ministry of Culture). The Audit Authority has ensured correctness of the data by reconciling it against the expenditure in amounts included in audit population. The Audit Authority has considered the results of audits of operations and the audit of accounts in the preparation of the Annual Audit Report and in the audit opinion. No system system audits have currently been carried out. The Audit Authority has also assessed that information provided by the Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) is not inconsistent with the audit results for the purpose of audit opinion.

6

2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS

2.1 Details of any significant changes in the management and control systems related with Managing and Paying Authorities' responsibilities

The Description of the Management and Control Systems for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility has been drawn up. Currently, this has not been updated because the Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) is going through a few changes, including choosing a new Head of Authority. The Audit Authority is aware of the process and has already planned the task of reviewing the Description of the Management and Control Systems once the new Head of Authority has been chosen, and the Description of the Management and Control Systems has been updated and approved. However, this process will not begin until the second half of the year 2025.

2.2 The dates from which these changes apply, as well as the impact of these changes to the audit work are to be indicated

The information regarding these points will be addressed in the next Annual Audit Report.

7

3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY

3.1 Details of any changes to the audit strategy, and explanation of the reasons.

The Audit Authority has drawn up the audit strategy, and has updated it in March 2025 in line with the recommendations received during communications with the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility.

3.2 Differentiation between the changes made or proposed at a late stage, which do not affect the work done during the reference period and the changes made during the reference period, that affect the audit work and results

The updates have no effect to the audit work or results.

8

4. SYSTEM AUDITS

4.1 Details of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that have carried out audits on the proper functioning of the management and control system of the Programme

Only the Audit Authority carries out the system audits. No other body has been given the right to do so.

4.2 Description of the basis for the audits carried out, including a reference to the audit strategy applicable, more particularly to the risk assessment methodology and the results that led to establishing the audit plan for system audits

The system audits are carried out in accordance with the Audit Strategy, the annual risk assessment

and the annual working plan of the Financial Control Department.

For the reporting covered in this Annual Audit Report, no system audits have yet been carried out.

This has been agreed in communication with the Audit Authority and the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation

Facility. The first system audit will be carried out in the year 2025.

4.3 Description of the main findings and conclusions drawn from system audits1

There are no findings and conclusions, as no system audits have been carried out yet.

4.4 Indication of whether any problems identified were considered to be of a systemic character

There are no problems of systemic character.

4.5 Information on the follow-up of audit recommendations from system audits from previous accounting years

There are no previous recommendations to be followed up.

4.6 Level of assurance obtained following the system audits (low/average/high) and justification

As no system audits have been carried out, the Audit Authority currently gives no opinion on the management and control system based on that. However, based on the audit of expenditures carried out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from the audit, the management and control system can be assessed at least as average.

1 If several system audits took place during the reporting period, it is possible to add a list as an annex at the end of the document, to facilitate the overview. As an example for the list, Chapter 10.1 of the Annex II of the EU regulations 2018/1291 can be used. This should be done in addition to the description of the main findings and conclusions under 4.3.

9

5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES

5.1 Indication of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that carried out the audits of expenditures

Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of expenditures. No other body has been given the right to do so.

5.2 Description of the sampling methodology2 applied and information whether the methodology is in accordance with the audit strategy

When carrying out the audits of expenditures, the sampling methodology was applied in two ways,

both of which were consistent with the audit strategy.

During the first audit of expenditures, all costs in total amounts of 89 977,50 euros were included in

the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat projects or

other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that 87 cost

items were included. From them, a statistical sample was drawn using monetary unit sampling. The

statistical sampling was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.

This resulted in a sample of 30 cost items with a total amount of 61 511,74 euros (68,4% of the

population total amount).

During an additional audit of expenditures, all additional costs in amounts of 56 462,25 euros were

included in the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat

projects or other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that

in number, 41 additional cost items were included. From them, a non-statistical sample was drawn

using the principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of costs. The non-statistical sampling

was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.

This resulted in a sample of 5 cost items with a total amount of 11 388,45 euros (20,2% of the

population total amount).

In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited in two separate sub-populations, using

two separate methods of sampling. Both methods were consistent with the principles of statistical and

non-statistical sampling as well as with the audit strategy.

In total, 72 900,19 euros was audited, totaling 49,8% of the total amounts in the population.

5.3 Indication of the parameters used for statistical sampling and explanation of the underlying calculations and professional judgement applied

For the statistical sampling, monetary unit sampling (probability proportional to cost) was applied. The

general principles in the methodology of the Financial Control Department were used: confidence

level of 80%, expected error rate of 1,13% and materiality level of 2% from which then the respective

sampling interval was calculated, given the population size of 89 977,50 euros and 87 cost items.

There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no

need to apply additional professional judgment.

2 The Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1291 as well as the European Commission’s Guidance on sampling methods (EGESIF_16-0014-01) can be taken as references.

10

5.4 In case of the use of non-statistical sampling, indicate the reasons for using a different method and present the percentage of Projects/Programme Components/expenditure covered through audits, the steps taken to ensure randomness of the sample (and thus its representativity) and to ensure a sufficient size of the sample enabling the Audit Authority to draw up a valid audit opinion

For the non-statistical sampling, the general principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of

costs were applied and simple random sampling with equal probability was carried out on the

population of 56 462,25 euros and 41 cost items.

There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no

need to apply additional professional judgment.

5.5 Analysis of the principal results of the audits of expenditures, describing the number of sample items audited, the respective amount and types of errors by Project/Programme Component, the nature of errors found, the stratum error rate and corresponding main deficiencies or irregularities, the upper limit of the error rate (where applicable), root causes, corrective measures proposed (including those intending to avoid these errors in subsequent payment applications) and the impact on the audit opinion

In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited, containing 128 items. The number of

items audited together was 35, with a total amount of 72 900,19 euros. No deficiencies or

irregularities were detected.

5.6 Comparison of the total error rate and the residual total error rate with the set materiality level, to ascertain if the population is materially misstated and the impact on the audit opinion3

The total error rate and the residual error rate are both 0.

5.7 Information on the results of the audit of the complementary sample

There has been no need for a complementary sample, and none has been drawn by the Audit

Authority.

5.8 Details of whether any problems identified were systemic in nature, and the measures taken, including a quantification of the irregular expenditure and any related financial corrections

There were no problems or irregularities identified and none that were systemic in nature. There has

been no irregular expenditure and no financial corrections.

5.9 Information on the follow-up of audits of expenditures carried out in previous years, on deficiencies of systemic nature

3 The European Commission’s “Guidance for Member States on the Annual Control Report and Audit Opinion to be reported by audit authorities and on the treatment of errors detected by audit authorities in view of establishing and reporting reliable total residual error rates” (EGESIF_15-0002-04) can be taken as a reference.

11

There has been no follow-up of audits of expenditures as none have been conducted previously.

5.10 Conclusions drawn from the overall results of the audits of expenditures regarding the effectiveness of the management and control system

There were no findings related to audits of expenditures. Therefore, it can be concluded that the

management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audits of

expenditures can be assessed as high.

12

6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS

6.1 Indication of the authorities/bodies that have carried out audits of accounts

Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of accounts. No other body has been given the right to do so.

6.2 Description of audit approach used to verify the elements of the accounts

The Audit Authority has verified the elements of the accounts in full by carrying out the audits of

expenditures that have included in its entirety the following costs.

1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.

2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount of 2 603,73 euros.

3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of 6 514,90 euros.

4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in the amount of 11 987,71 euros.

5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of 14 952,61 euros.

6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of 30 804,23 euros.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.

This was in turn compared with the amounts declared by the Managing Authority (the National

Coordination Unit).

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared

Service Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical

assistance audited under point 1.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry

of Climate covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund

audited under point 5.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry

of Culture covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds

audited under points 2, 3, 4 and 6.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.

6.3 Indication of the conclusions drawn from the results of the audits regarding the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the accounts, including an indication on the financial corrections made and reflected in the accounts as a follow-up to the results of the system audits and/or audit of expenditures

There were no findings related to audit of accounts. Therefore, it can be concluded that the

management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audit of accounts can

13

be assessed as high. There are no findings resulting from the audits of expenditures and thus no

effect in that regard exists to the accounts. No financial corrections are made, and no follow-up is

necessary.

14

7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY

7.1 Description of the procedure for coordination between the Audit Authority and any audit body that carries out audits

No body other than the Audit Authority has carried out any audits.

7.2 Description of the procedure for supervision and quality review applied by the Audit Authority to such audit body(ies)

Whenever audit work may be outsourced by the Audit Authority, full quality control in accordance with the methodology will be carried out by the Audit Authority before accepting any final audit work from other bodies.

15

8. OTHER INFORMATION

8.1 Where applicable, information on reported fraud and suspicions of fraud detected in the context of the audits performed by the Audit Authority (including the cases reported by other bodies and related to Projects/Programme Components audited by the Audit Authority), together with the measures taken

There has been no reported fraud or suspicions of fraud detected.

8.2 Where applicable, subsequent events occurred after the submission of the accounts to the Audit Authority and before the transmission of the Annual Audit Report and considered when establishing the level of assurance and opinion by the Audit Authority

No subsequent events that occurred after the submission of the accounts are there to be considered.

16

9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE

9.1 Indication of the overall level of assurance on the proper functioning of the management and control system, and explanation of how such level was obtained from the combination of the results of the system audits and audits of Projects/Programme Components

The overall level of assurance is reflected in the audit opinion, which is unqualified.

Assurance on the accounts – the Audit Authority concludes that the accounts contain complete,

accurate and truthful information.

Assurance on the effective functioning of the management and control systems – the Audit Authority

concludes that although no system audits have been carried out, the results of the audits of

expenditures carried out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from

the audit, the management and control system can be assessed at least as average. Looking at the

results of the audit of expenditures separately, since no findings have been detected from there, the

assurance can even be assessed as high.

However, the Audit Authority is of the opinion that when no system audits have yet been carried out,

an overall level of assurance cannot be given as high. Therefore, an overall level of assurance of

average should be indicated for now.

9.2 Assessment of any mitigating actions implemented, such as financial corrections and assessment of the need for any additional corrective measures necessary, both from a system and financial perspective.

There are no mitigating actions necessary for now.

17

Annex 1 – Independent auditor’s report (accounts)

Independent auditor’s report on financial information Opinion We have audited the financial information for Projects and Programme components listed in Annex 3, which comprise the annual accounts for the year 2024 (21.02.2023-30.06.2024) In our opinion, the accompanying financial information on the above-mentioned Projects and Programme Components for the year 2024 ended 30.06.2024 are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with national law and jurisdiction of the Republic of Estonia as well as with the rules and requirements of Swiss- Estonian Cooperation Facility. Basis for opinion We conducted our audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors. Our responsibilities under those provisions and standards are further described in this report. We are independent of the entity in accordance with the requirements of the Global Internal Audit Standards, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Information Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial information. This responsibility includes designing, implementing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial information that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies; and making accounting estimates that are reasonable in the circumstances. Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial information Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial information is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken based on this financial information. As part of an audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards, we exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. We also:

• Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial information, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.

• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control.

• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by Management.

Signed electronically Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority 31.03.2025 Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia Tallinn, Estonia Annex: Audited accounts (Annex 3)

18

Annex 2 – Audit opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure and functioning of the management and control system

Independent auditor’s report on financial information on the legality and regularity of expenditure and

functioning of the management and control system

Opinion

We have audited the institutions, Projects and Programme Components listed in Annex 3. In our opinion and based on the audit work performed:

- the expenditure in the accounts for which reimbursement has been requested is legal and regular,

- the management and control systems put in place function properly.

The examination of the institutions, Projects and Programme Components have been conducted in accordance with defined audit strategy and taking into consideration internationally accepted audit standards.

Signed electronically Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority 31.03.2025 Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia Tallinn, Estonia

19

Annex 3 – Overview of Projects and Programme Components

The following projects were audited by the Audit Authority.

1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.

2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount of 2 603,73 euros.

3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of 6 514,90 euros.

4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in the amount of 11 987,71 euros.

5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of 14 952,61 euros.

6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of 30 804,23 euros.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared Service

Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical assistance audited

under point 1.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Climate

covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund audited under point 5.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Culture

covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds audited under points

2, 3, 4 and 6.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.

SWISS-ESTONIAN COOPERATION FACILITY

AUDIT STRATEGY

As prepared by:

AUDIT AUTHORITY

SITUATED IN

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia

31st of March 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3

RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................... 3

METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................... 4

Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 4

Walkthrough ........................................................................................................................................ 4

Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility ................. 5

Audits of Support Measures ................................................................................................................ 6

AUDIT WORK PLANNED ........................................................................................................................... 7

RESOURCES .............................................................................................................................................. 7

INTRODUCTION

The Framework Agreement for the implementation of the second Swiss Contribution to selected

Member States of the European Union was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the

Government of the Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of

the Swiss Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth referred to as “Swiss-

Estonian Cooperation Facility”.

As per the country-specific setup, the Audit Authority is the Financial Control Department of the

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia. The Audit Authority is solely responsible for drawing up,

monitoring, and updating the audit strategy.

The functions of the Audit Authority are set out in Regulations on the implementation of the second

Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the European Union. In addition to that, the tasks of

the Financial Control Department are stipulated with the statute of the Ministry of Finance and

specified with the statute of Financial Control Department, which functions as the audit charter.

With the decree of the Government of Estonia No 177 from 22nd of December 2011, the Financial

Control Department as the Audit Authority is subordinated directly to the Secretary General of the

Ministry of Finance. That ensures its functional and organizational independence within the Swiss-

Estonian Cooperation Facility, as the National Coordination Unit and the Paying Authority of the Facility

are situated in the State Shared Service Centre.

RISK ASSESSMENT

National Coordination Unit is responsible for the overall risk assessment of the Swiss-Estonian

Cooperation Facility, including the methodology, coordination, and consolidation of the results of the

risk assessment.

In addition to the risk assessment exercise coordinated by the National Coordination Unit, the Audit

Authority carries out its own, independent risk assessment to compose the annual audit plan, including

audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well as audits

of Support Measures.

The risk assessment is carried out annually, before the composition of annual audit plan, considering

the risk components of impact, likelihood and implemented internal control measures. The risk factors

to be considered for risk assessment exercise are the following:

- Results of risk assessment carried out by the National Coordination Unit.

- Results of audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures.

- The quantity and frequency of errors and the error rate of previous accounting year or years.

- Any other indications of significant risks or weaknesses.

METHODOLOGY

Overview

According to the statute of the Financial Control Department, all the auditors of the department must

follow the Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal

Auditors.

There are no discrepancies between the standards for professional practice of internal auditors which

are established by the decree of Minister of Finance of Estonia and International Standards for the

Professional Practice of Internal Auditing issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors.

To obtain assurance of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility as a whole, the Audit Authority shall

carry out audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well

as audits of Support Measures.

The Audit Authority shall carry out those audits for each accounting year running from 1st of July on

the year N-1 to 30th of June on the year N (with an exception for the first accounting year which shall

cover the period from the signing of the Framework Agreement on the year N-1 until the 30th of June

on the year N).

It is the sole responsibility of the Audit Authority to prepare and submit to Switzerland for each of

those accounting years and not later than 31st of March of the year N+1 an Annual Audit Report along

with the Audit Opinion signed by the head of the Audit Authority. The Annual Audit Report shall include

all data of the audits carried out for the accounting year, including findings and measures taken.

The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out those audits. Instead, the

Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department of Financial Control

as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the second Swiss

Contribution.

However, a short description of audit principles along with the main elements to be verified shall be

outlined in the audit strategy. The Audit Authority will also prepare general checklists to be used in

audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures. Those checklists

will be annexed to the audit strategy.

Also, every audit will be thoroughly planned with the reasons, processes, risks, goals, and extent of

defined and agreed on in detail during the planning process. This thorough planning process precludes

the need for a separate manual.

Walkthrough

The methodology used by the Audit Authority is compliant with the Global Internal Audit Standards as

operated by the Institute of Internal Auditors.

The audits are carried out assuming full and unhindered access by the auditors for all documents and

information necessary.

All auditors included in the audit activities must sign a declaration of independence and objectivity in

relation to the audit scope.

All engagements are communicated to the auditees beforehand. The audit engagements include desk-

based checks of documents and other information, with additional on-site visits, if necessary.

The communication of all results, including irregularities, errors and corrective measures, is always

provided to the auditee as well as the Managing Authority. The auditee has always the right to

comment on the results of the audit before the final report is issued.

The corrective measures recommended by the Audit Authority are always reviewed later to ensure

that they are carried out in a sufficient manner.

All audit documents are archived in accordance with the principles of the Cooperation Facility.

The materiality level for the annual reporting is set at 2% of the amounts included. For annual

reporting, any extrapolated final residual error rates above should be met with corrective action at the

level of the Cooperation Facility.

Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility

The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for the audits of management and control

systems. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department

of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the

second Swiss Contribution

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on the functioning of the management and control

systems, audits at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be carried out. Those audits shall aim to

provide the Audit Authority with assurance that the management and control systems in the Partner

State are functioning effectively and in compliance with the Framework Agreement and national law

of the Partner State.

The crucial bodies to be audited are the National Coordination Unit, the Paying Authority (the tasks of

which are also taken on by the National Coordination Unit) and any Intermediate Bodies that carry out

tasks of the Cooperation Facility. Those bodies shall be audited at least once during the

implementation period of the Cooperation Facility.

Additionally, there are crucial aspects of the implementation of the Cooperation Facility that shall also

be audited at least once during the implementation period, either along with the audits of the bodies

carrying out the implementation of those aspects, or separately. Those are the following.

- The definition of the functions of the bodies involved in the management and control of the Cooperation Facility and the allocation of functions within each body.

- Compliance with the principle of separation of functions between and within such bodies.

- The procedures and embedded controls for ensuring the correctness and regularity of expenditure.

- The reliability of the accounting, monitoring and financial reporting.

- The reporting and monitoring systems where the responsible body entrusts the execution of tasks to another body.

- The system to ensure that all documents regarding expenditures and audits are held to ensure an adequate audit trail.

- The procedures ensuring that the rules on public procurement are correctly applied.

- The procedures for preventing, detecting, reporting, correcting and prosecuting irregularities.

Audits of Support Measures

The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out the audits of support

measures. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the

Department of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the

implementation of the second Swiss Contribution.

The Audit Authority has prepared a general checklist to be used in audits of Support Measures. This

checklist has been annexed to the audit strategy as Annex 1.

The planning of the audit of Support Measures will be based on the following

- Accounts presented to the Audit Authority, that will be tested in full.

- Expenditure presented to the Audit Authority, that will be audited in accordance with a non- statistical or statistical sampling.

- Risk assessment of the management and control system, based on which audits of management and control system are carried out.

Audits of Support Measures shall be carried out by the Audit Authority to obtain assurance and to

express the opinion on the following crucial matters.

- Accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the accounts.

- Legality and regularity of expenditure.

- Existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system.

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the

accounts, an audit of accounts shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.

The audit of accounts shall consider the results of audits of the management and control systems as

well as the results of audits on the legality and regularity of expenditure along with the existence,

adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system. In addition, the audit of accounts

shall consider the results of any other audits or checks carried out at the Cooperation Facility.

The audit of accounts shall aim to provide reasonable assurance on the completeness, accuracy, and

veracity of the amounts declared in the accounts.

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on legality and regularity of expenditure, audits of

expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.

The audits of expenditure shall be carried out on the entirety of the expenditure for each accounting

year and with a sampling method that shall ensure a random selection of each sampling unit from the

population. If possible, a statistical sampling method shall be used for making that selection. However,

the Audit Authority assumes at this stage that the population for each accounting year will be less than

50 units, making a non-statistical sampling method the reasonable option of choice.

In composing the random sample, the following principles shall be used.

- At least 10% of items (either projects or other programme components) for which expenditure has been declared during an accounting year and at least 15% of the expenditure which has been declared during the same accounting year must be included in the sample.

- The selection of those items shall be done with a simple random equal probability principle.

- Any negative items in the population shall be separated from the population before drawing a sample and examined as a separate population.

- Any irregularities found because of the audits of expenditure shall be extrapolated in line with the principles of non-statistical sampling and this extrapolation shall form the basis for the assurance obtained and opinion given on those audits.

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the

management and control system, the Audit Authority considers both the results of audits of the

management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility and the results of the audits

of expenditure for each accounting year.

For results considered this way, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any errors

detected in those audits that are related to existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management

and control system are random or systemic.

In addition to that, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any such errors point to

a risk of fraud, corruption, conflict of interest, or double funding. Any of those risks shall be treated as

the highest priority.

AUDIT WORK PLANNED

The first audit of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be

carried out by the Audit Authority during the year 2025. Thereon, at least one such audit shall be

carried out for each accounting year, unless otherwise proposed by the Audit Authority in the Annual

Audit Report and agreed on with the acceptance of the same Annual Audit Report.

The audits of expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year for which

expenditure has been declared and in line with the principles of sampling approved in the Audit

Strategy. In addition to that, an audit of accounts shall also be carried out by the Audit Authority for

each accounting year for which expenditure has been declared.

RESOURCES

The Audit Authority resources allocated by the Financial Control Department for the Swiss-Estonian

Cooperation Facility amount to 0,75 full-time equivalent. This may be divided between more than one

auditor of the Financial Control Department, to ensure the best possible audit team for the tasks at

hand as well as the principles and necessities of the work in the Financial Control Department.

Approved by

(Signed electronically)

Anu Alber

Head of the Financial Control Department of the Ministry of Finance

Head of the Audit Authority

Annex 1: General checklist for auditing Support Measures

Lõkke 4 / 10122 Tallinn / 663 8200 / [email protected] / www.rtk.ee / Registrikood 70007340

Christoph Liechti

Embassy of Switzerland to Latvia, Lithuania

and Estonia

[email protected] Ours 31.03.2025 no 11.1-5/25/728-1

Smilšu iela 8 Riga

LV-1050 LATVIA

Submission of the Annual Audit Report and

the Audit Strategy

Dear Mr Liechti,

The National Coordination Unit of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme hereby submits

the first Annual Audit Report for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme, covering the period

from 21.02.2023 to 30.06.2024, along with the updated Audit Strategy.

Yours sincerely,

(signed digitally)

Urmo Merila

Deputy Director General

Annexes:

Annual Audit Report

Audit Strategy

General Checklist

Helena Musthallik 56466003

[email protected]

Template version 28.11.23

Second Swiss Contribution

Estonia

Annual Audit Report

Reporting Period: 21.02.23-30.06.24

Report Number: 1

Report Submission Date: 31.03.2025

1

TABLE OF CONTENT

AUDIT OPINION ................................................................................................................................................................ 3

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE RESPONSIBLE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND OTHER BODIES THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN PREPARING THE REPORT ..... 4 1.2 REFERENCE PERIOD (I.E. THE REPORTING PERIOD ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS 9.3 (4)) ............................................................... 4 1.3 AUDIT PERIOD (DURING WHICH THE AUDIT WORK TOOK PLACE) ................................................................................................. 4 1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF THE COOPERATION PROGRAMME COVERED BY THE REPORT AND OF ITS MANAGING AND PAYING AUTHORITIES. ....... 4 1.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE STEPS TAKEN TO PREPARE THE REPORT AND TO DRAW THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................... 5

2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS ................................................................... 6

2.1 DETAILS OF ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS RELATED WITH MANAGING AND PAYING

AUTHORITIES' RESPONSIBILITIES .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2 THE DATES FROM WHICH THESE CHANGES APPLY, AS WELL AS THE IMPACT OF THESE CHANGES TO THE AUDIT WORK ARE TO BE INDICATED

6

3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY .................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 DETAILS OF ANY CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY, AND EXPLANATION OF THE REASONS. .............................................................. 7 3.2 DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN THE CHANGES MADE OR PROPOSED AT A LATE STAGE, WHICH DO NOT AFFECT THE WORK DONE DURING THE

REFERENCE PERIOD AND THE CHANGES MADE DURING THE REFERENCE PERIOD, THAT AFFECT THE AUDIT WORK AND RESULTS ................ 7

4. SYSTEM AUDITS .................................................................................................................................................. 8

4.1 DETAILS OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM OF THE PROGRAMME .................................................................................................... 8 4.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BASIS FOR THE AUDITS CARRIED OUT, INCLUDING A REFERENCE TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY APPLICABLE, MORE

PARTICULARLY TO THE RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND THE RESULTS THAT LED TO ESTABLISHING THE AUDIT PLAN FOR SYSTEM

AUDITS .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM SYSTEM AUDITS................................................................ 8 4.4 INDICATION OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE CONSIDERED TO BE OF A SYSTEMIC CHARACTER ....................................... 8 4.5 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS FROM SYSTEM AUDITS FROM PREVIOUS ACCOUNTING YEARS ........... 8 4.6 LEVEL OF ASSURANCE OBTAINED FOLLOWING THE SYSTEM AUDITS (LOW/AVERAGE/HIGH) AND JUSTIFICATION ................................... 8

5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES .................................................................................................................................. 9

5.1 INDICATION OF THE BODIES (INCLUDING THE AUDIT AUTHORITY) THAT CARRIED OUT THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES ............................ 9 5.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE SAMPLING METHODOLOGY APPLIED AND INFORMATION WHETHER THE METHODOLOGY IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

AUDIT STRATEGY .............................................................................................................................................................. 9 5.3 INDICATION OF THE PARAMETERS USED FOR STATISTICAL SAMPLING AND EXPLANATION OF THE UNDERLYING CALCULATIONS AND

PROFESSIONAL JUDGEMENT APPLIED .................................................................................................................................... 9 5.4 IN CASE OF THE USE OF NON-STATISTICAL SAMPLING, INDICATE THE REASONS FOR USING A DIFFERENT METHOD AND PRESENT THE

PERCENTAGE OF PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS/EXPENDITURE COVERED THROUGH AUDITS, THE STEPS TAKEN TO ENSURE

RANDOMNESS OF THE SAMPLE (AND THUS ITS REPRESENTATIVITY) AND TO ENSURE A SUFFICIENT SIZE OF THE SAMPLE ENABLING THE

AUDIT AUTHORITY TO DRAW UP A VALID AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10 5.5 ANALYSIS OF THE PRINCIPAL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES, DESCRIBING THE NUMBER OF SAMPLE ITEMS AUDITED, THE

RESPECTIVE AMOUNT AND TYPES OF ERRORS BY PROJECT/PROGRAMME COMPONENT, THE NATURE OF ERRORS FOUND, THE STRATUM

ERROR RATE AND CORRESPONDING MAIN DEFICIENCIES OR IRREGULARITIES, THE UPPER LIMIT OF THE ERROR RATE (WHERE APPLICABLE),

ROOT CAUSES, CORRECTIVE MEASURES PROPOSED (INCLUDING THOSE INTENDING TO AVOID THESE ERRORS IN SUBSEQUENT PAYMENT

APPLICATIONS) AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ....................................................................................................... 10 5.6 COMPARISON OF THE TOTAL ERROR RATE AND THE RESIDUAL TOTAL ERROR RATE WITH THE SET MATERIALITY LEVEL, TO ASCERTAIN IF THE

POPULATION IS MATERIALLY MISSTATED AND THE IMPACT ON THE AUDIT OPINION ...................................................................... 10 5.7 INFORMATION ON THE RESULTS OF THE AUDIT OF THE COMPLEMENTARY SAMPLE ....................................................................... 10 5.8 DETAILS OF WHETHER ANY PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED WERE SYSTEMIC IN NATURE, AND THE MEASURES TAKEN, INCLUDING A QUANTIFICATION

OF THE IRREGULAR EXPENDITURE AND ANY RELATED FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS ............................................................................ 10 5.9 INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOW-UP OF AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES CARRIED OUT IN PREVIOUS YEARS, ON DEFICIENCIES OF SYSTEMIC

NATURE ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10 5.10 CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE OVERALL RESULTS OF THE AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES REGARDING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................... 11

2

6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ...................................................................................................................................... 12

6.1 INDICATION OF THE AUTHORITIES/BODIES THAT HAVE CARRIED OUT AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS ........................................................... 12 6.2 DESCRIPTION OF AUDIT APPROACH USED TO VERIFY THE ELEMENTS OF THE ACCOUNTS ................................................................. 12 6.3 INDICATION OF THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM THE RESULTS OF THE AUDITS REGARDING THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY AND VERACITY

OF THE ACCOUNTS, INCLUDING AN INDICATION ON THE FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS MADE AND REFLECTED IN THE ACCOUNTS AS A FOLLOW-

UP TO THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND/OR AUDIT OF EXPENDITURES ............................................................................ 12

7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY .................... 14

7.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR COORDINATION BETWEEN THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND ANY AUDIT BODY THAT CARRIES OUT AUDITS

14 7.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE FOR SUPERVISION AND QUALITY REVIEW APPLIED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY TO SUCH AUDIT BODY(IES)

14

8. OTHER INFORMATION....................................................................................................................................... 15

8.1 WHERE APPLICABLE, INFORMATION ON REPORTED FRAUD AND SUSPICIONS OF FRAUD DETECTED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE AUDITS

PERFORMED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY (INCLUDING THE CASES REPORTED BY OTHER BODIES AND RELATED TO PROJECTS/PROGRAMME

COMPONENTS AUDITED BY THE AUDIT AUTHORITY), TOGETHER WITH THE MEASURES TAKEN ........................................................ 15 8.2 WHERE APPLICABLE, SUBSEQUENT EVENTS OCCURRED AFTER THE SUBMISSION OF THE ACCOUNTS TO THE AUDIT AUTHORITY AND BEFORE

THE TRANSMISSION OF THE ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT AND CONSIDERED WHEN ESTABLISHING THE LEVEL OF ASSURANCE AND OPINION BY

THE AUDIT AUTHORITY ................................................................................................................................................... 15

9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ........................................................................................................................ 16

9.1 INDICATION OF THE OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE ON THE PROPER FUNCTIONING OF THE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM, AND

EXPLANATION OF HOW SUCH LEVEL WAS OBTAINED FROM THE COMBINATION OF THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM AUDITS AND AUDITS OF

PROJECTS/PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ............................................................................................................................. 16 9.2 ASSESSMENT OF ANY MITIGATING ACTIONS IMPLEMENTED, SUCH AS FINANCIAL CORRECTIONS AND ASSESSMENT OF THE NEED FOR ANY

ADDITIONAL CORRECTIVE MEASURES NECESSARY, BOTH FROM A SYSTEM AND FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. ........................................... 16

ANNEX 1 – INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT (ACCOUNTS) .......................................................................................... 17

ANNEX 2 – AUDIT OPINION ON THE LEGALITY AND REGULARITY OF EXPENDITURE AND FUNCTIONING OF THE

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEM ............................................................................................................ 18

ANNEX 3 – OVERVIEW OF PROJECTS AND PROGRAMME COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 19

3

AUDIT OPINION

The following summary report presents the significant findings of the examination of Support

Measures, systems and expenses of the Second Swiss Contribution by the Audit Authority.

The audit opinion to be provided annually by the Audit Authority for the Swiss Cooperation Programme is based on the conclusions drawn from the audit evidence obtained. The report covers the three elements of the assurance:

- Accounts (audit opinion Annex 1) - Legality & regularity of expenditure (separate audit opinion in Annex 2) - Functioning of the management and control system (separate audit opinion in Annex 2)

Three types of opinions are foreseen:

- Unqualified opinion - Qualified opinion (either with limited or significant impact) - Adverse opinion

The following cover the Programme Components and Projects listed in Annex 3.

Findings on the accounts No findings Findings on legality & regularity of expenditure No findings Findings on functioning of the management and control system No findings

Audit result Unqualified opinion

4

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Identification of the responsible Audit Authority and other bodies that have been involved in preparing the report

The Annual Audit Report is prepared by the Audit Authority of the second Swiss Contribution between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Estonia (“Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility”)

Identification of the Audit Authority: Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia Financial Control Department Suur-Ameerika 1A Tallinn, Estonia Contacts: Anu Alber Head of the Financial Control Department, Head of the Audit Authority Mobile: +372 5885 1318 Email: [email protected] Mart Pechter Head of the Audit Unit II Mobile: +372 611 3152 Email: [email protected]

The Audit Authority has been solely responsible for the preparation of this report.

1.2 Reference period (i.e. the reporting period according to Regulations 9.3 (4))

The Annual Audit Report covers the period from 21.02.2023 till 30.06.2024.

1.3 Audit period (during which the audit work took place)

This is the first Annual Audit Report of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility and information contained herein covers the audit work period from the beginning date of 21.02.2023 until the submission of this report in 31.03.2025. Please note that the audit work carried out in this period covers only the costs and activities within the reference period (21.02.2023-30.06.2024). All audit work that has been carried out is in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards (Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors) and the work plan of the Financial Control Department.

1.4 Identification of the Cooperation Programme covered by the report and of its Managing and Paying authorities.

The Annual Audit Report covers the second Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the European Union that was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the Government of the Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of the Swiss Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth again be referred to as “Swiss- Estonian Cooperation Facility”. The respective Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit)

5

and Paying Authority of Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility are situated in the State Shared Service Centre of Estonia.

1.5 Description of the steps taken to prepare the report and to draw the audit opinion

The Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) has submitted one overall payment claim concerning the period (containing claim No. 1 for technical assistance, claim No. 1 for preparation fund presented by the Ministry of Climate and claim No. 1 for preparation fund presented by the Ministry of Culture). The Audit Authority has ensured correctness of the data by reconciling it against the expenditure in amounts included in audit population. The Audit Authority has considered the results of audits of operations and the audit of accounts in the preparation of the Annual Audit Report and in the audit opinion. No system system audits have currently been carried out. The Audit Authority has also assessed that information provided by the Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) is not inconsistent with the audit results for the purpose of audit opinion.

6

2. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL SYSTEMS

2.1 Details of any significant changes in the management and control systems related with Managing and Paying Authorities' responsibilities

The Description of the Management and Control Systems for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility has been drawn up. Currently, this has not been updated because the Managing Authority (the National Coordination Unit) is going through a few changes, including choosing a new Head of Authority. The Audit Authority is aware of the process and has already planned the task of reviewing the Description of the Management and Control Systems once the new Head of Authority has been chosen, and the Description of the Management and Control Systems has been updated and approved. However, this process will not begin until the second half of the year 2025.

2.2 The dates from which these changes apply, as well as the impact of these changes to the audit work are to be indicated

The information regarding these points will be addressed in the next Annual Audit Report.

7

3. CHANGES TO THE AUDIT STRATEGY

3.1 Details of any changes to the audit strategy, and explanation of the reasons.

The Audit Authority has drawn up the audit strategy, and has updated it in March 2025 in line with the recommendations received during communications with the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility.

3.2 Differentiation between the changes made or proposed at a late stage, which do not affect the work done during the reference period and the changes made during the reference period, that affect the audit work and results

The updates have no effect to the audit work or results.

8

4. SYSTEM AUDITS

4.1 Details of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that have carried out audits on the proper functioning of the management and control system of the Programme

Only the Audit Authority carries out the system audits. No other body has been given the right to do so.

4.2 Description of the basis for the audits carried out, including a reference to the audit strategy applicable, more particularly to the risk assessment methodology and the results that led to establishing the audit plan for system audits

The system audits are carried out in accordance with the Audit Strategy, the annual risk assessment

and the annual working plan of the Financial Control Department.

For the reporting covered in this Annual Audit Report, no system audits have yet been carried out.

This has been agreed in communication with the Audit Authority and the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation

Facility. The first system audit will be carried out in the year 2025.

4.3 Description of the main findings and conclusions drawn from system audits1

There are no findings and conclusions, as no system audits have been carried out yet.

4.4 Indication of whether any problems identified were considered to be of a systemic character

There are no problems of systemic character.

4.5 Information on the follow-up of audit recommendations from system audits from previous accounting years

There are no previous recommendations to be followed up.

4.6 Level of assurance obtained following the system audits (low/average/high) and justification

As no system audits have been carried out, the Audit Authority currently gives no opinion on the management and control system based on that. However, based on the audit of expenditures carried out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from the audit, the management and control system can be assessed at least as average.

1 If several system audits took place during the reporting period, it is possible to add a list as an annex at the end of the document, to facilitate the overview. As an example for the list, Chapter 10.1 of the Annex II of the EU regulations 2018/1291 can be used. This should be done in addition to the description of the main findings and conclusions under 4.3.

9

5. AUDITS OF EXPENDITURES

5.1 Indication of the bodies (including the Audit Authority) that carried out the audits of expenditures

Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of expenditures. No other body has been given the right to do so.

5.2 Description of the sampling methodology2 applied and information whether the methodology is in accordance with the audit strategy

When carrying out the audits of expenditures, the sampling methodology was applied in two ways,

both of which were consistent with the audit strategy.

During the first audit of expenditures, all costs in total amounts of 89 977,50 euros were included in

the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat projects or

other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that 87 cost

items were included. From them, a statistical sample was drawn using monetary unit sampling. The

statistical sampling was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.

This resulted in a sample of 30 cost items with a total amount of 61 511,74 euros (68,4% of the

population total amount).

During an additional audit of expenditures, all additional costs in amounts of 56 462,25 euros were

included in the population. Since there was only a small amount of costs, there was no need to treat

projects or other components separately and all cost items were able to be included. This meant that

in number, 41 additional cost items were included. From them, a non-statistical sample was drawn

using the principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of costs. The non-statistical sampling

was chosen as the number of items in the population was sufficiently large.

This resulted in a sample of 5 cost items with a total amount of 11 388,45 euros (20,2% of the

population total amount).

In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited in two separate sub-populations, using

two separate methods of sampling. Both methods were consistent with the principles of statistical and

non-statistical sampling as well as with the audit strategy.

In total, 72 900,19 euros was audited, totaling 49,8% of the total amounts in the population.

5.3 Indication of the parameters used for statistical sampling and explanation of the underlying calculations and professional judgement applied

For the statistical sampling, monetary unit sampling (probability proportional to cost) was applied. The

general principles in the methodology of the Financial Control Department were used: confidence

level of 80%, expected error rate of 1,13% and materiality level of 2% from which then the respective

sampling interval was calculated, given the population size of 89 977,50 euros and 87 cost items.

There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no

need to apply additional professional judgment.

2 The Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1291 as well as the European Commission’s Guidance on sampling methods (EGESIF_16-0014-01) can be taken as references.

10

5.4 In case of the use of non-statistical sampling, indicate the reasons for using a different method and present the percentage of Projects/Programme Components/expenditure covered through audits, the steps taken to ensure randomness of the sample (and thus its representativity) and to ensure a sufficient size of the sample enabling the Audit Authority to draw up a valid audit opinion

For the non-statistical sampling, the general principles of including at least 10% of items and 15% of

costs were applied and simple random sampling with equal probability was carried out on the

population of 56 462,25 euros and 41 cost items.

There was no information suggesting that different parameters should be used, and auditors saw no

need to apply additional professional judgment.

5.5 Analysis of the principal results of the audits of expenditures, describing the number of sample items audited, the respective amount and types of errors by Project/Programme Component, the nature of errors found, the stratum error rate and corresponding main deficiencies or irregularities, the upper limit of the error rate (where applicable), root causes, corrective measures proposed (including those intending to avoid these errors in subsequent payment applications) and the impact on the audit opinion

In together, the population of 146 439,75 euros was audited, containing 128 items. The number of

items audited together was 35, with a total amount of 72 900,19 euros. No deficiencies or

irregularities were detected.

5.6 Comparison of the total error rate and the residual total error rate with the set materiality level, to ascertain if the population is materially misstated and the impact on the audit opinion3

The total error rate and the residual error rate are both 0.

5.7 Information on the results of the audit of the complementary sample

There has been no need for a complementary sample, and none has been drawn by the Audit

Authority.

5.8 Details of whether any problems identified were systemic in nature, and the measures taken, including a quantification of the irregular expenditure and any related financial corrections

There were no problems or irregularities identified and none that were systemic in nature. There has

been no irregular expenditure and no financial corrections.

5.9 Information on the follow-up of audits of expenditures carried out in previous years, on deficiencies of systemic nature

3 The European Commission’s “Guidance for Member States on the Annual Control Report and Audit Opinion to be reported by audit authorities and on the treatment of errors detected by audit authorities in view of establishing and reporting reliable total residual error rates” (EGESIF_15-0002-04) can be taken as a reference.

11

There has been no follow-up of audits of expenditures as none have been conducted previously.

5.10 Conclusions drawn from the overall results of the audits of expenditures regarding the effectiveness of the management and control system

There were no findings related to audits of expenditures. Therefore, it can be concluded that the

management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audits of

expenditures can be assessed as high.

12

6. AUDITS OF ACCOUNTS

6.1 Indication of the authorities/bodies that have carried out audits of accounts

Only the Audit Authority carries out the audits of accounts. No other body has been given the right to do so.

6.2 Description of audit approach used to verify the elements of the accounts

The Audit Authority has verified the elements of the accounts in full by carrying out the audits of

expenditures that have included in its entirety the following costs.

1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.

2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount of 2 603,73 euros.

3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of 6 514,90 euros.

4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in the amount of 11 987,71 euros.

5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of 14 952,61 euros.

6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of 30 804,23 euros.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.

This was in turn compared with the amounts declared by the Managing Authority (the National

Coordination Unit).

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared

Service Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical

assistance audited under point 1.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry

of Climate covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund

audited under point 5.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry

of Culture covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds

audited under points 2, 3, 4 and 6.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.

6.3 Indication of the conclusions drawn from the results of the audits regarding the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the accounts, including an indication on the financial corrections made and reflected in the accounts as a follow-up to the results of the system audits and/or audit of expenditures

There were no findings related to audit of accounts. Therefore, it can be concluded that the

management and control systems are working well, and the assurance from the audit of accounts can

13

be assessed as high. There are no findings resulting from the audits of expenditures and thus no

effect in that regard exists to the accounts. No financial corrections are made, and no follow-up is

necessary.

14

7. COORDINATION BETWEEN AUDIT BODIES AND SUPERVISORY WORK OF THE AUDIT AUTHORITY

7.1 Description of the procedure for coordination between the Audit Authority and any audit body that carries out audits

No body other than the Audit Authority has carried out any audits.

7.2 Description of the procedure for supervision and quality review applied by the Audit Authority to such audit body(ies)

Whenever audit work may be outsourced by the Audit Authority, full quality control in accordance with the methodology will be carried out by the Audit Authority before accepting any final audit work from other bodies.

15

8. OTHER INFORMATION

8.1 Where applicable, information on reported fraud and suspicions of fraud detected in the context of the audits performed by the Audit Authority (including the cases reported by other bodies and related to Projects/Programme Components audited by the Audit Authority), together with the measures taken

There has been no reported fraud or suspicions of fraud detected.

8.2 Where applicable, subsequent events occurred after the submission of the accounts to the Audit Authority and before the transmission of the Annual Audit Report and considered when establishing the level of assurance and opinion by the Audit Authority

No subsequent events that occurred after the submission of the accounts are there to be considered.

16

9. OVERALL LEVEL OF ASSURANCE

9.1 Indication of the overall level of assurance on the proper functioning of the management and control system, and explanation of how such level was obtained from the combination of the results of the system audits and audits of Projects/Programme Components

The overall level of assurance is reflected in the audit opinion, which is unqualified.

Assurance on the accounts – the Audit Authority concludes that the accounts contain complete,

accurate and truthful information.

Assurance on the effective functioning of the management and control systems – the Audit Authority

concludes that although no system audits have been carried out, the results of the audits of

expenditures carried out, the Audit Authority can state that since no findings have been detected from

the audit, the management and control system can be assessed at least as average. Looking at the

results of the audit of expenditures separately, since no findings have been detected from there, the

assurance can even be assessed as high.

However, the Audit Authority is of the opinion that when no system audits have yet been carried out,

an overall level of assurance cannot be given as high. Therefore, an overall level of assurance of

average should be indicated for now.

9.2 Assessment of any mitigating actions implemented, such as financial corrections and assessment of the need for any additional corrective measures necessary, both from a system and financial perspective.

There are no mitigating actions necessary for now.

17

Annex 1 – Independent auditor’s report (accounts)

Independent auditor’s report on financial information Opinion We have audited the financial information for Projects and Programme components listed in Annex 3, which comprise the annual accounts for the year 2024 (21.02.2023-30.06.2024) In our opinion, the accompanying financial information on the above-mentioned Projects and Programme Components for the year 2024 ended 30.06.2024 are prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with national law and jurisdiction of the Republic of Estonia as well as with the rules and requirements of Swiss- Estonian Cooperation Facility. Basis for opinion We conducted our audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors. Our responsibilities under those provisions and standards are further described in this report. We are independent of the entity in accordance with the requirements of the Global Internal Audit Standards, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Information Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial information. This responsibility includes designing, implementing and maintaining internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial information that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies; and making accounting estimates that are reasonable in the circumstances. Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial information Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial information is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken based on this financial information. As part of an audit in accordance with Global Internal Audit Standards, we exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. We also:

• Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial information, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.

• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control.

• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by Management.

Signed electronically Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority 31.03.2025 Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia Tallinn, Estonia Annex: Audited accounts (Annex 3)

18

Annex 2 – Audit opinion on the legality and regularity of expenditure and functioning of the management and control system

Independent auditor’s report on financial information on the legality and regularity of expenditure and

functioning of the management and control system

Opinion

We have audited the institutions, Projects and Programme Components listed in Annex 3. In our opinion and based on the audit work performed:

- the expenditure in the accounts for which reimbursement has been requested is legal and regular,

- the management and control systems put in place function properly.

The examination of the institutions, Projects and Programme Components have been conducted in accordance with defined audit strategy and taking into consideration internationally accepted audit standards.

Signed electronically Anu Alber, Head of the Audit Authority 31.03.2025 Financial Control Department, Ministry of Finance of Estonia Tallinn, Estonia

19

Annex 3 – Overview of Projects and Programme Components

The following projects were audited by the Audit Authority.

1. The technical assistance (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0007) in the amount of 79 576,57 euros.

2. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Social Affairs (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0006) in the amount of 2 603,73 euros.

3. The preparation fund for the Ministry of the Interior (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0005) in the amount of 6 514,90 euros.

4. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Education and Research (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0004) in the amount of 11 987,71 euros.

5. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Climate (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0003) in the amount of 14 952,61 euros.

6. The preparation fund for the Ministry of Culture (Project No Šveits.1.03.23-0002) in the amount of 30 804,23 euros.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros or the full population of the audits of expenditures.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Technical Assistance Fund) from the State Shared Service

Centre covers the amounts of 79 576,57 euros, which is in accordance with the technical assistance audited

under point 1.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Climate

covers the amounts of 14 952,61 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation fund audited under point 5.

The declared Reimbursement Request No. 1 (Support Measure Preparation Fund) from the Ministry of Culture

covers the amounts of 51 910,57 euros, which is in accordance with the preparation funds audited under points

2, 3, 4 and 6.

This totals to 146 439,75 euros, which is in accordance with the full population of the audits.

SWISS-ESTONIAN COOPERATION FACILITY

AUDIT STRATEGY

As prepared by:

AUDIT AUTHORITY

SITUATED IN

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia

31st of March 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 3

RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................... 3

METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................................... 4

Overview.............................................................................................................................................. 4

Walkthrough ........................................................................................................................................ 4

Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility ................. 5

Audits of Support Measures ................................................................................................................ 6

AUDIT WORK PLANNED ........................................................................................................................... 7

RESOURCES .............................................................................................................................................. 7

INTRODUCTION

The Framework Agreement for the implementation of the second Swiss Contribution to selected

Member States of the European Union was entered into between the Swiss Federal Council and the

Government of the Republic of Estonia on the 21st of November 2022. The country-specific setup of

the Swiss Contribution along with the Framework Agreement will be henceforth referred to as “Swiss-

Estonian Cooperation Facility”.

As per the country-specific setup, the Audit Authority is the Financial Control Department of the

Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Estonia. The Audit Authority is solely responsible for drawing up,

monitoring, and updating the audit strategy.

The functions of the Audit Authority are set out in Regulations on the implementation of the second

Swiss Contribution to selected Member States of the European Union. In addition to that, the tasks of

the Financial Control Department are stipulated with the statute of the Ministry of Finance and

specified with the statute of Financial Control Department, which functions as the audit charter.

With the decree of the Government of Estonia No 177 from 22nd of December 2011, the Financial

Control Department as the Audit Authority is subordinated directly to the Secretary General of the

Ministry of Finance. That ensures its functional and organizational independence within the Swiss-

Estonian Cooperation Facility, as the National Coordination Unit and the Paying Authority of the Facility

are situated in the State Shared Service Centre.

RISK ASSESSMENT

National Coordination Unit is responsible for the overall risk assessment of the Swiss-Estonian

Cooperation Facility, including the methodology, coordination, and consolidation of the results of the

risk assessment.

In addition to the risk assessment exercise coordinated by the National Coordination Unit, the Audit

Authority carries out its own, independent risk assessment to compose the annual audit plan, including

audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well as audits

of Support Measures.

The risk assessment is carried out annually, before the composition of annual audit plan, considering

the risk components of impact, likelihood and implemented internal control measures. The risk factors

to be considered for risk assessment exercise are the following:

- Results of risk assessment carried out by the National Coordination Unit.

- Results of audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures.

- The quantity and frequency of errors and the error rate of previous accounting year or years.

- Any other indications of significant risks or weaknesses.

METHODOLOGY

Overview

According to the statute of the Financial Control Department, all the auditors of the department must

follow the Global Internal Audit Standards and related materials issued by the Institute of Internal

Auditors.

There are no discrepancies between the standards for professional practice of internal auditors which

are established by the decree of Minister of Finance of Estonia and International Standards for the

Professional Practice of Internal Auditing issued by the Institute of Internal Auditors.

To obtain assurance of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Facility as a whole, the Audit Authority shall

carry out audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility as well

as audits of Support Measures.

The Audit Authority shall carry out those audits for each accounting year running from 1st of July on

the year N-1 to 30th of June on the year N (with an exception for the first accounting year which shall

cover the period from the signing of the Framework Agreement on the year N-1 until the 30th of June

on the year N).

It is the sole responsibility of the Audit Authority to prepare and submit to Switzerland for each of

those accounting years and not later than 31st of March of the year N+1 an Annual Audit Report along

with the Audit Opinion signed by the head of the Audit Authority. The Annual Audit Report shall include

all data of the audits carried out for the accounting year, including findings and measures taken.

The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out those audits. Instead, the

Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department of Financial Control

as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the second Swiss

Contribution.

However, a short description of audit principles along with the main elements to be verified shall be

outlined in the audit strategy. The Audit Authority will also prepare general checklists to be used in

audits of the management and control systems as well as audits of Support Measures. Those checklists

will be annexed to the audit strategy.

Also, every audit will be thoroughly planned with the reasons, processes, risks, goals, and extent of

defined and agreed on in detail during the planning process. This thorough planning process precludes

the need for a separate manual.

Walkthrough

The methodology used by the Audit Authority is compliant with the Global Internal Audit Standards as

operated by the Institute of Internal Auditors.

The audits are carried out assuming full and unhindered access by the auditors for all documents and

information necessary.

All auditors included in the audit activities must sign a declaration of independence and objectivity in

relation to the audit scope.

All engagements are communicated to the auditees beforehand. The audit engagements include desk-

based checks of documents and other information, with additional on-site visits, if necessary.

The communication of all results, including irregularities, errors and corrective measures, is always

provided to the auditee as well as the Managing Authority. The auditee has always the right to

comment on the results of the audit before the final report is issued.

The corrective measures recommended by the Audit Authority are always reviewed later to ensure

that they are carried out in a sufficient manner.

All audit documents are archived in accordance with the principles of the Cooperation Facility.

The materiality level for the annual reporting is set at 2% of the amounts included. For annual

reporting, any extrapolated final residual error rates above should be met with corrective action at the

level of the Cooperation Facility.

Audits of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility

The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for the audits of management and control

systems. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the Department

of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the implementation of the

second Swiss Contribution

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on the functioning of the management and control

systems, audits at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be carried out. Those audits shall aim to

provide the Audit Authority with assurance that the management and control systems in the Partner

State are functioning effectively and in compliance with the Framework Agreement and national law

of the Partner State.

The crucial bodies to be audited are the National Coordination Unit, the Paying Authority (the tasks of

which are also taken on by the National Coordination Unit) and any Intermediate Bodies that carry out

tasks of the Cooperation Facility. Those bodies shall be audited at least once during the

implementation period of the Cooperation Facility.

Additionally, there are crucial aspects of the implementation of the Cooperation Facility that shall also

be audited at least once during the implementation period, either along with the audits of the bodies

carrying out the implementation of those aspects, or separately. Those are the following.

- The definition of the functions of the bodies involved in the management and control of the Cooperation Facility and the allocation of functions within each body.

- Compliance with the principle of separation of functions between and within such bodies.

- The procedures and embedded controls for ensuring the correctness and regularity of expenditure.

- The reliability of the accounting, monitoring and financial reporting.

- The reporting and monitoring systems where the responsible body entrusts the execution of tasks to another body.

- The system to ensure that all documents regarding expenditures and audits are held to ensure an adequate audit trail.

- The procedures ensuring that the rules on public procurement are correctly applied.

- The procedures for preventing, detecting, reporting, correcting and prosecuting irregularities.

Audits of Support Measures

The Audit Authority will not produce a separate manual for carrying out the audits of support

measures. Instead, the Audit Authority will rely on the audit methodology developed by the

Department of Financial Control as well as on the principles outlined in Regulations on the

implementation of the second Swiss Contribution.

The Audit Authority has prepared a general checklist to be used in audits of Support Measures. This

checklist has been annexed to the audit strategy as Annex 1.

The planning of the audit of Support Measures will be based on the following

- Accounts presented to the Audit Authority, that will be tested in full.

- Expenditure presented to the Audit Authority, that will be audited in accordance with a non- statistical or statistical sampling.

- Risk assessment of the management and control system, based on which audits of management and control system are carried out.

Audits of Support Measures shall be carried out by the Audit Authority to obtain assurance and to

express the opinion on the following crucial matters.

- Accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the accounts.

- Legality and regularity of expenditure.

- Existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system.

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on accuracy, completeness, and veracity of the

accounts, an audit of accounts shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.

The audit of accounts shall consider the results of audits of the management and control systems as

well as the results of audits on the legality and regularity of expenditure along with the existence,

adequacy and effectiveness of the management and control system. In addition, the audit of accounts

shall consider the results of any other audits or checks carried out at the Cooperation Facility.

The audit of accounts shall aim to provide reasonable assurance on the completeness, accuracy, and

veracity of the amounts declared in the accounts.

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on legality and regularity of expenditure, audits of

expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year.

The audits of expenditure shall be carried out on the entirety of the expenditure for each accounting

year and with a sampling method that shall ensure a random selection of each sampling unit from the

population. If possible, a statistical sampling method shall be used for making that selection. However,

the Audit Authority assumes at this stage that the population for each accounting year will be less than

50 units, making a non-statistical sampling method the reasonable option of choice.

In composing the random sample, the following principles shall be used.

- At least 10% of items (either projects or other programme components) for which expenditure has been declared during an accounting year and at least 15% of the expenditure which has been declared during the same accounting year must be included in the sample.

- The selection of those items shall be done with a simple random equal probability principle.

- Any negative items in the population shall be separated from the population before drawing a sample and examined as a separate population.

- Any irregularities found because of the audits of expenditure shall be extrapolated in line with the principles of non-statistical sampling and this extrapolation shall form the basis for the assurance obtained and opinion given on those audits.

To obtain assurance and to express the opinion on existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the

management and control system, the Audit Authority considers both the results of audits of the

management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility and the results of the audits

of expenditure for each accounting year.

For results considered this way, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any errors

detected in those audits that are related to existence, adequacy and effectiveness of the management

and control system are random or systemic.

In addition to that, the Audit Authority shall pay specific attention to whether any such errors point to

a risk of fraud, corruption, conflict of interest, or double funding. Any of those risks shall be treated as

the highest priority.

AUDIT WORK PLANNED

The first audit of the management and control systems at the level of the Cooperation Facility shall be

carried out by the Audit Authority during the year 2025. Thereon, at least one such audit shall be

carried out for each accounting year, unless otherwise proposed by the Audit Authority in the Annual

Audit Report and agreed on with the acceptance of the same Annual Audit Report.

The audits of expenditure shall be carried out by the Audit Authority for each accounting year for which

expenditure has been declared and in line with the principles of sampling approved in the Audit

Strategy. In addition to that, an audit of accounts shall also be carried out by the Audit Authority for

each accounting year for which expenditure has been declared.

RESOURCES

The Audit Authority resources allocated by the Financial Control Department for the Swiss-Estonian

Cooperation Facility amount to 0,75 full-time equivalent. This may be divided between more than one

auditor of the Financial Control Department, to ensure the best possible audit team for the tasks at

hand as well as the principles and necessities of the work in the Financial Control Department.

Approved by

(Signed electronically)

Anu Alber

Head of the Financial Control Department of the Ministry of Finance

Head of the Audit Authority

Annex 1: General checklist for auditing Support Measures

VALIDITY CONFIRMATION SHEET SIGNED FILES

FILE NAME FILE SIZE

Audit Strategy 2025.asice 212 KB

Annual_Audit_Report_FINAL.asice 342 KB

Submission of the Annual Audit Report and the Audit Strategy.pdf 362 KB

Annex 1 General checklist.pdf 437 KB

SIGNERS

NO. NAME PERSONAL CODE TIME

URMO MERILA1 38005150268 31.03.2025 21:43:30 +03:00

VALIDITY OF SIGNATURE

SIGNATURE IS VALID

ROLE / RESOLUTION

PLACE OF CONFIRMATION (CITY, STATE, ZIP, COUNTRY)

SERIAL NUMBER OF SIGNER CERTIFICATE

52:ef:36:99:5b:27:7a:36:62:17:76:4e:6a:82:9e:8e

ISSUER OF CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY KEY IDENTIFIER

ESTEID-SK 2015 B3 AB 88 BC 99 D5 62 A4 85 2A 08 CD B4 1D 72 3B 83 72 47 51

HASH VALUE OF SIGNATURE 30 31 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 05 00 04 20 F5 D5 B6 9C 25 22 1A 85 4B 60 B5 5E 75 50 56 4E AC 62 50 AD 34 B2 0D 5F C5 64 D2 47 EF 59 FF 7F

The print out of files listed in the section "Signed Files" are inseparable part of this Validity Confirmation Sheet.

NOTES

Presented print summary is informative to confirm existence of signed file with given hash value. The print summary itself does not have independent verification value. Declaration of signers’ signature can be verified only through digitally signed file.

VALIDITY CONFIRMATION SHEET SIGNED FILES

FILE NAME FILE SIZE

Annual_Audit_Report_FINAL.pdf 423 KB

SIGNERS

NO. NAME PERSONAL CODE TIME

ANU ALBER1 47008272711 31.03.2025 20:25:59 +03:00

VALIDITY OF SIGNATURE

SIGNATURE IS VALID

ROLE / RESOLUTION

PLACE OF CONFIRMATION (CITY, STATE, ZIP, COUNTRY)

SERIAL NUMBER OF SIGNER CERTIFICATE

45:a8:79:76:2e:d8:36:36:06:61:83:1d:5a:c8:13:83

ISSUER OF CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY KEY IDENTIFIER

ESTEID2018 D9 AC 70 DB 5F 7E BE 94 F8 A0 E4 BE 47 A2 D0 34 AD 9A 2A 12

HASH VALUE OF SIGNATURE 30 31 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 05 00 04 20 49 FC AD AC DD DD A6 CA 49 5B C9 C7 C6 D5 E0 0D 47 5C 6E A5 1D 3E 0A F8 B0 E2 B7 11 D0 62 73 45

The print out of files listed in the section "Signed Files" are inseparable part of this Validity Confirmation Sheet.

NOTES

Presented print summary is informative to confirm existence of signed file with given hash value. The print summary itself does not have independent verification value. Declaration of signers’ signature can be verified only through digitally signed file.

VALIDITY CONFIRMATION SHEET SIGNED FILES

FILE NAME FILE SIZE

Audit Strategy 2025.pdf 236 KB

SIGNERS

NO. NAME PERSONAL CODE TIME

ANU ALBER1 47008272711 31.03.2025 20:24:40 +03:00

VALIDITY OF SIGNATURE

SIGNATURE IS VALID

ROLE / RESOLUTION

PLACE OF CONFIRMATION (CITY, STATE, ZIP, COUNTRY)

SERIAL NUMBER OF SIGNER CERTIFICATE

45:a8:79:76:2e:d8:36:36:06:61:83:1d:5a:c8:13:83

ISSUER OF CERTIFICATE AUTHORITY KEY IDENTIFIER

ESTEID2018 D9 AC 70 DB 5F 7E BE 94 F8 A0 E4 BE 47 A2 D0 34 AD 9A 2A 12

HASH VALUE OF SIGNATURE 30 31 30 0D 06 09 60 86 48 01 65 03 04 02 01 05 00 04 20 F0 3A 80 25 63 5A 59 94 93 5C 51 CB 31 72 A5 EC B8 9A 8F 08 B0 8B A3 CF 11 B5 02 FC 90 18 C6 83

The print out of files listed in the section "Signed Files" are inseparable part of this Validity Confirmation Sheet.

NOTES

Presented print summary is informative to confirm existence of signed file with given hash value. The print summary itself does not have independent verification value. Declaration of signers’ signature can be verified only through digitally signed file.

Lõkke 4 / 10122 Tallinn / 663 8200 / [email protected] / www.rtk.ee / Registrikood 70007340

Christoph Liechti

Embassy of Switzerland to Latvia, Lithuania

and Estonia

[email protected] Ours 31.03.2025 no 11.1-5/25/728-1

Smilšu iela 8 Riga

LV-1050 LATVIA

Submission of the Annual Audit Report and

the Audit Strategy

Dear Mr Liechti,

The National Coordination Unit of the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme hereby submits

the first Annual Audit Report for the Swiss-Estonian Cooperation Programme, covering the period

from 21.02.2023 to 30.06.2024, along with the updated Audit Strategy.

Yours sincerely,

(signed digitally)

Urmo Merila

Deputy Director General

Annexes:

Annual Audit Report

Audit Strategy

General Checklist

Helena Musthallik 56466003

[email protected]