Audiitorteenuse osutamise leping

_______________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing Allkiri: Klient

Audiitorteenuse osutamise leping nr 23241798

Eritingimused

Tallinnas, 06.05.2025.

Siseministeerium, registrikood 70000562, aadress Pikk 61, Tallinn, 15065 (edaspidi nimetatud

“Klient”), mida esindab volikirja alusel Krista Aas, isikukoodiga 47607275214, kelle isikusamasuse

on Audiitorühingu esindaja tuvastanud isikut tõendava dokumendi, mille number on AB0495433,

alusel,

ja

Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ, registrikood 10384467, mille registreeritud aadress on Pärnu mnt 22,

Tallinn 10141 (edaspidi nimetatud „Audiitorühing”), mida esindab juhatuse liige, vandeaudiitor Mart

Nõmper,

Audiitorühingule ja/või Kliendile viidatakse edaspidi ka vastavalt „Pool“ või „Pooled“,

sõlmisid käesoleva audiitorteenuse osutamise lepingu (edaspidi nimetatud „Leping“) järgnevatel

tingimustel.

Käesolev Leping koosneb eritingimustest ja üldtingimustest. Eritingimused on Poolte poolt

läbiräägitud konkreetse audiitorteenuse läbiviimise tingimused ja kokkulepped ning üldtingimused on

Audiitorühingu üldised tingimused, millistel viimane audiitorteenust osutab. Eritingimused koos

lisadega ja üldtingimused moodustavad pärast allkirjastamist ühtse terviku ning on käsitletavad ühtse

Lepinguna. Allkirjastades eritingimused kinnitab Klient, et on tutvunud nii eritingimustega ja

üldtingimustega kui ka Lepingu lisadega ning saab tingimuste sisust aru ja on nendega nõus.

Eritingimused ja üldtingimused allkirjastatakse samaaegselt.

A. Audiitorteenus ja selle objekt

i) Audiitorühing osutab Kliendile kokkuleppeliste protseduuride audiitorteenust kooskõlas

rahvusvahelise seonduvate teenuste standardiga ISRS (Eesti) 4400 (edaspidi nimetatud

„Protseduurid“), täpsemalt:

a) Projekti „PWinPLan“ kokkuleppeliste protseduuride teostamine vastavalt nõutud

juhendmaterjalile (ISRS 4400) – lepingu lisad 3 ja 4.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 2 Allkiri: Klient

Protseduuride raames ei viida läbi auditit ega ülevaatust, mis on tehtud kooskõlas rahvusvaheliste

auditeerimisstandarditega (ISA) või rahvusvaheliste ülevaatuse töövõttude standarditega (või viidata

asjakohastele riiklikele standarditele või tavadele), ehk tegemist ei ole kindlustandva töövõtuga.

ii) Protseduuride läbiviimise tulemusena väljastab Audiitorühing Kliendile sõltumatu vandeaudiitori

aruande faktiliste tähelepanekute kohta (edaspidi nimetatud “Vandeaudiitori aruanne”) – lepingu

lisa 5. Vandeaudiitori aruande allkirjastab Mart Nõmper.

iii) Arvestades seniseid läbirääkimisi Audiitorühingu ja Kliendi vahel on Audiitorühing seisukohal, et

Protseduuride läbiviimisesse on otstarbekas lisaks eelmises punktis nimetatud vandeaudiitorile

kaasata vähemalt alljärgnevad isikud:

Nimi E-post Telefon

Kai Paalberg [email protected] 626 0500

B. Audiitorteenuse osutamise korraldus ja teenuse eeldatav ajaline kestus

i) Protseduuride läbiviimise tähtaeg on 07.07.2025 eeldusel, et:

a) Klient esitab Audiitorühingule Audiitorühingu poolt nõutavad dokumendid hiljemalt 10.06.2025.

b) Kliendi raamatupidamine vastab õigusaktides ja Lepingus nõutud tasemele.

ii) Protseduuride läbiviimise eeldatav ajaline kestus tundides on kokku 45 töötundi.

C. Audiitorteenuse osutamise tasu suurus ja tasumise kord

i) Klient kohustub tasuma Audiitorühingule Protseduuride läbiviimise eest tasu (edaspidi nimetatud

„Tasu“).

ii) Tasu suuruseks on 5400 eurot, mis on arvutatud põhimõttel, et iga töötunni hind on keskmiselt 120

eurot. Tasule lisandub käibemaks seadusega ettenähtud korras ja määras.

iii) Juhul, kui Protseduuridele kulub punktis B nimetatud töötundide mahust tegelikult rohkem töötunde,

siis võib Tasu suureneda vastavalt Lepingu üldtingimuste punkti 3 asjakohastes alapunktides toodud

põhimõtetele.

iv) Klient kohustub maksma punktis C ii) sätestatud Tasu peale Protseduuride läbiviimist.

v) Klient kohustub Audiitorühingule tasuma Lepingus ettenähtud maksed (sh Tasu) 21 päeva jooksul

vastavasisulise arve Kliendile esitamisest (sh saatmisest e-postile või tavapostile).

D. Muud eritingimused

i) Klient ei ole avaliku huvi üksus audiitortegevuse seaduse § 13 tähenduses.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 3 Allkiri: Klient

E. Poolte kontaktandmed

i) Kõik Lepingut puudutavad teated koostatakse vähemalt kirjalikku taasesitamist võimaldavas vormis

(kui õigusaktides või Lepingus on nõutud, siis kirjalikus vormis) ja saadetakse selle saajale

alljärgneval aadressil:

Audiitorühingule: Kliendile:

volitatud isik: Mart Nõmper volitatud isik: Krista Aas

Aadress: Pärnu mnt 22, Tallinn 10141 Aadress: Pikk 61, Tallinn, 15065

E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

Arve saaja e-mail: [email protected]

F. Lisad

i) Lepingu lahutamatud osad on käesolevale Lepingule lisatud alljärgnevad lisad:

Lisa 1 - Info tegeliku kasusaaja kohta;

Lisa 2 - Kliendi registrikaardi väljavõte.

Lisa 3 – Certificate on the Financial Statement (CFS) – Terms of Reference

Lisa 4 – CFS Agreed-Upon Procedures Checklist Lisa 5 – Agreed-Upon Procedures Report on the Certificate on the Financial Statement Audiitorühingu eest ja nimel: Kliendi eest ja nimel: /digitaalallkirjastatult/ /digitaalallkirjastatult/ _________________________ _________________________ Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ Siseministeerium juhatuse liige volikirja alusel Mart Nõmper Krista Aas

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 4 Allkiri: Klient

Audiitorteenuse osutamise leping 23241798

Üldtingimused LEPINGU TERMINOLOOGIA

Lepingus (nii eritingimustes, lisades, kui ka üldtingimustes) kasutatakse ühtset terminoloogiat. Lepingus

määratletud mõisted on tähistatud suure algustähega. Lepingus määratlemata mõistete puhul lähtutakse nende

üldlevinud tähendusest ning vajadusel ka õigusaktides (eelkõige tsiviilseadustiku üldosa seaduses,

audiitortegevuse seaduses, raamatupidamisseaduses, rahapesu ja terrorismi rahastamise tõkestamise

seaduses, võlaõigusseaduses ja äriseadustikus) määratletud tähendusest.

1. Audiitorühingu üldised õigused ja kohustused

1.1 Lepingu alusel osutab Audiitorühing Kliendile kindlustandvat audiitorteenust (s.o audit, ülevaatus,

kokkuleppeliste protseduuride, pakendiauditi, omavahendite nõuete täitmise ning muu kindlustandev

audiitorteenus) kooskõlas asjakohaste standarditega.

1.2 Teenuse osutamise käigus viib Audiitorühing läbi vajalikke teste ning muid kontrollprotseduure, kuid

teenuse testiiseloomu ja mis tahes (Kliendi) sisekontrollisüsteemi piiratuse tõttu eksisteerib

paratamatu risk, et ka olulised vead võivad jääda avastamata.

1.3 Audiitorühingul on õigus ühepoolselt määrata uus vandeaudiitor, teatades sellest viivitamatult

Kliendile kirjalikult.

1.4 Vajadusel kaasab Audiitorühing omal vastutusel teenuse osutamisse abilise, eksperdi või muu isiku,

kes tegutseb Audiitorühingu juhtimisel. Audiitorühing informeerib Klienti vastavate isikute

kaasamisest ja kooskõlastab Kliendiga vastavate isikute tasustamise käesoleva lepingu raames.

1.5 Audiitorühingul on õigus omal äranägemisel anda tegevus edasi kolmandale isikule Lepingu

täitmisega seotud kõikide või mõne kohustuse paremaks täitmiseks. Seejuures vastutab

Audiitorühing selle eest, et vastav kolmas isik järgiks asjakohaseid audiitortegevuse seadusest

tulenevaid nõudeid.

1.6 Audiitorühingu ainupädevuses on määrata kindlaks teenuse osutamiseks vajalikud isikud, nende arv,

töötundide maht ning muu asjakohane tegevus ja töökorraldus. Audiitorühingul on õigus kalduda

kõrvale Lepingu eritingimuste punktis B väljatoodud eeldatavast ajakulust. Rohkem kasutatud

töötunnid mõjutavad Tasu suurust vastavalt punkti 3 alapunktides toodud tingimustele.

1.7 Pidades rangelt silmas Audiitorühingu sõltumatuse nõudeid, on Audiitorühing valmis osutama

Kliendile ka muid kutseteenuseid, mille osutamine ei ole vastuolus Audiitorühingule seadusest või

teistest Audiitorühingu tegevust reguleerivatest aktidest tulenevate sõltumatuse ja muude

kohustustega. Nimetatud teenuste osutamises ja tingimustes (sh tasus) lepivad Pooled kokku eraldi,

sõlmides vastava lepingu.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 5 Allkiri: Klient

1.8 Audiitorühingul on kohustus ka täita rahapesu ja terrorismi rahastamise tõkestamise seaduse

nõudeid. Seejuures on Audiitorühing muu hulgas kohustatud ja õigustatud esitama rahapesu

andmebüroole õigusaktides sätestatud andmeid Kliendi ning Kliendiga seotud isikute kohta ning

teostama muid õigusaktidest tulenevaid õigusi ja kohustusi (sh ka olukorras, kus Leping jääb

sõlmimata ja/või Lepingu kehtivus on lõppenud).

2. Kliendi üldised õigused ja kohustused

2.1 Käesoleva Lepingu sõlmimisel on arvestatud asjaolu, et vastavalt seadusele on raamatupidamise

korraldamine Kliendi juhtorganite kohustus, Kliendi juhtorganid on kohustatud tagama

raamatupidamise algdokumentide ja registrite adekvaatse koostamise ja säilitamise,

raamatupidamise aastaaruande vastavuse valitud finantsaruandluse standardi nõuetele, tõhusa

sisekontrollisüsteemi funktsioneerimise, raamatupidamiseeskirjade väljatöötamise ning Kliendi

varade säilivuse. Klient kohustub võimaldama Audiitorühingule ligipääsu kõikidele andmetele ja

dokumentidele, aga ka ruumidele jms, mis on Audiitorühingule vajalikud teenuse osutamiseks.

Seejuures kohustub Klient esitama Audiitorühingule oma tegevuse seisukohast olulised dokumendid

ning oma organisatsioonilise struktuuri ülevaate koos tegeliku kasusaaja nimetamisega ning andmete

muutumisel esitama Audiitorühingule viivitamatult uuenenud andmed ja dokumendid.

2.2 Lepingule alla kirjutades kinnitab Klient, et teenuse osutamise käigus esitatakse Audiitorühingule

täielik ning tõene dokumentatsioon ning informatsioon, mis on vajalik teenuse osutamiseks.

2.3 Audiitorühingu taotlusel ja vajadusel ka omal algatusel kohustub Klient andma Audiitorühingule

viivitamatult informatsiooni ning dokumente ning tegema vastavaid toiminguid, mis on vajalikud

teenuse osutamiseks, st tegema Audiitorühinguga teenuse osutamisel täielikku ja igakülgset

koostööd.

2.4 Lepingut sõlmides ja/või Lepingulisi läbirääkimisi pidades teadvustab Klient Audiitorühingu õigusi ja

kohustusi, mis tulenevad rahapesu ja terrorismi rahastamise tõkestamise seadusest ning sellega

kaasnevaid võimalikke tagajärgi Kliendile ja Kliendiga seotud isikutele.

2.5 Klient ei tohi Lepingu kehtivuse ajal ja 12 kuu jooksul pärast Lepingu lõppemist pakkuda tööd/teenuse

osutamist (mis tahes õigussuhte alusel) Audiitorühingu töötajale (ega paluda kellelgi teisel sel

eesmärgil Audiitorühingu töötajaga kontakteeruda ega anda soovitust selliseks kontakteerumiseks),

kui sellega otseselt või kaudselt kaasneks selle töötaja ja Audiitorühingu vahel sõlmitud töölepingu

või mistahes muud õigussuhet reguleeriva lepingu lõpetamine või selle rikkumine. Lepingu

rikkumiseks ei loeta, kui Klient pakub tööd/teenuse osutamist isikule, kes (a) pakkumise ajal ei tööta

enam Audiitorühingus, (b) kontakteerub Kliendiga omal algatusel ilma Kliendi poolse pakkumise või

kontaktivõtuta, (c) vastab Klienti või Kliendi agendi poolt meedias avaldatud töökuulutusele.

2.6 Punktis 2.5 sätestatud kohustuse rikkumise korral on Audiitorühingul õigus nõuda Kliendilt leppetrahvi

summas, mis võrdub asjaomase töötaja 6 kuu brutotasuga.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 6 Allkiri: Klient

2.7 Klient nõustub, et Audiitorühing võib viidata Lepingu objektiks olevatele töövõttudele koos Kliendi

nime ja logo märkimisega Audiitorühingu turundus- ja kutsetegevuse käigus.

3. Poolte õigused ja kohustused tasu maksmisel

3.1 Klient tasub Audiitorühingule teenuse eest Tasu vastavalt Lepingu eritingimuste punkti C

alapunktides, üldtingimustes ning kohalduvates õigusnormides toodule. Klient tasub Audiitorühingule

teenuse eest eritingimuste punktis C nimetatud Tasu. Samas punktis on välja toodud ka keskmise

töötunni hind, mille põhjal arvutatakse Tasu suurus poolte kokkuleppel vastavalt punktile 33.1, kui

tegelikult kulub teenuse osutamiseks töötunde eritingimuste punktis B märgitust rohkem.

3.2 Kui eritingimuste punktis B väljatoodud eeldatavast ajakulust ei ole ilmselgelt võimalik kinni pidada,

on Audiitorühingul õigus algatada Kliendiga läbirääkimised Lepingu vastavaks muutmiseks (sh Tasu

suurendamiseks ning vajadusel uue tähtaja määramiseks). Täiendava tasu suuruse määramisel

lähtuvad Pooled eritingimuste punktis C toodud töötunni keskmisest hinnast, korrutades rohkem

kulunud ja/või täiendavalt kuluvate töötundide summa töötunni keskmise hinnaga. Täiendava tasu

kokkuleppimisel ei võeta arvesse eritingimuste punktis B väljatoodud eeldatavast ajakulust rohkem

kulunud ja või täiendavalt kuluvaid töötunde juhul, kui Audiitorühing nägi või oleks pidanud juba

Lepingu sõlmimisel ette nägema tegelikku suuremat ajakulu.

Pooltevahelises suhtes eeldatakse, et Audiitorühing ei näinud ega pidanud ette nägema eritingimuste

punktis ii) väljatoodud eeldatavast ajakulust suuremat ajakulu juhul, kui:

a) Klient ei pea kinni Ajakavast või muudest Protseduuride käigus Poolte vahel tehtud teenuse

osutamisega seotud kokkulepetest;

b) Kliendi raamatupidamine ei vasta finantsaruandluse standardile;

c) Kliendil puudub tõhus sisekontrollisüsteem;

d) Aastaaruanne või Kliendi raamatupidamine ei vasta õigusaktides sätestatud muudele nõuetele;

e) Klient ei vii kõiki Audiitorühingu poolt väljapakutud parandusi Aastaaruandesse sisse

Audiitorühingu poolt nõutud tähtajaks ja/või

f) Klient ei vasta Audiitorühingu küsimustele operatiivselt (st hiljemalt küsimuse esitamisele

järgneva tööpäeva jooksul) või Audiitorühingu nõutavaks tähtajaks.

Kui esineb mõni alapunktides a kuni f nimetatud asjaolu, on Audiitorühingul õigus ühepoolselt

suurendada Tasu eritingimuste punktis B väljatoodud eeldatavast ajakulust rohkem kulunud ja/või

täiendavalt kuluvate töötundide summa võrra.

3.3 Juhul, kui Kliendi initsiatiivil on vaja täiendavat nõustamist Audiitorühingu poolt pakutavatest teistest

nõustamise teenusliinidest, siis on Pooled kokku leppinud, et Audiitorühingu täiendavate

nõustamisteenuste rakendamise korral lähtutakse Hinnakirjast. Sellisel juhul lepivad Klient ja vastava

nõustamisteenuse eest vastutav isik kirjalikku taasesitamist võimaldavas vormis kokku töö sisu, selle

mahu ja täpsemad tingimused.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 7 Allkiri: Klient

3.4 Kõik Lepingus nimetatud maksed kohustub Klient tasuma Audiitorühingu arvete alusel Audiitorühingu

arveldusarvele nr. EE132200221001114347 Swedbank´is eritingimuste punktis C v) nimetatud

tähtaja jooksul. Arve mittesaamine ei vabasta Klienti tasumise kohustusest.

3.5 Lepingus sätestatud rahaliste kohustuste tähtaegseks täitmiseks loetakse Audiitorühingu

arveldusarve krediteerimist ettenähtud summa ulatuses hiljemalt tasumise tähtpäeval.

3.6 Rahaliste kohustuste täitmisega viivitamise korral on Klient kohustatud tasuma Audiitorühingule viivist

0,2% tasumata summalt päevas. Lisaks viivisele on Audiitorühingul õigus nõuda Kliendi poolt Lepingu

mittetäitmisega tekitatud kahju hüvitamist.

3.7 Käesolevaga annab Klient Audiitorühingule nõusoleku edastada avalikkusele teavet Kliendi poolt

Audiitorühingule tähtaegselt tasumata võlgnevuse kohta (sh edastada vastav teave

maksehäireregistrile).

4. Lepingu kehtivus, muutmine ja ülesütlemine

4.1 Leping jõustub pärast selle allkirjastamist Poolte poolt ning on sõlmitud eritingimustes nimetatud

teenuse osutamiseks. Pooled võivad käesoleva Lepingu kehtivust võrreldes algsega pikendada,

sõlmides Lepingule täiendavaid eritingimusi või muid Lepingu muutmise kokkuleppeid. Lepingu

kehtivuse pikendamisel täiendavate eritingimuste allkirjastamisega ei ole vaja üldtingimusi

täiendavalt allkirjastada, välja arvatud juhul, kui üldtingimused muutuvad.

4.2 Klient on kohustatud Audiitorühingule viivitamatult teatama Kliendi juht- ja järelevalveorganite

liikme(te) muutumisest ning omanike muutumisest üle 10% (mis võib tingida vajaduse muuta

Lepingut huvide konflikti vältimiseks).

4.3 Lepingu võib üles öelda vaid mõjuval põhjusel. Mõjuva põhjusena käeoleva Lepingu raames ei

käsitleta arvamuste lahknevust raamatupidamise või vandeaudiitori tegevusega seotud teemade

käsitlemisel.

4.3.1 Klient kohustub tasuma Audiitorühingule viivitamatult Audiitorühingu arve alusel kõigi

Lepingus kokku lepitud tööde eest, mille Audiitorühing tegi enne Lepingu ülesütlemist.

4.4 Lepingut võib muuta ainult kirjalikus vormis.

4.5 Käesoleva Lepingu jõustumisega loetakse eelnevad Poolte vahel sama teenuse osutamiseks

sõlmitud leping(ud) lõppenuks.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 8 Allkiri: Klient

5. Poolte vastutuse üldküsimused

5.1 Oma Lepingust tulenevate kohustuste täitmisel on Pooled kohustatud käituma hea usu ja

mõistlikkuse põhimõtetest lähtuvalt (sh abistama teineteist Lepingu täitmisel).

5.2 Audiitorühing kannab varalist vastutust Kliendile või kolmandale isikule vandeaudiitori

kutsetegevusega süüliselt tekitatud otsese varalise kahju eest. Vastutuse ülempiir on kümnekordne

Lepingu Tasu, milles lepiti kokku lepingu vastavates eritingimustes (või lepingu konkreetset teenust

reguleerivas lisakokkuleppes), millega seoses kahju tekitati. Raskest hooletusest tuleneva või tahtliku

rikkumise korral ülempiiri ei kohaldata.

5.3 Kui Audiitorühing osutab Kliendile sellist teenust, millest tulenev vastutus ei ole audiitoritele

kohalduvate erisätetega reguleeritud, siis vastutab Audiitorühing Kliendi või kolmandate isikute ees

raske hooletusega või tahtlikult tekitatud kahju eest ning tervise kahjustamise ja/või surma

põhjustamise eest.

5.4 Kui Audiitorühingul tekib vastutus kolmanda isiku ees solidaarselt Kliendiga ning sellise vastutuse

tekkimise osaliseks või täielikuks otseseks või kaudseks põhjustajaks on Klient, siis vabaneb

Audiitorühing omavahelistes suhetes Kliendiga sellisest vastutusest ning vastutus jääb täielikult (või

vastavalt osaliselt) Kliendile.

5.5 Kui Klient on esitatud Audiitorühingule Lepingu täitmisel mittetäielikku dokumentatsiooni või

valeandmeid, ei vastuta Audiitorühing sellest tulenevate valede järelduste või muu kahju tekkimise

eest Kliendile või kolmandatele isikutele.

5.6 Kliendi juhtkond kinnitab käesolevaga (sh Lepingus mujal toodut osaliselt korrates ja sellele

täiendavalt) Audiitorühingule alljärgnevat:

a) Kliendil eksisteerib eritingimuste punktis A nimetatud perioodil ning käesoleva Lepingu

kehtivuse ajal finantsaruandluse standardi järgne raamatupidamine ja tõhus sisekontrolli

süsteem;

b) kõik eritingimuste punktis A nimetatud perioodil aset leidnud ja/või leidvad sündmused on

ja/või saavad korrektselt raamatupidamises kajastatud;

c) Audiitorühingule on tehtud ja tehakse teenuse osutamise käigus õigeaegselt teatavaks kogu

oluline informatsioon, mis on vajalik Kliendi finantsseisundi õigeks ja õiglaseks kajastamiseks

ja raamatupidamises kajastamise kontrollimiseks;

d) Klient viib kõik Audiitorühingu poolt väljapakutud parandused Aastaaruandesse sisse

Audiitorühingu poolt nõutud tähtajaks; ja

e) Klient vastab Audiitori küsimustele operatiivselt (st hiljemalt küsimuse esitamisele järgneva

tööpäeva jooksul) või Audiitori nõutavaks tähtajaks.

5.7 Klient kohustub maksma Audiitorühingule Lepingus sätestatud Tasu ka juhul, kui teenuse osutamine

osutub võimatuks Lepingus sätestatud tähtaja jooksul (sh kui Leping öeldakse enne teenuse

osutamise alustamist või selle jooksul üles) Kliendist tuleneva asjaolu tõttu. Tasu kuulub maksmisele

vastavalt Audiitorühingu poolt tegelikult osutatud teenuse mahule.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 9 Allkiri: Klient

6. Informatsiooni käitlemine ja kommunikatsioon

6.1 Pooltevaheline kommunikatsioon toimub Lepingu eritingimuste punktis E toodud kontaktandmeid

kasutades.

6.2 Klient kinnitab, et mistahes informatsiooni (sh isikuandmete) edastamine Audiitorühingule on

õiguspärane.

6.3 Klient nõustub informatsiooni vahetamisega elektrooniliselt interneti kaudu ning kinnitab, et on teadlik

riskidest, mis kaasnevad interneti teel elektroonilise posti edastamisega: informatsioon ja/või sõnumid

võivad kaduda, konfidentsiaalset informatsiooni võidakse tahtlikult või mittetahtlikult muuta,

varastada, jälgida ja/või kolmandatele isikutele avaldada. Audiitorühing ei vastuta võimalike kahjude

eest, mis võivad tekkida seoses ülaltoodud riskidega.

6.4 Kui Audiitorühing on andnud Kliendile ligipääsu mõnele veebikeskkonnale või rakendusele, kohustub

Klient tagama ligipääsuks vajaliku teabe (kasutajatunnus ja salasõna) konfidentsiaalsuse ning

teavitama Audiitorühingut muudatustest ligipääsu saanud ning selleks õigustatud isikute osas.

6.5 Kui Klient on andnud Audiitorühingule ligipääsu veebikeskkonnale või rakendusele, eemaldab Klient

ligipääsuõigused pärast Lepingu täitmist ja ligipääsu vajaduse äralangemist.

6.6 Audiitorühingul on õigus säilitada Kliendi poolt Lepingu raames edastatud informatsiooni, arvestades

õigusaktides (sh Üldmäärusest, millele on viidatud allpool punktis 8.1) sätestatud piiranguid,

Lepingust tulenevate võimalike õigusnõuete aegumise tähtaegasid ning Audiitorühingule kohalduvaid

infoturbe nõudeid.

6.7 Audiitorühing rakendab Kliendi poolt edastatud informatsiooni (sh isikuandmete) turvalisuse

tagamiseks korralduslikke ja tehnilisi meetmeid. Meetmete üldine kirjeldus on avaldatud

Audiitorühingu veebilehel.

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 10 Allkiri: Klient

7. Konfidentsiaalsuskohustus

7.1 Pooled kohustuvad mitte avalikustama kolmandatele isikutele konfidentsiaalset teavet, mis on

tähistatud vastavalt või mida mõistlikult hinnates tuleks käsitleda konfidentsiaalsena, arvestades

teabe avaldamise konteksti ja asjaolusid.

7.2 Konfidentsiaalseks informatsiooniks loetakse eelkõige, kuid mitte ainult, Poolte poolt Lepingu täitmise

raames edastatud teavet, Lepingu tingimusi ja muud informatsiooni, mida teabe edastanud Pool on

kohustatud hoidma konfidentsiaalsena.

7.3 Pooled kohustuvad võtma tarvitusele kõik neist olenevad meetmed vältimaks eelnimetatud

informatsiooni sattumist kolmandate isikute kätte, välja arvatud juhul, kui informatsiooni avaldamine

kolmandale isikule on Poolele kohustuslik vastavalt õigusaktidele.

7.4 Konfidentsiaalsuskohustuse rikkumiseks ei loeta seda, kui Klient avalikustab Audiitorühingu enda

audiitorina või koostööpartnerina või kui Audiitorühing edastab kohtule, maksehäireregistrile või

sissenõudmisega tegelevale ettevõtjale või avalikkusele andmed Kliendi võlgnevusest

Audiitorühingule või kui Audiitorühing avaldab Kliendi nime, kaubamärgi ja projekti lühikirjelduse

turunduse- ja kutsetegevuse käigus. Samuti ei loeta konfidentsiaalsuskohustuse rikkumiseks

konfidentsiaalse teabe edastamist Poolte õigusnõustajatele või audiitoritele.

7.5 Pooled kinnitavad, et konfidentsiaalsuskohustus laieneb Poole kõikidele töötajatele, alltöövõtjatele

ning teenuseosutajatele, kes võivad konfidentsiaalse informatsiooniga kokku puutuda.

8. Isikuandmete töötlemine

8.1 Kui Audiitorühing töötleb teenuse osutamise raames Kliendi poolt edastatud isikuandmeid, kohustub

Audiitorühing neid töötlema kooskõlas kehtivate isikuandmete kaitset reguleerivate õigusnormidega,

eelkõige lähtudes Euroopa Parlamendi ja Nõukogu määrusest (EL) 2016/679 füüsiliste isikute kaitse

kohta isikuandmete töötlemisel ja selliste andmete vaba liikumise ning direktiivi 95/467EÜ kehtetuks

tunnistamise kohta (isikuandmete kaitse üldmäärus) (edaspidi nimetatud „Üldmäärus“).

8.2 Klient tagab, et isikuandmete edastamine Audiitorühingule on õiguspärane ning isikuandmeid

edastatakse kooskõlas Üldmääruses sätestatud isikuandmete töötlemise põhimõtetega.

8.3 Audiitorühing kasutab Lepingu täitmise käigus saadud isikuandmeid vaid Lepingu ning õigusaktidest

tulenevate kohustuste täitmiseks ja võimalike õigusnõuete esitamise või nende eest kaitsmise

eesmärgil.

8.4 Audiitorühing on isikuandmete töötlemisel vastutav töötleja, kohaldades Audiitorühingu poolt

avaldatud isikuandmete töötlemise sätteid.

8.5 Lepingust tulenevate isikuandmete töötlemisega seotud küsimuste ja pöördumiste lahendamiseks

saab Klient kirjutada Audiitorühingu kontaktaadressile: [email protected].

________________ ________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing 11 Allkiri: Klient

9. Lepinguliste vaidluste lahendamine

9.1 Kõik käesolevast Lepingust tulenevad vaidlused lahendatakse Pooltevaheliste läbirääkimiste teel.

Kokkuleppe mittesaavutamisel lahendatakse vaidlused Eesti kohtus lähtudes Eesti Vabariigi

õigusaktidest

Käesolevas dokumendis on esitatud Audiitorteenuse osutamise lepingu üldtingimused, mis

moodustavad koos eritingimustega ja Lepingu lisadega ühtse ja lahutamatu terviku.

Vastuolude puhul eri- ja üldtingimustes prevaleerivad eritingimused.

Lepingut Kliendi nimel allkirjastav isik kinnitab, et omab selleks esindusõigust ning puuduvad

seadusest või tehingust tulenevad takistused Lepingu allkirjastamiseks. Lepingut Kliendi

nimel allkirjastav isik kinnitab, et on teadlik esindusõiguseta isikule tehingu tegemisel

laienevast vastutusest.

Audiitorühingu eest ja nimel: Kliendi eest ja nimel: /digitaalallkirjastatult/ /digitaalallkirjastatult/ _________________________ _________________________ Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ Siseministeerium juhatuse liige volikirja alusel Mart Nõmper Krista Aas

______________________ ______________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing Allkiri: Klient

1

Lisa 1 Audiitorteenuse osutamise lepingu nr 23241798 juurde

Info tegeliku kasusaaja kohta

Käesolev dokument on sõlmitud Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ, registrikood 10384467 (Audiitorühing) ja

Siseministeerium, registrikood 70000562 (Klient) vahel Tallinnas, käesoleva audiitorteenuse

osutamise lepingu lisana nr 1.

Tegelik kasusaaja on vastavalt rahapesu ja terrorismi rahastamise tõkestamise seadusele alati

füüsiline isik, kelle varalist seisundit/olukorda tehtav tehing reaalselt mõjutab, st tegelik kasusaaja on

ka isik, kes „seisab variisiku selja taga“ ja, kes oma mõju ära kasutades teostab lõplikku kontrolli

tehingu soorituste üle ja, kelle huvides või kasuks või arvel tegelikult tehing või toiming tehakse.

Tegeliku kasusaaja mõiste hõlmab ka äriühingu füüsilisest isikust aktsionäre või osanikke, kellele

kuuluvad või, kes teostavad kontrolli rohkem kui 25% aktsiate või osade või hääleõiguste üle otsese

või kaudse omamise kaudu, kaasa arvatud esitajaaktsiate või -osade kujul, samuti äriühingu

füüsilisest isikust aktsionär või osanik, kes teostab muul viisil kontrolli äriühingu juhtimise üle.

Klient kinnitab, et tegelikke kasusaajaid ei ole võimalik määratleda.

Klient kohustub Audiitorühingule koheselt esitama uuendatud andmed juhul, kui tegelikud andmed

võrreldes siin tooduga muutuvad, või juhul, kui Kliendi esindaja saab täiendavat uut teavet. Käesolev

Lisa on allkirjastatud Kliendi esindaja poolt, kes kinnitab, et käesolevat dokumenti allkirjastades on

ta teinud kõik endast oleneva selleks, et selgitada välja ja veenduda, et siin toodud andmed on

täielikult õiged (sh teinud vastavad järelepärimised kõikidele Kliendi juhtorgani liikmetele ning

osanikele/aktsionäridele ning kõikidele teistele isikutele, kes siin toodud andmete osas teavet omada

võivad).

Kliendi eest ja nimel:

/digitaalallkirjastatud/

_________________________

Siseministeerium

volikirja alusel

[[Representative]]

______________________ ______________________ Allkiri: Audiitorühing Allkiri: Klient

1

Lisa 2 Audiitorteenuse osutamise lepingu

nr 23241798 juurde

Kliendi B- kaardi väljavõte

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

1

CERTIFICATE ON THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT (CFS)

TERMS OF REFERENCE

1. Background and subject matter

A certificate on the financial statements (CFS) must be provided for entities that participate as beneficiary or

affiliated entities (‘participants’) in EU grants — provided that it is required under the EU grant agreement and that

certain thresholds are met (see GA Data Sheet and Article 24.2 and AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement, art

24.2).

The purpose of the CFS is to provide the EU granting authority with findings to be able to assess whether costs

that are declared on the basis of actual costs or costs according to usual cost accounting practices (if any) and,

if relevant, also revenues comply with the conditions set out in the EU grant agreement.

The present Terms of Reference set out the procedures to be performed, define the scope and applicable

standards of the CFS and who may deliver it.

2. Scope and applicable standards

The CFS is a report on (factual) findings based on agreed-upon procedures (AUP).

The engagement is to perform agreed-upon procedures (AUPs) regarding the eligibility of the costs (and, if

relevant, also revenues) declared under grant agreement 101142969 — PWinPLan (‘the Grant Agreement’). It

is not an assurance engagement; the CFS practitioner does not provide an audit opinion, nor expresses

assurance.

The following standards apply:

 the International Standard on Related Services (ISRS) 4400 (revised) Agreed-upon Procedures

Engagements as issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB)

 the International Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (including International Independent

Standards) issued by the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (IESBA), including the

independence requirements

 the International Standard on Quality Control 1 Quality Control for Firms that Perform Audits and Reviews

of financial statements, and Other Assurance and Related Services Engagements (or equivalent).

Supreme audit institutions applying INTOSAI-standards may carry out the procedures according to the

corresponding International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAIs) and Code of Ethics issued by

INTOSAI instead of the International Standard on Related Services (ISRS) 4400 (revised) and the Code of Ethics

for Professional Accountants issued by the IAASB and the IESBA.

The CFS must be issued according to the highest professional standards. The practitioner must comply with the

present Terms of Reference, including the agreed-upon procedures checklist and report template — without

modifying them. The work must be planned in a way that the engagement can be performed effectively. The

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

2

practitioner must use the evidence obtained from the procedures performed as the basis for the report. Matters

which are important for the findings and evidence that the work was carried out in accordance with the Terms of

Reference must be documented. The findings must be described in sufficient detail and include the affected

amounts, to allow the participant and the EU granting authority to ensure appropriate follow-up.

3. Practitioners who may deliver a certificate

The participant is free to choose a qualified external auditor, including its usual external auditor, provided that:

 the auditor is independent from the participant and

 the provisions of Directive 2006/43/EC1 (or similar standards) are complied with.

Although ISRS 4400 (revised) states that independence is not a requirement for engagements to carry out agreed-

upon procedures, this is one of the qualities to ensure an unbiased approach and therefore required for CFS

practitioners. Compliance with the IESBA Code’s independence requirements is therefore mandatory.

However:

 public bodies can choose an external auditor or a competent independent public officer. In this latter

case, independence is usually defined as independence ‘in fact and in appearance’ (e.g. that the officer

is not involved in drawing up the financial statements). It is for each public body to appoint the public

officer and ensure their independence. The certificate should refer to this appointment.

 pillar-assessed entities can choose their regular internal or external auditors in accordance with their

internal financial regulations and procedures as assessed by the European Commission in accordance

with Article 154(3) of Regulation 2018/1046 2 .

The CFS costs themselves can be charged to the EU project and the choice of practitioner therefore has to

comply with the cost eligibility criteria, in particular lowest price or best value for money and no conflict of interest

as set out in the Grant Agreement (for the detailed conditions, see AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement, art

6.2.C*).

The CFS does not affect the granting authority’s right to carry out its own assessment or audit on the eligibility of

the costs covered. Neither does it preclude the bodies mentioned in Article 25 of the Granting Agreement (e.g.

granting authority, European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), European

Court of Auditors (ECA), etc) from exercising their rights under the Grant Agreement.

4. Procedures to be followed and expected results

The procedures to be carried out by the practitioner are listed in the agreed-upon procedures checklist below.

The checklist is an integral part of these Terms of Reference.

1 Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on statutory audits of annual

accounts and consolidated accounts (OJ L 157, 9.6.2006, p. 87). 2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial

rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (‘Financial Regulation’) (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p. 1).

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

3

The engagement should be undertaken on the basis of inquiry and analysis, (re)computation, comparison, other

accuracy checks, observation, inspection of records and documents and by interviewing the participant (and the

persons working for them) as described in the agreed-upon procedures.

The ‘result’ column in the checklist has three different options of findings:

 YES — means that the standard finding is confirmed and that no exception needs to be reported

 NO — means that the standard finding cannot be confirmed and that an exception needs to be reported

(either because the practitioner carried out the procedures but cannot confirm the standard finding or

because the practitioner was not able to carry out a specific procedure, e.g. because it was impossible to

reconcile key information or data were unavailable)

 N.A. — means that the standard finding is ‘not applicable’ and that the procedure did not have to be

carried out. The reasons for the non-application must be obvious, e.g. no cost was declared under a

certain category; conditions for a certain procedure are not met, etc. For instance, for participants with

accounts established in a currency other than the euro the procedure related to participants with accounts

established in euro does not apply. Similarly, if no additional remuneration is paid, the standard finding(s)

and procedure(s) for additional remuneration do not apply.

The reference document for the confirmation of standard findings are the rules set out in the Grant

Agreement, as explained in the AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement*. The agreed-upon procedures make

reference to the relevant Grant Agreement provisions and cost categories, to enable the practitioner to find them

easily.

5. Other special terms

N/A

For and on behalf of the Audit Firm: For and on behalf of the Client:

/digitally signed/ /digitally signed/

_______________________________ _______________________________

Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ Siseministeerium

Member of the board Authorized representative

Mart Nõmper Krista Aas

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

1

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES CHECKLIST

General eligibility conditions and ineligible cost

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — General eligibility conditions and ineligible costs

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding

Article 6.1, 6.3

GENERAL ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS AND INELIGIBLE COSTS

Article 6.1 and 6.3

GENERAL ELIGIBILITY CONDITION

S AND INELIGIBLE

COSTS

For all cost categories:

For the sample of each cost category, the practitioner checked that the costs declared in the financial statements fulfil the following general eligibility conditions for actual costs:

 The costs are identifiable and verifiable, in particular recorded in the participant's accounts in accordance with the accounting standards applicable in the country where the participant is established and with the participant's usual cost accounting practices (i.e. used consistently by the participant for all similar activities, not just for the EU action, except for modifications required to comply with rules under the Grant Agreement).

 The costs are actually incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities).

 The costs are incurred in the period set out in art. 4 (with the exception of costs relating to the submission of the final periodic report, which may be incurred afterwards; see art. 21 GA and the corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section).

 The costs are declared under the correct budget category set out in art. 6.2 and Annex 2.

 The costs are incurred in connection with the action (i.e. a direct link between the cost and the action activities as described in the description of the action (Annex 1 GA) can be established in the accounting system or other supporting documents).

 The costs comply with the applicable (national) law (e.g. on taxes, labour and social security).

 The cost do not contain any ineligible elements (listed in art. 6.3; e.g.cost declared under other EU grants (‘double- funding’), or excessive or reckless expenditure).

The standard finding for this procedure is included as first finding in each cost category (see below):

“The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re- invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.”

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

2

Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.A A. PERSONNEL COSTS

Article 6.2.A A. PERSONNEL

COSTS

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all persons for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 persons (or all persons if less than 10 worked on the action).

The practitioner sampled _____ persons out of a total of _____.

Article 6.2.A.1

A.1 EMPLOYEES OR EQUIVALENT

Article 6.2.A.1

A.1 EMPLOYEES

OR EQUIVALENT

(all programmes

For the persons included in the sample and working under an employment contract or equivalent appointing act:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

Actual personnel cost for employees (or equivalent) are to be calculated in

1) The cost used for the calculation of the daily rate were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

‘Excessive’ means paying significantly (25%) more for products, services or personnel than the prevailing market rates or the usual practices of the participant (and thus resulting in an avoidable financial loss to the action).

‘Reckless’ means failing to exercise care in the selection of products, services or personnel (and thus resulting in an avoidable financial loss to the action (25%)).

‘Double-funding’ means that costs or contributions cannot be declared under other EU grants (or grants awarded by an EU Member State, non-EU country or other body implementing the EU budget) except where the Grant Agreement explicitly provides for synergy actions (art. 6.3(b)).

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

3

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

except SMP ESS,

CUST/FISC)

A.1 If standard

(Case 1A):

accordance with the formula set out in art 6.2.A.1 GA and the corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section.

It is the task of the practitioner to check that the elements for the calculation of actual personnel cost declared to the granting authority are correct and in compliance with the rules and that the formula has been correctly applied. The elements to be checked are:

 actual personnel cost incurred, including any eligible components and excluding any ineligible components

 number of months of employment during the reporting period, used for the calculation of the maximum declarable-day equivalents

 working-time factor, used for the calculation of the maximum declarable-day equivalents

 number of day-equivalents worked for the action, as recorded in the monthly declaration or another reliable time recording system (correctly converted using one of the accepted formulas, see art. 20 GA and the corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section)

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked the following information/documents provided by the participant:

 a list of the persons included in the sample indicating the period(s) during which they worked for the action, their position (classification or category) and type of contract (or other document proving the working-time factor)

 the payslips of the employees included in the sample as well as documents providing proof of payment (checked at least two salary payments per person per year);information concerning the employment status and employment conditions of personnel included

2) The persons worked for the participant on the basis of an employment contract or equivalent appointing act.

YES/NO/N.A.

3) The persons were i) directly hired by the participant in accordance with its national legislation, ii) under the participant's sole technical supervision and responsibility and iii) remunerated in accordance with the participant's usual practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

4) The persons’ employment time during the action corresponds to the number of months used for the calculations of the maximum declarable-day equivalents.

YES/NO/N.A.

5) The persons’ working-time factor(s) corresponds to the factor(s) used for the calculation of the maximum declarable-day equivalents.

YES/NO/N.A.

6) The persons were assigned to the action according to the monthly declaration of day-equivalents worked in the action, or internal written instructions, organisation chart or other documented management decision.

YES/NO/N.A.

7) The maximum declarable day-equivalents for the person have been correctly calculated according to the following formula (or as adapted for specific cases, see art 6.2.A.1 GA and the corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section).

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

4

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

in the sample, in particular their employment contracts or equivalent

 the participant's usual policy regarding payroll matters (e.g. salary policy, overtime policy, variable pay/bonuses)

 applicable national law on taxes, labour and social security

 monthly declarations/ time records of the employees included in the sample and

 any other document that supports the personnel costs declared.

The practitioner also checked the eligibility of all components (see art. 6) and recalculated the personnel costs for employees declared in the financial statement(s) through reapplication of the personnel cost formula with the data from the accounting system (project accounting and general ledger), payroll system, time recording system and supporting documents proving the working time factor.

8) The maximum declarable day-equivalents used for the calculation of the personnel cost are correctly rounded (up or down to the nearest half day- equivalent).

YES/NO/N.A.

9) Daily rate was correctly calculated (actual personnel costs during the months within the reporting period divided by maximum declarable day-equivalents; or, alternatively, months per calendar year within the reporting period divided by maximum declarable day- equivalents, see AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement, Fn 4*).

YES/NO/N.A.

10) Day-equivalents worked on the action were recorded in a monthly declaration, signed by the person and their supervisor, or were recorded in another reliable time-record system.

YES/NO/N.A.

11) If another reliable time-record system was used, time worked on the action has been correctly converted into day-equivalents according to one of the accepted formulas (see art. 20 GA and the corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section).

YES/NO/N.A.

12) Personnel cost declared for the persons for each reporting period were correctly calculated ({day- equivalents worked} x {daily rate}).

YES/NO/N.A.

13) If any, cost declared under specific cases (e.g. for HE, HUMA: parental leave) were correctly calculated and in accordance with art 6.2.A.1 GA and the

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

5

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section.

14) There were no discrepancies between the personnel costs charged to the action and the costs recalculated by the practitioner in accordance with the formula.

YES/NO/N.A.

A.1 If project- based re-

muneration(C ase 1B):

(option in HE)

Additional procedures if ‘project-based remuneration’ is paid:

For the persons included in the sample whose level of remuneration (daily rate, hourly rate) increases when and because they work in (EU, national or other) projects:

Apart from carrying out the procedures indicated above, to confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner:

 checked relevant documents provided by the participant (employment contract or project-based contract, collective agreement, the participant’s usual policy on remuneration, criteria used for its calculation, the participant’s usual remuneration practice for projects funded under national funding schemes

 recalculated the action daily rate per person as follows: {actual personnel costs for work on the action (incl. project-based supplementary payments, bonuses, increased salary, etc) during the months within the reporting period} divided by {day-equivalents worked by the person on the action during the months within the reporting period}

 recalculated the (theoretical) national project daily rate as follows: {theoretical personnel costs for similar work in a national project over the same number of months as the reporting period} divided by {maximum declarable day-equivalents}

 compared the action daily rate with the national project daily rate; the

15) The amount of project-based remuneration paid corresponded to the participant’s usual remuneration practices and was consistently paid whenever the same kind of work or expertise was required.

YES/NO/N.A.

16) The criteria used to calculate the project-based remuneration were objective and generally applied by the participants regardless of the source of funding used.

YES/NO/N.A.

17) The daily rate to be used for the EU Grant’ financial statements is the lower of the action daily rate and the national project daily rate.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

6

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

daily rate to be used for the EU grant financial statement will be the lower of the two

 checked documents providing proof of payment (checked at least two salary payments per person per year).

The maximum declarable day-equivalents for each reporting period are calculated as follows:

(215 / 12) multiplied by the number of months [during which the person is employed] within the reporting period) multiplied by the working time factor [e.g. 1 for full-time, 0,5 for 50% part time etc].

If there are no regulatory requirements and the participant does not have internal rules defining objective conditions on which the national project daily rate can be determined, but it can demonstrate that its usual practice is to pay bonuses for work in national projects, the national project daily rate is the average of the remuneration that the person received in the last complete year (calendar, financial or fiscal year) before the end of the reporting period for work in national projects calculated as follows:

{(total personnel costs of the person in the last complete year) minus (remuneration paid for EU actions during that complete year)}

divided by

{215 minus (days worked in EU actions during that complete year)}

‘EU actions’ are ‘EU grants’ as defined in the Grant Agreement (i.e. awarded by EU institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, including EU executive agencies, EU regulatory agencies, EDA, joint undertakings).

‘Total personnel costs’ covers all types of contracts with the person that qualify as personnel costs under art. 6.2.A.

A.1 If average Additional procedures in case ‘average personnel costs’ is used: 18) The personnel costs included in the financial YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

7

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

personnel costs (unit

costs calculated in accordance with usual

cost accounting practices) (Case 2):

(option in HE, DEP, EDF,

CEF, HUMA)

For the persons included in the sample:

Apart from carrying out the procedures indicated above, the practitioner carried out following procedures to confirm standard findings in the next column:

 obtained a description of the participant’s usual cost accounting practice to calculate unit costs

 checked whether the participant’s usual cost accounting practice was applied for the financial statements subject of the present CFS

 checked that the employees included in the sample were charged under the correct category (in accordance with the criteria used by the participant to establish personnel categories) by reviewing the contract/HR-record or analytical accounting records

 checked that there is no difference between the total amount of personnel costs used in calculating the cost per unit and the total amount of personnel costs recorded in the statutory accounts

 checked documents providing proof of payment (checked at least two salary payments per person per year)

 checked whether actual personnel costs were adjusted on the basis of budgeted or estimated elements and, if so, examined whether those elements used are actually relevant for the calculation, objective and supported by documents.

statement were calculated in accordance with the participant's usual cost accounting practice, using the actual personnel costs recorded in the participant’s accounts and excluding ineligible costs or costs already included in other budget categories and were applied in consistent manner, based on objective criteria, regardless of the source of funding.

19) The employees were charged under the correct category.

YES/NO/N.A.

20) Total personnel costs used in calculating the unit costs were consistent with the expenses recorded in the statutory accounts and excluded any ineligible costs or costs included in other budget categories.

YES/NO/N.A.

21) Any estimated or budgeted element used by the participant in its unit-cost calculation were relevant for calculating personnel costs, used in a reasonable way (i.e. do not play a major role in calculating the hourly rate) and corresponded to objective and verifiable information. If the budgeted or estimated figures represent less than 5% of the declared unit cost, it is considered that they do not play a major role and can be accepted. If the budgeted or estimated component is higher than 5%, then it needs to be compared with the actual costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

8

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.A.2.

A.2 NATURAL PERSONS WITH A DIRECT CONTRACT1

Article 6.2.A.2

A2. NATURAL PERSONS

WITH DIRECT CONTRACT

For natural persons included in the sample and working with the participant under a direct contract other than an employment contract, such as consultants (not subcontractors):

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

To confirm standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked following information/documents provided by the participant:

 the contracts, especially the cost, contract duration, work description, place of work, ownership of the results and reporting obligations to the participant

 the employment conditions of staff in the same category to compare costs

 monthly declarations/ other reliable time records of the natural persons included in the sample and

 any other document that supports the costs declared and its registration (e.g. invoices, accounting records, proof of payment,etc).

22) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re- invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

23) The persons worked for the participant as a self- employed natural person (e.g. some types of in-house consultants) under a direct contract or a contract signed between the participant and a legal entity fully owned by the person (with no other employees).

YES/NO/N.A.

24) The persons worked under conditions similar to those of an employee (including regarding teleworking arrangements / presence requirements at the premises).

YES/NO/N.A.

25) The cost of the persons were not significantly different from costs for employees of the participant performing similar tasks (up to 50% can be accepted in relation to the average daily rate of employees

YES/NO/N.A.

1 The person must be hired under either: a direct contract signed between the participant and the natural person (not through another legal entity; e.g. a temporary agency) or a contract

signed between the participant and a legal entity fully owned by that natural person and which has no other staff than the natural person being hired.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

9

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

performing similar tasks, or 25% in relation to the highest daily rate of employees performing similar tasks (which ever of the two amounts is the lowest).

26) The results of work carried out belong to the participant, or, if not, the participant has obtained all necessary rights to fulfil its obligations as if those results were generated by itself (e.g. through obtaining adequate licences).

YES/NO/N.A.

27) The person was assigned to the action according to internal written instructions, organisation chart or other documented management decision.

YES/NO/N.A.

28) Day-equivalents worked on the action were recorded in a monthly declaration, signed by the person and their supervisor, or were recorded in another reliable time-record system.

YES/NO/N.A.

29) Time worked on the action has been converted into day-equivalents.

YES/NO/N.A.

30) The cost used for the calculation of the daily rate for the person do not include ineligible cost.

YES/NO/N.A.

31) the daily rate has been calculated with one of the following 3 alternatives:

- If the contract specifies a fixed daily rate, this rate must be used. In case an hourly rate is set instead of a daily, multiply the hourly rate X 8

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

10

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

- -If the contract states a fixed amount of work and a fixed amount of days/hours, the global amount for the work must be divided by the number of day-equivalents. If hours are mentioned, convert into equivalent days by X 8

- If the contract states a fixed amount for the work but does not specify the daily or hourly rate or total amount of days or hours to be worked, the global amount for the work must be divided by the pro-rata of 215 corresponding to the duration of the contract.

32) Personnel cost declared for the person for each reporting period were correctly calculated ({day- equivalents worked (rounded up or down to the nearest half-day)} x {daily rate}).

YES/NO/N.A.

33) If a number of day equivalents is used in the calculation of the amount per ‘unit’ (daily rate), the participant has not declared more day-equivalents worked on the action than the number of day- equivalents used to calculate the daily rate (consistency with the denominator).

YES/NO/N.A.

Article 6.2.A.3

A.3 SECONDED PERSONS BY A THIRD PARTY AGAINST PAYMENT

Article 6.2.A.3

A.3 SECONDED PERSONS

For persons included in the sample and seconded by a third party against payment (not subcontractors):

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility

34) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re- invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

11

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

of costs (see above).

To confirm standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked following information/documents provided by the participant:

 their secondment contract(s) notably regarding costs, duration, work description, place of work and ownership of the results

 for the reimbursement by the participant to the third party for the resource made available (seconded personnel against payment): any documentation that supports the costs declared (e.g. contract, invoice, bank payment, and proof of registration in its accounting/payroll, etc) and reconciliation of the financial statement(s) with the accounting system (project accounting and general ledger) as well as any proof that the amount invoiced by the third party did not include any profit (i.e. that the daily rate paid by the participant is not higher than the daily rate actually paid by the third party to the seconded person, applying the calculation rules of the Grant Agreement)

 any other document that supports the costs declared (e.g. invoices, etc) and proof of payment.

Normally, the practitioner should consider cost difference compared with staff who performed similar tasks under an employment contract with the participant as significant if they are 50% or more above the average daily rate of employees performing similar tasks, or 25% or more above the highest daily rate of employees performing similar tasks (which ever of the two amounts is lower). However, in the specific case of persons seconded against payment from a third party located in a different country than the participant’s one, the costs can be higher than 50% in relation to the average daily rate of employees performing similar, or higher than 25% in relation to the highest daily rate of employees performing similar tasks (whichever is the lower), if the participant can demonstrate that its usual practice is to pay for secondments at the level of the actual remuneration of the seconded person.

action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

35) Seconded personnel are covered by a secondment agreement between the participant and the employer of the seconded person, the seconded personnel reported to the participant’s and worked on the participant’s premises (unless otherwise agreed with the participant).

YES/NO/N.A.

36) The results of work carried out belong to the participant, or, if not, the participant has obtained all necessary rights to fulfil its obligations as if those results were generated by itself (e.g. through obtaining adequate licences).

YES/NO/N.A.

37) Their costs were not significantly different from those for staff who performed similar tasks under an employment contract with the participant (or differences are justified under the specific case of secondment from other countries).

YES/NO/N.A.

38) The costs declared were supported with documentation and recorded in the participant’s accounts.

YES/NO/N.A.

39) The secondment did not entail any profit in the calculation of personnel cost for the seconded person (neither for the participant nor for the seconding third party).

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

12

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Personnel costs (A.1-A.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.A.4

A.4 SME OWNERS AND NATURAL PERSON BENEFICIARIES (all programmes except SMP ESS, EUAF, CUST/FISC, CCEI, PERI)

N/A

Article 6.2.A.5

A.5 VOLUNTEERS (ERDF-TA, LIFE, ERASMUS, CREA, CERV, JUST, ESF/SOCPL, AMIF/ISF/BMVI, UCPM)

N/A

Subcontracting costs (B.)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Subcontracting costs (B.)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.B B. SUBCONTRACTING COSTS

Article 6.2.B B. SUBCONTRA

CTING

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly.

It should cover:

 10% of all subcontracts for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 subcontracts (or all if less than 10 subcontracts were declared) (default option for all programmes except CEF)

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

13

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Subcontracting costs (B.)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

 10% of all subcontracting costs declared, with a minimum sample of 2 subcontracts and 10 invoices (option for CEF).

Note:

‘Subcontract’ is understood as one contract signed with a subcontractor. For specific cases where several contracts are part of the same contracting procedure (e.g. contract divided in lots or several contracts under a common framework contract), they should be counted together as one contract for the sample.

For programmes using the first option (all programmes except CEF), the sample is based on subcontracts. For each sampled subcontract, the selection procedure must be reviewed and all the declared costs and invoices must be verified.

For programmes using the second option (CEF), the sample is based on the subcontracting costs declared, for which in addition to the sampled costs, also the selection procedure of the underlying subcontract(s) must be reviewed.

[OPTION 1 for all programmes except CEF: The practitioner sampled _____ subcontracts out of a total of _____.] [OPTION 2 for CEF: The practitioner sampled _____ % of the subcontracting costs (which covered _____ subcontracts and _____ invoices)].

For the subcontracts/subcontracting costs included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 the use of subcontractors was foreseen in Annex 1 GA (or declared following the ‘simplified approval’ procedure if allowed by the Grant

40) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re- invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

41) The subcontracts were not made between YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

14

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Subcontracting costs (B.)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Agreement; see art. 6.2.B)

 the total estimated costs of subcontracting are set out in Annex 2 GA (or declared following the ‘simplified approval’ procedure if allowed by the Grant Agreement; see art. 6.2.B)

 subcontracting costs were declared in the subcontracting category of the financial statement

 subcontracting costs declared in the financial statements are reconciled with the data in the accounting system

 costs claimed can be traced to underlying bank statements showing amount paid and date of payment by the participant

 there are supporting documents proving that the selection and award procedure were based on the usual purchase practices of the participant and, if applicable, national law on public procurement

 the subcontracts were awarded using the participant’s usual purchasing practices/internal procedures, that these ensure best value for money (or if appropriate the lowest price) and that there are procedures in place to ensure the absence of conflict of interests by:

 reviewing the subcontract award process, including, bid evaluation, and selection process to ensure that the award corresponded to the evaluation in accordance with the requirements set out for the subcontract and that the participants staff involved in the award procedure were subject to conflict of interest rules (e.g. requiring them to declare conflict of interests)

 reviewing the qualifications of the subcontractor: to ensure that they correspond to the requirements set out for the subcontract

participants (unless in line with specific cases set out in the AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement, art. 6.2.B*)

42) The use of subcontracting was foreseen in Annex 1 GA and the total estimated costs of subcontracting were set out in Annex 2 GA (or use and cost were declared following the ‘simplified approval’ procedure if allowed by the Grant Agreement; see art. 6.2.B) and costs were declared in the financial statements under the subcontracting category.

YES/NO/N.A.

43) Subcontracts were awarded using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO/N.A.

44) Subcontracts were awarded according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price. If an existing contract, a framework contract or a usual provider is used, the participant provided proof (e.g. documents of requests to different providers, different offers, proof of assessment of offers and/or assessment of market prices) demonstrating that the original selection fulfilled these criteria

YES/NO/N.A.

45) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

15

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Subcontracting costs (B.)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

 reviewing the subcontract to ensure that it contains conflict of interest provisions (e.g. requirements for the subcontractor to disclose any conflicts of interest)

 receiving a written confirmation from the participant that subcontracts were awarded in accordance with the principle of best value of money and no conflict of interest.

For participants that are ‘contracting authorities/entities’ within the meaning of the EU Public Procurement Directives 2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU or 2009/81/EC, the practitioner verified that the subcontracting complied with the applicable national law on public procurement.

The practitioner also examined the subcontracts to identify that the participant’s contractual obligations under the Grant Agreement are also imposed on subcontractors (see art. 9.3):

 proper implementation

 conflict of interest

 confidentiality and security

 ethics and values

 visibility

 other specific rules for carrying out the action

 information obligations

 record keeping

 checks, reviews, audits, investigation rights of the granting authority, OLAF, ECA and EPPO.

In addition, the practitioner also checked that:

 there were signed agreements between the participant and the

confirmation. If an existing contract, a framework contract or a usual provider was used, the participant provided proof (e.g. requests to different providers, proof of assessment of offers and/or assessment of market prices) demonstrating that the original selection fulfilled these criteria.

46) The subcontracts ensure that the contractual obligations set out in art. 9.3 are also imposed on the subcontractor.

YES/NO/N.A.

47) The subcontracts were not awarded to other participants of the consortium or affiliated entities.

YES/NO/N.A.

48) All subcontracts were supported by signed agreements between the participant and the subcontractor.

YES/NO/N.A.

49) There was evidence that the services were provided by the subcontractors.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

16

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Subcontracting costs (B.)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

subcontractor

 the subcontracts were not awarded to other participants or to affiliates, unless they have a framework contract or the affiliate is their usual provider, and the subcontract is priced at market conditions

 there was evidence that the services were provided by subcontractor.

In the case of framework contracts, the practitioner checked that the selection of the provider was done in line with the usual practice of the participant and awarded on the basis of best-value-for-money or lowest price and absence of conflict of interest. The framework contract does not necessarily have to be concluded before the start of the action.

Purchase costs (C.)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Purchase costs (C.)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding

Article 6.2.C C. PURCHASE COSTS

Article 6.2.C GENERAL ELIGIBILITY

CONDITIONS FOR

PURCHASE

For all purchase cost categories:

For the sample of each purchase cost category, the practitioner checked that the costs declared in the financial statements fulfil the following eligibility conditions for purchase costs:

The standard finding for this procedure is included as first finding in each cost category (see below):

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

17

COSTS  The purchases were made in conformity with the participant’s usual purchasing practices/internal procedures — provided these ensure purchases with best value for money (key elements to appreciate the respect of this principle are the award of the contract to the bid offering best price-quality ratio, under conditions of transparency and equal treatment), or if appropriate the lowest price, and that there are procedures in place to ensure the absence of conflict of interests. If an existing contract, a framework contract or a usual provider is used, the participant provided proof (e.g. requests to different providers, proof of assessment of offers and/or assessment of market prices) demonstrating that the original selection fulfilled these criteria.

 The practitioner received written confirmation from the participant that purchases were made in accordance with the principle of best value of money and no conflict of interest.

 For participants that are ‘contracting authorities/entities’ within the meaning of the EU Public Procurement Directives 2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU or 2009/81/EC, the practitioner verified that the procurement complied with the applicable national law on public procurement.

 “Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

 Purchases were made according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

 The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written confirmation.”

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

18

Travel and subsistence (C.1)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Travel and subsistence costs (C.1)

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.C.1

C.1 TRAVEL AND SUBSISTENCE COSTS

Article 6.2.C.1

C.1 TRAVEL AND

SUBSISTENCE

(all programmes except RFCS,

CCEI)

C.1 If actual costs:

(HE, DEP, EDF, CEF, LIFE,

AGRIP, HUMA)

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all travel instances for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 travels (or all if less than 10 travels were declared).

Note: ‘Travel instance’ is understood as travel for 1 person/event. Related cost for transport, accommodation and subsistence are together counted as one instance.

The practitioner sampled _____ travels out of a total of _____.

For the travels included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility of purchase costs (see above).

To confirm standard findings in the next column, the practitioner reviewed the sample and checked that:

 travel and subsistence costs were consistent with the participant’s usual policy for travel. In this context, the participant provided evidence of its normal policy for travel costs (e.g. use of first class tickets, reimbursement by the participant on the basis of actual costs, a per diem, carbon offsetting contributions) to enable the practitioner to compare the travel costs charged with this policy.

50) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

51) Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO/N.A.

52) Purchases were made according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

19

 for cases of combined travel, the participant kept evidence not only of the actual cost of the subsequent travel leg(s), but also of the cost of the theoretical direct return travel after the end of the work for the action.

 travel costs are identified and allocated to the action (e.g. trips are directly linked to the action, during the action period, etc) by examining relevant supporting documents such as minutes of meetings, workshops or conferences, their registration in the correct project account, their consistency with time records or with the dates/duration of the workshop/conference.

53) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written confirmation.

YES/NO/N.A.

54) Costs were incurred, approved and reimbursed in line with the participant’s usual policy for travels.

YES/NO/N.A.

55) There was a link between the trip and the action. YES/NO/N.A.

56) The supporting documents were consistent with each other regarding subject of the trip, dates, duration and reconciled with monthly declaration of time worked on the action / other reliable time records and accounting.

YES/NO/N.A.

57) The supporting documents are addressed to the participant.

YES/NO/N.A.

58) Costs of a combined travel were charged to the action only up to the cost that would have been incurred if the travel would have been made exclusively (proven by records) for the action and allowing combined travel is the usual practice of the participant.

YES/NO/N.A.

C.1 If unit costs:

(most programmes, e.g. I3, ERDF- TA, IMREG,

EMFAF, IMCAP, SMP,

N/A

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

20

Equipment (C.2)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.C.2

C.2 EQUIPMENT COSTS

Article 6.2.C.2

C.2 EQUIPMENT

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

C.2 If depreciation

only:

(default

For the equipment included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility of purchase

59) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re- invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting

YES/NO/N.A.

ERASMUS, CREA, CERV,

JUST, ESF/SOCPL,

EU4H, AMIF/ISF/BMVI,

EUAF, CUST/FISC, PERI

(partial), TSI, UCPM)

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

21

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

option for most

programmes)

costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column for purchases of equipment, infrastructure or other assets used for the action (‘equipment’), the practitioner checked that:

 they were entered in the accounting system and written off in accordance with the participant’s usual accounting practices and with international accounting standards; they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents such as delivery note invoice or any other proof demonstrating the link to the action)

 the extent to which the equipment was used for the action (as a percentage) was supported by reliable documentation (e.g. usage overview table)

 any costs reductions (rebates, discounts) have been taken into account

 confirmed the existence of the equipment and ensured that is the same equipment purchased

 if the action was suspended, that no depreciation costs were charged during the suspension period.

Purchases between participants are in principle not accepted, unless in exceptional and properly justified cases (e.g. participant A is the usual supplier of participant B for a generic consumable that participant B needs for the action). If a participant needs supplies from another participant, it is the latter participant that should charge them to the action as cost.

The practitioner recalculated the depreciation costs and checked that:

 the depreciation is calculated on the acquisition value

 the depreciation costs were accumulated during the action duration

practices.

60) Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO/N.A.

61) Assets were purchased according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

YES/NO/N.A.

62) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written confirmation.

YES/NO/N.A.

63) There was a link between the Grant Agreement and the equipment charged to the action.

YES/NO/N.A.

64) The equipment charged to the action was physically inspected and traceable to the accounting records and the underlying documents.

YES/NO/N.A.

65) The purchases were not made between participants (unless in line with specific cases set out in the AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement, art 6.2.B and 6.2.C*).

YES/NO/N.A.

66) The depreciation costs were calculated in line with YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

22

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

 the depreciation costs were calculated for each reporting period according to the rate of use for the project (if the participant does not use the equipment exclusively for the action, only the portion used on the action may be charged)

 the participant did not charge depreciation from a date before reception of the equipment. Eligible depreciation of an equipment begins when it is available for use in the action

 the depreciation costs do not exceed the equipment purchase price. The depreciable amount (purchase price) of the equipment must be allocated on a systematic basis over its useful life (i.e. the period during which the equipment is expected to be usable). If the equipment’s useful life is more than a year, the participant cannot charge the total cost of the item in a single year unless the Grant Agreement explicitly foresees that option.

Apart from depreciation costs, costs for renting or leasing equipment, infrastructure or other assets, are also eligible as equipment costs if they do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets and do not include any financing fees. If the equipment was not purchased but rented or leased, the practitioner should also check that the costs:

 do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets

 do not include any financing fees (e.g. finance charges included in the finance lease payments or interests on loans taken to finance the purchase)

 there is no double charging of costs (e.g. no charging of depreciation costs for equipment previously funded at full cost by an EU grant).

applicable audit standards and the participant’s usual accounting practices (normally at the earliest as of the reception of the equipment and its availability for use), for each reporting period.

67) The amount charged corresponded to the rate of actual usage for the action.

YES/NO/N.A.

68) Costs for renting or leasing equipment do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, do not include any financing fees and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

23

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

C.2 If full cost only:

(option in HE, RFCS, DEP, EDF, SMP,

EU4H, EUAF, UCPM;

mandatory in CEF, CCEI,

HUMA)

For the equipment included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility of purchase costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

For ‘equipment, infrastructure or other assets’ (‘equipment) selected in the sample, that are charged as full capitalised costs (instead of depreciation cost), the practitioner checked that:

 the Grant Agreement explicitly allows that purchases of equipment specifically for the action (or developed as part of the action tasks) may be declared as full capitalised costs

 development costs fulfil the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories

 such capitalised costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase or for the development of the equipment, infrastructure or other assets

 they are recorded under a fixed asset account of the participant in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual cost accounting practices

 there is no double charging of costs (in particular, no charging of depreciation costs for the prototype or pilot plant to the grant or another EU grant).

Costs for renting or leasing such equipment are also eligible if they do not

69) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant during the duration of the action (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities).

YES/NO/N.A.

70) Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO/N.A.

71) Purchases were made according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

YES/NO/N.A.

72) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written confirmation.

YES/NO/N.A.

73) For development costs, the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories are fulfilled.

YES/NO/N.A.

74) The Grant Agreement allows for purchases of equipment, infrastructure or other assets specifically for the action (or developed as part of the action tasks) to be declared as full capitalised costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

24

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets and do not include any financing fees. If the equipment was not purchased but rented or leased, the practitioner should also check that the costs:

 do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets

 do not include any financing fees (e.g. finance charges included in the finance lease payments or interests on loans taken to finance the purchase)

 there is no double charging of costs (e.g. no charging of depreciation costs for equipment previously funded at full cost by an EU grant)

Equipment that does not comply with the specific conditions for full cost (e.g. equipment purchased prior to the action but used for the action) must be declared using the normal depreciation cost.

75) Full capitalised costs were recorded under fixed costs account in the participant’s accounting records in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

76) The full capitalised costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase or for the development of the equipment and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

77) Costs for renting or leasing equipment do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, do not include any financing fees and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

C.2 If depreciation and full cost

for listed equipment:

(option in HE, RFCS, DEP, EDF, SMP,

AMIF/ISF/BM VI, PERI, UCPM)

For the equipment included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The procedure analysed above under cost category C.2 (depreciation only) is performed.

Moreover, for equipment purchased specifically for the action (or developed as part of the action tasks) costs may exceptionally be declared as full capitalised costs, if these assets are listed under art. 6.C.2.

For equipment that is charged at full acquisition cost, to confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

78) The standard findings under cost category C.2 (depreciation only) are fulfilled.

YES/NO/N.A.

79) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant during the duration of the action (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities).

YES/NO/N.A.

80) For development costs, the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories are fulfilled.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

25

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

 the Grant Agreement explicitly allows that the equipment may be declared as full capitalised costs. Such equipment must be listed in art. 6.C.2.

 development costs fulfil the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories

 such capitalised costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase or for the development of the equipment, infrastructure or other assets

 they are recorded under a fixed asset account of the participant in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual cost accounting practices.

 there is no double charging of costs (in particular, no charging of depreciation costs for the prototype or pilot plant to the grant or another EU grant).

Costs for renting or leasing such equipment are also eligible if they do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets and do not include any financing fees. If the equipment was not purchased but rented or leased, the practitioner should also check that the costs:

 do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, infrastructure or assets

 do not include any financing fees (e.g. finance charges included in the finance lease payments or interests on loans taken to finance the purchase)

 there is no double charging of costs (e.g. no charging of depreciation costs for equipment previously funded at full cost by an EU grant).

81) The equipment whose costs were declared as full capitalised costs were listed under art.6.C.2 as equipment whose costs may be declared as full capitalised costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

82) Full capitalised costs were recorded under fixed costs account in the participant’s accounting records in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

83) The full capitalised costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase or for the development of the equopment and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

84) Costs for renting or leasing equipment do not exceed the depreciation costs of similar equipment, do not include any financing fees and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

26

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Equipment costs (C.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

C.2 If full cost and

depreciation for listed

equipment:

(option in HE, RFCS, EDF, LIFE, SMP,

UCPM)

For the equipment included in the sample:

The procedure analysed above under cost category C.2 (full cost only) is performed.

However, for the equipment used for the action that are listed under art. 6.C.2, the costs must be declared as depreciation costs. For these assets, the practitioner:

 checked that they are listed under art. 6.C.2 as equipment whose costs must be declared as depreciation costs

 performed the procedure analysed above under C.2 (depreciation only).

85) For the costs declared as full capitalised costs, the standard findings under cost category C.2 (full cost only) are fulfilled.

YES/NO/N.A.

86) The costs of the equipment listed under art. 6.C.2 were declared as depreciation costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

87) For the costs declared as depreciation costs, the standard findings under cost category C.2 (depreciation only) are fulfilled.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

27

Other goods, works and services (C.3)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Other goods, works and services (C.3)

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(Y/N/N.A.)

Article 6.2.C.3

C.3 OTHER GOODS, WORKS AND SERVICES

Article 6.2.C.3

C.3 OTHER GOODS,

WORKS AND SERVICES

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the other purchases included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility of purchase costs (see above).

Purchases of other goods, works and services for the action must be calculated on the basis of the costs actually incurred. Such goods, works and services include, for instance, consumables and supplies, promotion, dissemination, protection of results, translations, publications, certificates and financial guarantees, if required under the Agreement.

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 purchases of other goods, works and services were declared eligible (as costs actually incurred) in the Grant Agreement

88) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

89) Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO/N.A.

90) Purchases were made according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

YES/NO/N.A.

91) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

28

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Other goods, works and services (C.3)

Grant Agreement

Article Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(Y/N/N.A.)

 the contracts did not cover tasks described in Annex 1 GA (these should be charged as subcontracting costs)

 the goods, works or services were purchased specifically for the action and they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents such as delivery note invoice or any other proof demonstrating the link to the action)

 the goods were not placed in the inventory of durable equipment (otherwise they should be charged as equipment costs)

 the costs charged to the action were accounted in line with the participant’s usual accounting practices. If it is the participant’s usual accounting practice to consider some of these costs (or all of them) as indirect costs, they cannot be declared as direct costs.

confirmation.

92) Contracts for works or services did not cover tasks described in Annex 1 GA.

YES/NO/N.A.

93) Costs were allocated to the correct action and the goods were not placed in the inventory of durable equipment.

YES/NO/N.A.

94) The costs were charged in line with the participant’s accounting practices and were adequately supported.

YES/NO/N.A.

95) Correct and complete entry made in the accounting system of the participant.

YES/NO/N.A.

Other cost categories (D.)

Financial support to third parties (D.1)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Financial Support to third parties (D.1)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A. )

Article 6.2.D D. OTHER COST CATEGORIES

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

29

Article 6.2.D.1

D.1 FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO THIRD PARTIES

Article 6.2.D.1

D.1 FINANCIAL

SUPPORT TO THIRD

PARTIES

(all programmes except RFCS,

SMP ESS, EUAF,

CUST/FISC, CCEI, PERI, TSI, UCPM)

D.1 If actual costs:

(all except SMP COSME

EYE)

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the FSTP items included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner checked that the costs for providing financial support to third parties ((in the form of grants, prizes or similar forms of support; if any):

 were declared eligible in the Grant Agreement

 the maximum amount of financial support to each third party is not more than the amount per recipient set out in the Data Sheet or otherwise agreed with the granting authority and in compliance with the applicable call conditions under which the Grant Agreement has been issued

The practitioner also:

 reconciled the list of recipients for whom costs have been claimed with the proposals and project documentation.

 checked the existence of signed agreements/acceptance forms between the participants and the recipients. Unless otherwise provided for in the call conditions, financial support to third parties needs to be given directly from the EU grant participant to the (final) recipients, without further intermediaries.

 checked if there were audits undertaken by the participant on the recipients. Trace the cost adjustments to the financial statements to the EU and ensure that they were taken into account.

96) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re- invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

97) The costs for providing financial support to third parties were declared eligible in the call conditions and the Grant Agreement.

YES/NO/N.A.

98) The costs did not exceed the maximum amount of financial support to each third party.

YES/NO/N.A.

99) The support has been awarded in line with the conditions defined in Annex 1 GA.

YES/NO/N.A.

100) The (minimum) conditions for the support are set out in Annex 1 GA and that these were also already part of the proposal.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

30

The practitioner checked that the support is implemented in accordance with the conditions set out in Annex 1 GA that must ensure objective and transparent selection procedures and include at least the following minimum conditions:

 for grants (or similar):

 the maximum amount of financial support for each third party (‘recipient’); this amount may not exceed the amount set out in the Data Sheet or otherwise agreed with the granting authority

 the criteria for calculating the exact amount of the financial support

 the different types of activity that qualify for financial support, on the basis of a closed list

 the persons or categories of persons that will be supported and

 the criteria and procedures for giving financial support

 for prizes (or similar):

 the eligibility and award criteria

 the amount of the prize and

 the payment arrangements

 for other kinds of financial support to third parties:

 the maximum amount of financial support for each third party (‘recipient’); this amount may not exceed the amount set out in the Data Sheet or otherwise agreed with the granting authority

 the criteria for determining the exact amount

 the types of activities to be funded

 the types of recipients eligible.

If a call allows financial support to third parties, directly or via implementing partners, in repayable form such as (micro)loans or other financial instruments with a long-term character that exceed by their nature the duration of the action and Annex 1 GA must provide for specific conditions on cost eligibility and acceptance. The practitioner checked that these

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

31

specific conditions are fulfilled.

The practitioner checked that the support is implemented in compliance with specific call conditions (if any).

D.1 If unit costs:

(SMP COSME EYE)

N/A

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

32

Internally invoiced goods and services (D.2)

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Internally invoiced goods and services (D.2)

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.D.2

D.2 INTERNALLY INVOICED GOODS AND SERVICES

Article 6.2.D.2

D.2 INTERNALLY

INVOICED GOODS AND

SERVICES (unit costs

calculated in accordance with usual

cost accounting practices)

(HE, DEP, EDF)

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the internally invoiced items included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

‘Internally invoiced goods and services’ means goods or services which are provided within the participant’s organisation directly for the action and which the participant values on the basis of its usual cost accounting practices. This budget category covers the costs for goods and services that the participant itself produced or provided for the action.

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 the units have been actually implemented (used or produced)

 the units were necessary for the implementation of the action

 the participant did not declare costs covered by the unit cost also under other cost categories

101) The cost were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

102) The methodology of the practitioner included at least the method to determine the amount per unit used, adequate supporting records and documents to prove the number of units declared, details of the number of units declared and the amount per unit used making up the total costs claimed etc.

YES/NO/N.A.

103) The number of units for internal invoices have been actually implemented (used or produced) and necessary for the implementation of the action.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

33

 the specific eligibility conditions set out in the Grant Agreement (if any) were complied with.

Costs of internally invoiced goods and services must be declared as unit costs in accordance with usual cost accounting practices of the participant. The usual cost accounting practices of the participant must define both the unit (e.g. hour of use of wind tunnel, one genomic test, one electronic wafer fabricated internally, etc) and the methodology to determine the cost of the unit.

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner:

 obtained records and documents supporting the costs claimed as unit costs to understand the methodology used

 obtained a description of the participant’s usual cost accounting practice to calculate costs of internally invoiced goods and services (unit costs)

 checked whether the participant’s usual cost accounting practice was applied for the financial statements subject of the present CFS

 ensured that the participant’s usual cost accounting practices to calculate unit costs is being used in a consistent manner, regardless of the source of funding

 checked that the same unit cost has been applied in a consistent manner in other transactions not involving EU grants

 checked that any ineligible costs or any costs claimed under other budget categories, have not been taken into account when calculating the costs of internally invoiced goods and services (see art. 6)

 checked whether actual costs of internally invoiced goods and services were adjusted on the basis of budgeted or estimated elements and, if so, verified whether those elements used are actually relevant for the calculation, and correspond to verifiable information. Estimates represents less than 5% of the declared costs

 for all programmes except Horizon Europe: checked that any costs of items which are not directly linked to the production of the invoiced goods or service (e.g. supporting services like cleaning, general accountancy, administrative support, etc. not directly used for

104) The costs declared as internal invoices do not include costs declared under other cost categories.

YES/NO/N.A.

105) The specific eligibility conditions set out in the Grant Agreement (if any) have been fulfilled.

YES/NO/N.A.

106) The costs of internally invoiced goods and services included in the financial statement were calculated in accordance with the participant’s usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

107) The usual cost accounting practices used to calculate the costs of internally invoiced goods and services were applied by the participant in a consistent manner regardless of the source of funding.

YES/NO/N.A.

108) It is the usual practice of the participant to calculate a unit cost for these good or service based on objective criteria that are verifiable.

YES/NO/N.A.

109) Unit costs have been applied in a consistent manner in other transactions not involving EU grants.

YES/NO/N.A.

110) The unit cost is calculated using the actual costs for the good or service recorded in the participant’s accounts, excluding any ineligible cost, costs included in other budget categories, or costs of resources that do not belong to the participant and which it uses free of charge.

YES/NO/N.A.

111) The cost items used for calculating the actual costs of internally invoiced goods and services were relevant, and correspond to verifiable information.

YES/NO/N.A.

112) Costs of items used for calculating the costs internally invoiced goods and services are supported

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

34

production of the good or service) have not been taken into account when calculating the costs of internally invoiced goods and services

 for all programmes except Horizon Europe: checked that costs of resources that do not belong to the participant and which it uses free of charge (e.g. personnel or equipment of a third party provided free of charge), have not been taken into account when calculating the costs of internally invoiced goods and services (see art. 6), because those costs are not in its accounts (see art. 6.1(a)(v))

 checked that any costs of items used for calculating the costs internally invoiced goods and services are supported by evidence and registered in the accounts.

by evidence and registered in the accounts.

113) Allocation keys used are those defined in the participant participant’s usual costs accounting practices used for the non EU funded projects.

YES/NO/N.A.

 for Horizon Europe: checked that the amount per unit, for providing internally the good or service, has been calculated using the actual direct and indirect costs recorded in the participant’s accounts, attributed either by direct measurement or on the basis of cost drivers in line with participant’s accounting practices.

114) The amount per unit has been calculated using the actual direct and indirect costs recorded in the participant’s accounts, attributed either by direct measurement or on the basis of costs drivers as defined in the participant participant’s usual costs accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

35

Other cost categories (D.[X])

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Other cost categories (D.[X])

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category

Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A. )

Article 6.2.D.2

D.2 CEF STUDIES

Article 6.2.D.2

D.2 CEF STUDIES

(only CEF)

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the studies included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 studies were declared eligible (as costs actually incurred) in the Grant Agreement

 the costs for the studies were incurred specifically for the action and they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents demonstrating the link to the action)

 the costs fulfil the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories (cost categories A-C for the underlying types of costs, i.e. personnel, subcontracting, purchases).

115) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

116) The cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories (cost categories A-C for the underlying types of costs, i.e. personnel, subcontracting, purchases) are fulfilled (see above).

YES/NO/N.A.

Article D.3 CEF SYNERGETIC ELEMENTS

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

36

6.2.D.3

Article 6.2.D.3

D.3 CEF SYNERGETIC ELEMENTS

(only CEF)

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the synergetic elements included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 synergetic elements were declared eligible (as costs actually incurred) in the Grant Agreement

 the costs for the synergetic elements were incurred specifically for the action and they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents demonstrating the link to the action)

 the costs are related to elements identified as synergetic during the evaluation, that concern another sector of the CEF Programme (transport, energy or digital) and that allow to significantly improve the socio-economic, climate or environmental benefits of the action

 the costs fulfil the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories (cost categories A-C for the underlying types of costs, i.e. personnel, subcontracting, purchases).

The 20% cost eligibility ceiling set out in art. 6.2.D.3 will be checked by the granting authority at the final payment.

117) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

118) The costs are related to elements identified as synergetic during the evaluation, that concern another sector of the CEF Programme (transport, energy or digital) and that allow to significantly improve the socio-economic, climate or environmental benefits of the action

YES/NO/N.A.

119) The cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories (cost categories A-C for the underlying types of costs, i.e. personnel, subcontracting, purchases) are fulfilled (see above).

YES/NO/N.A.

Article 6.2.D.4

D.4 CEF WORKS IN OUTERMOST REGIONS

Article D.4 CEF The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

37

6.2.D.4 WORKS IN OUTERMOST

REGIONS

(only CEF)

category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the works included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 works in outermost regions were declared eligible (as costs actually incurred) in the Grant Agreement

 the costs for the works in outermost regions were incurred specifically for the action and they were correctly allocated to the action (with supporting documents demonstrating the link to the action)

 the costs are related to works in an outermost region within the meaning of Article 349 TFEU (Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Réunion, Saint-Barthélemy, Saint-Martin, the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands).

 the costs fulfil the cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories (cost categories A-C for the underlying types of costs, i.e. personnel, subcontracting, purchases).

120) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities) during the duration of the action in accordance with its usual cost accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

121) The costs are related to works in an outermost region within the meaning of Article 349 TFEU (Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Réunion, Saint-Barthélemy, Saint-Martin, the Azores, Madeira and the Canary Islands).

YES/NO/N.A.

122) The cost eligibility conditions applicable to their respective cost categories (cost categories A-C for the underlying types of costs, i.e. personnel, subcontracting, purchases) are fulfilled (see above).

YES/NO/N.A.

Article 6.2.D.5

D.5 CEF LAND PURCHASE

Article D.5 CEF LAND The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

38

6.2.D.5 PURCHASE

(only CEF)

all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled _____ items out of a total of _____.

For the land purchases included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility of purchase costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 land purchase costs were declared eligible (as costs actually incurred) in the Grant Agreement

 the call conditions explicitly allow for the eligiblity of land purchase

 the costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase

 they are recorded under a fixed asset account of the participant in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual cost accounting practices

 there is no double charging of costs.

Costs related to long-term renting /leasing or concession of the land are eligible, provided that it is proportional to the duration of the EU project. If the land was not purchased but part of a long-term rental/leasing or concession, the practitioner should also check that the costs are:

 proportional to the duration of the EU project.

The 10% cost eligibility ceiling set out in art. 6.2.D.5 will be checked by the granting authority at the final payment.

123) The Grant Agreement and call conditions explicitly allow for the eligiblity of land purchase costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

124) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant during the duration of the action practices (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities).

YES/NO/N.A.

125) Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO/N.A.

126) Purchases were made according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

YES/NO/N.A.

127) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written confirmation

YES/NO/N.A.

128) Full capitalised costs were recorded under fixed costs account in the participant’s accounting records in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual accounting practices.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

39

129) The full capitalised costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO/N.A.

130) Long-term renting/leasing or concession of the land are proportional to the duration of the EU project.

YES/NO/N.A.

Article 6.2.D.2]

D.2 LIFE LAND PURCHASE

Article 6.2.D.2

D.2 LIFE LAND

PURCHASE

(only LIFE)

The practitioner draws a sample to carry out the procedures under this cost category. The sample should be selected randomly. It should cover 10% of all items for which costs were declared, with a minimum sample of 10 items (or all if less than 10 items were declared).

Note: ‘Item’ is understood as 1 line in the detailed cost breakdown.

The practitioner sampled ____ items out of a total of _____.

For the land purchase items included in the sample:

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility and ineligibility of costs (see above).

The practitioner carried out the general checks for eligibility of purchase costs (see above).

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked that:

 land purchase costs were declared eligible (as costs actually incurred) in the Grant Agreement

 the call conditions explicitly allow for the eligiblity of land purchase

 the costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase

 they are recorded under a fixed asset account of the participant in compliance with international accounting standards and the

131) The call conditions explicitly allow for the eligiblity of land purchase costs.

YES/NO

132) The costs were eligible (no ineligible components), identifiable and verifiable, linked to the action and incurred by the participant during the duration of the action practices (proof of payment, no re-invoicing to other entities).

YES/NO

133) Purchases were made using the participant’s usual purchasing practices and, if applicable, other documents/procedures required for compliance with national law on public procurement.

YES/NO

134) Purchases were made according to the principle of best value for money (best price-quality ratio) or the lowest price.

YES/NO

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

40

Indirect costs (E.)

participant’s usual cost accounting practices

 there is no double charging of costs

 the specific conditions set out in art. 6.2.D.2 are fulfilled.

Long-term lease of land or one-off compensations for land use rights are also eligible, under the same conditions as purchase costs. If the land was not purchased but part of a long-term lease or one-off compensation for land use, the practitioner should also check that the lease:

 is of at least 20 years (unless provided otherwise in the call conditions)

 includes provisions and commitments that ensure the achievement of its objectives in terms of habitat and species protection

and that the costs:

 do not exceed the full purchase costs of similar land (cost-efficient)

 do not include any financing fees (e.g. finance charges included in the finance lease payments or interests on loans taken to finance the purchase)

 there is no double charging of costs.

135) The participant applied procedures to ensure the absence of conflict of interest and based on our examination nothing came to our attention that could indicate a potential conflict of interest. The participant has provided the required written confirmation

YES/NO

136) Full capitalised costs were recorded under fixed costs account in the participant’s accounting records in compliance with international accounting standards and the participant’s usual accounting practices.

YES/NO

137) The full capitalised costs correspond to the costs incurred in the purchase and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO

138) Long-term lease of land or one-off compensations for land use rights is of at least 20 years (unless provided otherwise in the call conditions) and includes provisions and commitments that ensure the achievement of its objectives in terms of habitat and species protection

YES/NO

139) Costs for long-term lease of land or one-off compensations for land use rights do not exceed the full purchase costs of similar land (are cost efficient), do not include any financing fees and there is no double charging of costs.

YES/NO

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Indirect costs (E.)

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

41

Currency for financial statements and conversion into euro

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 6.2.E E. INDIRECT COSTS

Article 6.2.E E. INDIRECT COSTS

If flat-rate:

(mandatory in all

programmes; option in

EDF)

N/A

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Currency for financial statements and conversion into euro

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 21.3 CURRENCY FOR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND CONVERSION INTO EUROS

Article 21.3 CURRENCY CONVERSIO

N

For the samples from all cost categories:

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner reviewed the samples selected in all cost categories for cost incurred in currencies other than the euro and checked:

 for participants with accounts established in euros: costs incurred in another currency were converted into euro by applying the participant’s usual accounting practices

 for participants with accounts established in a currency other than

140)

Participants with accounts established in euro converted costs in accordance with their usual accounting practice.

OR

For participants with accounts established in a currency other than euro, cost were correctly converted (in accordance with art. 21.3 GA and the corresponding AGA

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

42

Revenues

euros: exchange rates used for converting local currency into euros or other currencies into local currencies were in accordance with art. 21.3 GA and the corresponding AGA — Annotated Grant Agreement* section.

— Annotated Grant Agreement* section).

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — Revenues

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 22.3.4 REVENUES

Article 22.3.4 REVENUES

If no profit rule is NOT activated in the GA Data Sheet OR the

entity is a non-profit

orgranisatio n:

N/A

If the no- profit rule is activated in the GA Data Sheet and

the entity is a for-profit

organisation:

For revenue transactions:

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner examined transactions of revenues to identify any income generated by the action, such as:

 sale of equipment or assets bought for or generated by the project (limited to the claimed eligible cost of purchase); admission fee to a conference carried out by the consortium; sale of the proceedings of a conference.

141) The accounting system allows to identify expenses and revenues related to the action.

YES/NO/N.A.

142) The participant has declared all revenues (i.e. income generated by the action) in the interim and/or final reports.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

43

In-kind contributions

‘Revenue’ is all income generated by the action, during its duration (see art. 4), for participants that are profit legal entities.

For Horizon Europe: Revenue does not include income from exploitation of results, see Annex 5 GA (e.g. commercialising a product or service)

The practitioner also confirmed that revenues related to the action, if any, were duly booked in the participant’s accounts and declared to the granting authority.

CFS AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES — In-kind contributions

Grant Agreement

Article

Cost Category Procedures Standard Finding

Result

(YES/NO/N.A.)

Article 9.2 IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS BY THIRD PARTIES

Article 9.2 IN-KIND CONTRIBUTI

ONS

If in-kind contribution

s allowed but not eligible:

N/A

If in-kind contribution

s allowed and eligible:

(HE)

For all cost categories:

For in-kind contributions provided by third parties free-of charge declared as eligible direct costs by the participants which use them (under the same conditions and relevant cost category as if they were their own):

To confirm the standard findings in the next column, the practitioner checked in the sample of each cost category that:

143) Cost for in-kind contributions were foreseen in Annex 1 GA (or approved via a technical report) and declared under the relevant cost category.

YES/NO/N.A.

144) The rights of bodies mentioned in art. 25 are also ensured towards the third party giving in-kind contributions.

YES/NO/N.A.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

44

SIGNATURE

For and on behalf of the Audit Firm:

/digitally signed/

_______________________________

Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ

Member of the board

Mart Nõmper

 costs for in-kind contributions were correctly declared in line with art. 6.1 and 9.2

 the third parties and their in-kind contributions are mentioned in Annex 1 GA (or approved via a technical report)

 in line with art. 6.1, costs declared as in-kind free-of-charge do not exceed the direct costs incurred by the contributing third party for the in -kind contribution, by obtaining invoices, accounting entries etc.

The practitioner also checked that there were binding agreements between the participant and the third party that ensured the rights of bodies mentioned in art. 25 are also ensured towards the third party giving in-kind contributions.

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

1

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

1

AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES REPORT ON THE CERTIFICATE ON THE

FINANCIAL STATEMENT (CFS)

To

[Organisation full name

address]

The purpose of this CFS is to provide the EU granting authority with findings in accordance with the

agreed-upon procedures (AUP) set out in the Terms of Reference, in order to be able to assess

whether certain costs (and, if relevant, also revenues) comply with the conditions set out in the EU

Grant Agreement. This report is solely intended for this purpose.

The agreed-upon procedures have been set and determined as appropriate by the EU granting

authority.

The agreed-upon procedures engagement involves our performing the agreed-upon procedures set

out in the Terms of Reference, as agreed with the participant. We do not assess the appropriateness,

nor do we provide an audit opinion or assurance. Had we performed additional procedures, other

matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported.

We, [full name of the practitioner (firm)], established in [full address/city/country], represented for

signature of this CFS by [name and function of an authorised representative],

hereby report that

1 — We are qualified/authorised to deliver this CFS [(for additional information, see appendix to this

certificate)] and are not subject to any conflict of interest.

2 — We have performed the agreed-upon procedures engagement in accordance with the Terms of

Reference (including the agreed-upon procedures checklist, which forms an integral part of the

Terms of Reference), and in particular the following standards:

 the International Standard on Related Services (ISRS) 4400 (revised) Agreed-upon

Procedures Engagements as issued by the International Auditing and Assurance

Standards Board (IAASB)

 the International Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (including International

Independent Standards) issued by the International Ethics Standards Board for

Accountants (IESBA), including the independence requirements

 the International Standard on Quality Control 1 Quality Control for Firms that Perform

Audits and Reviews of financial statements, and Other Assurance and Related Services

Engagements (equivalent).

3 — We have performed the agreed-upon procedures on costs and revenues declared in the

financial statement(s) of [organisation legal name (short name)], PIC [number], under EU

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

2

Grant Agreement No [insert number] — [insert acronym], covering the following reporting

period(s): [insert reporting period(s)].

The relevant costs and revenues subject to this report amount to:

 total actual costs of EUR [insert cost amount]

 total unit cost in accordance with usual cost accounting practices of EUR [insert

cost amount] and

 total revenues of EUR [insert revenue amount].

In accordance with the Terms of Reference, specific cost categories based on unit costs (other

than unit costs in accordance with usual cost accounting practices), flat-rates or lump sums were

not subject to this report. The financial statement(s) for the relevant reporting period(s) contained

such costs amounting in total to EUR [insert number].

4 — We have performed the agreed-upon procedures on the reporting period(s) listed above.

The standard findings could be confirmed, with the following exceptions:

N.[insert number of not confirmed standard finding] – [insert cost category] – [insert amount per reporting period or ‘not quantifiable’)]: [provide factual explanation of ‘NO’- result finding e.g. calculation error, lack of supporting document, non-compliance with national law, etc.]

Repeat as needed

The following agreed-upon procedures (and standard findings) were not applicable:

N.[insert number of not applicable AUP/standard finding] – [insert cost category]: [provide factual explanation of ‘N.A.’-result finding e.g. no cost declared under one of the cost category.]

Repeat as needed

Further remarks:

[insert any additional remarks]

Project: 101142969 — PWinPLan — UCPM-2023-TRACK1-IBA

EU Grants: CFS: V2.2 – 01.03.2025

3

5 — The participant paid a price of EUR [insert amount]) (including VAT of EUR [insert amount]) for

this CFS. [OPTION 1: These costs are eligible under the grant and included in [the financial

statement][(one of) the next financial statements].][OPTION 2: These costs were not charged to

the grant.]

[OPTION: Other comments:

[if needed, insert free text to add additional information depending on the specificities of the CFS (ex.

confidentiality requirements), ensuring that it does not call into question the ToR, Grant Agreement or

other applicable provisions)]]

Annexes: Terms of Reference and AUP checklist (signed and completed)

SIGNATURE

For and on behalf of the Audit Firm: /digitally signed/ _______________________________ Grant Thornton Baltic OÜ Member of the board Mart Nõmper