TITLE

Effectiveness of Internal Control Systems on Financial Accountability in The Gambia Public Sector

By

Sulayman Marenah

(218194195),

BSc, Accountancy, University of The Gambia, 2014

Supervised By: Prof. Michael A. Ayeni, Ph,D,

BEING A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT

SCIENCES, SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT

OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER’S IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(MBA) DEGREE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE GAMBIA.

2019
i|Page

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that this thesis was written by Sulayman Marenah and to the best of our knowledge has

been read, approved and adjudged to be his original work to enable him to meet part of the requirement for

the award of Master of Business Administration (MBA) of the University of the Gambia.

……… maayeni ………………….

Supervisor

…………………………….

Chief Examiner

………………………………..

Dean
ii | P a g e

DEDICATION

Dedicated to my late father Yusupha Marenah, my brother Dr. Musa Marena Jr, my uncles Kebba

A.K Ceesay and Dr. Musa Marenah Snr and all those who played part in my education throughout

my career.
iii | P a g e

Acknowledgment

I wish to thank the Almighty Allah for giving me the opportunity and strengthen to carry out this

research in good health. My profound gratitude to Asst. Prof. Momodou Mustapha Fanneh,

Lecturers of the UTG MBA programme, and my able supervisor, Prof Michael A. Ayeni from

Nigeria for their tireless effort in making this research a possibility.

I wish to thank my boss, Ms. Nessie Golakai-Gould and other colleagues at work for their kind

understanding and support throughout the period of this research. I also wish to thank my beautiful

wife and daughter for their patience, support and for allowing me to use the family time to work

on this research.

A special thanks to the staff of GPPC, UTG, NAO, NEA, GBOS, NYC, NAWCE, GAMTEL,

GIEPA and NANA for taking their time to complete my questionnaire and giving me time for the

interview. Their participation made this research a success.

iv | P a g e

Table of Contents

TITLE............................................................................................................................................................i
CERTIFICATION .......................................................................................................................................i
DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................................. ii
Acknowledgment ........................................................................................................................................ iii
LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................................... vi
KEYWORDS ............................................................................................................................................. vii
Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. viii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................. x
CHAPTER ONE ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction and Background ......................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem ................................................................................................................ 4
1.3 Research Questions .......................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.1 General Question ....................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.2 Specific Question ....................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 0bjectives of the Study ..................................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Research Hypothesis ........................................................................................................................ 6
1.6 Scope of Study................................................................................................................................... 6
1.7 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 6
CHAPTER TWO........................................................................................................................................ 8
Literature Review ................................................................................................................................... 8
2.1 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.1 Internal Control System ........................................................................................................... 8
2.1.2. Internal Control ........................................................................................................................ 8
2.1.3 Financial Accountability ......................................................................................................... 10
2.1.4. Effectiveness of internal control ............................................................................................ 13
2.1.5 Internal Control and Accountability ..................................................................................... 16
2.2 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................................. 17
2.2.1 Agency theory approach ......................................................................................................... 17
2.2.2 Contingency theory approach ................................................................................................ 19
2.2.3 Stewardship Theory ................................................................................................................ 20
2.3 Empirical Review of Related Literature ...................................................................................... 21
CHAPTER THREE ................................................................................................................................. 25
Methodology ............................................................................................................................................. 25
3.1 Research Design.............................................................................................................................. 25
3.2 Area of Study .................................................................................................................................. 25
v|Page

3.2 Population, Sampling Techniques, and Sample size. .................................................................. 25

3.3 Measurement of Variable: ............................................................................................................. 26
3.4 Type and Source of Data Collection ............................................................................................. 27
3.4.1 Type of data and source .......................................................................................................... 27
3.4.2 Data collection.......................................................................................................................... 27
3.5 Validation and Reliability of Research Instruments ................................................................... 27
3.5 Data Analysis Techniques .............................................................................................................. 28
CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................................... 29
Data Presentation and Analysis .............................................................................................................. 29
4.1 Characteristic of Respondents ...................................................................................................... 29
4.2.1 Management Levels response to the Five Components ....................................................... 33
4.2 Inferential Statistic ......................................................................................................................... 39
CHAPTER FIVE ...................................................................................................................................... 43
Conclusions and Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 43
5.1 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................... 43
5.2 Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 44
5.3 Limitations of the Study................................................................................................................. 44
5.4 Suggested Areas for Future Research .......................................................................................... 45
References ................................................................................................................................................. 46
Appendices ................................................................................................................................................ 53
Questionnaire ........................................................................................................................................ 53
Percentage response per level of management .................................................................................. 61
Percentage age distribution per department ....................................................................................... 64
Percentage number of years respondents spent in their department .............................................. 65
vi | P a g e

LIST OF TABLES

Tables Page

1 Socio-Demographic Characteristic of Respondents 25

2 Number of years spent in your department 27

3 Management Level and Control environment 28

4 Management level and Control Activity 29

3 Management level and Risk Assessment 29

5 Management Level and Information & Communication 30

6 Management Level Monitoring and Evaluation 31

7 Evaluating the effectiveness of the internal control components 33

8 Summary Statistic of the components 34

vii | P a g e

KEYWORDS

Internal Controls, Management, Financial Accountability, Public Sector, Auditor, The Gambia
viii | P a g e

Acronyms and Abbreviations

CFAAs Computer Fraud and Abuse Act

COSO Committee of Sponsoring Organizations

CPIA Country Policy and Institutional Assessment

FI Financial Instruction

FPAC Finance and Public Accounts Committee

GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Standards

GAMTEL Gambia Telecommunication Company

GIEPA Gambia Investment and Export Agency

GBOS Gambia Bureau of Statistics

GPMB Gambia Produce Marketing Board

GPPC Gambia Public Printing Corporation

GPTC Gambia Public Transport Cooperation

GBOS Gambia Bureau of Statistics

IIAG Ibrahim Index of African Governance

IFAC International Federation of Accountants

IFMIS Integrated Financial Management Information System

INTOSAI International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions

IPSAS International Public Sector Accounting Standards

MDA Ministry Department and Agency

MTEF Medium Term Expenditure Framework

NAWEC National Water and Electricity Company

PAC Public Accounts Committee

PAC/PEC Public Accounts Committee/Public Enterprise Committee

PAGE Programme for Accelerated Growth And Employment

ix | P a g e

PBB Programme Based Budgeting

PFM Public Financial Management

PWD Public Works Department

UTG University of The Gambia

MGT Management

NANA National Nutrition Agency

NEA National Environment Agency

NOA National Audit Office

NYC National Youth Council

SOEs State Own Enterprises

x|Page

ABSTRACT

The Internal control system plays a key role in the assurance chain toward financial accountability.

However, literature expressed that abuse, error and wastes are common in Gambia’s public sector.

Incidentally, literature has not provided enough evidential matter as to why these problems.

Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the internal control system

on financial accountability in The Gambian public sector. Data was gathered through the

distribution of hundred (100) copies of questionnaire to ten public institutions (GPPC, UTG, NAO,

NEA, GBOS, NYC, NAWCE, GAMTEL, GEIPA, and NANA). The sample size of ten (10)

institutions with constitute twelve percent of the population size of seventy-two (72) public

institutions which constitute 14% of the population were used in the study. The purposive and

convenient sampling technique was adopted. Data were collected through interviews and

questionnaires. The data collected were analyzed using the statistical package call the Stata

computer software program. The study revealed that; over 50% of the public institutions do not

meet at least 80% of the principles of the components of the internal control system.

It was concluded that The Gambia public sector internal control system is not effective to ensure

financial accountability because all the five components are not operating effectively and that there

is a position relationship between internal control and financial accountability. The null hypothesis

cannot be rejected
1|Page

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Introduction and Background

Drawing from Statements of Standard Auditing Practices No. 6 (SAP 6) which defines internal

control as “the plan of organization and all the methods and procedures adopted by the

management of an entity to assist in achieving management objectives of ensuring as far as

practicable, the orderly and efficient conduct of its business, including adherence to management

policies, the safeguarding of assets, prevention and detection of fraud and error, the accuracy and

completeness of accounting records and the timely preparation of reliable financial information”.

Soudani (2013). Management’s responsibility for establishing adequate systems of internal control

is emphasized, but it is acknowledged that the auditor must plan the audit to provide a 'reasonable

expectation' of detecting material misstatements. Internal control systems are emerging as public

objects of regulatory attention in a way that they were not before. The concepts of internal control

have been debated and defined. So, the changes in the financial services sector are more complex

than merely requiring auditors to be explicit about what they have always done anyway.

The external auditor is located in a new space of programmatic expectations with the risks and

rewards that this entails. The audit explosion is to do with the need to install a publicly auditable

self-inspecting capacity which attempts to link ideals of accountability to those of self-learning.

The rise of internal control as the auditable object has also made the role of internal auditors more

visible and has re-opened debates about optimal balances between internal and external auditing

arrangements for assurance which may trade off competence and proximity against independence.

The development of sampling procedures for auditing seems on the surface to be unproblematic

but dip inside, the process is not rigor enough to unveil all the issues. To recap the official story,

as governments grew in size so did the number of transactions they conducted. Auditors quickly

realized that they could not audit, except in the most superficial manner, every transaction. The

audit would simply be too expensive. Furthermore, there was no need to look at all transactions if
2|Page

public institutions themselves are engaged in a process of self-checking through their own internal

control system `

This paper is a research on the study of the effectiveness of internal control on financial

accountability in public institutions in The Gambia.

Public institutions in The Gambia represent the most dominant economic forces, so efficiency and

effective systems of government financial management in the form of internal control are essential

measuring assets. It is also for facilitating the emergence of economic maturation processes

through accountability. There is a general opinion that most of the public enterprises have failed

to deliver on the purposes for which they were established. Management ineffectiveness and

inefficiency have been blamed most.

According to Lee, Johnson & Joyce, (2004), internal control is desired to provide some assurance

to stakeholders that scarce resources are not diverted away from basic considerations inherent in

financial management system design. The diversion of scarce resources has profoundly affected

the traditional accountability of government to the public where the internal control system is

sometimes sidelined to the extent of poor accountability. International Federation of Accountants

(IFAC) (2006), opined that the severity of high-profile corporate accounting failure which has

increased steadily over the last decade has led to the development of new legislation, standards,

codes, and guidelines. An effective internal control system is desired to ensure compliance with

all of these.

Ironically, the collapse of some public institutions such as the Public Works Department (PWD),

Gambia Public Transport Corporation (GPTC), Gambia Produce Marketing Board (GPMB), etc,

the inefficiency of some government institutions like National Water and Electricity Company

(NAWEC), Gambia Ferry Service, the effect of corrupt officers in The Gambia public service have

made internal control compliance, transparent financial management, and accountability to come

under a sharp scrutiny by the public.

3|Page

The Government’s effort to improve governance, as outlined in the National Development

Plan(NDP) rests on eight strategic priorities- Restoring good governance, human rights citizens’

youth G; stabilizing the economy, stimulating pro-poor growth; modernizing agriculture and

fisheries; investing in people through quality education and health; building infrastructure and

restoring energy to accelerate growth; promoting inclusive and culture centered tourism; reaping

the demographic dividend through youth empowerment and job creation and making the private

sector the engine of growth, transformation, and job creation. Effective public institutions and

efficient service delivery are seen as vital for the achievement of these goals. The government has

implemented several reforms to improve public services recently and will address the remaining

reforms during the NDP implementation period.

Public Financial Management (PFM) reforms (2015-2020) delineated in the NDP include

accountability and transparency in procurement, auditing, and budget credibility. Furthermore,

four (4) other priority issues are identified in the NDP such as: strengthen planning processes;

fiscal discipline; domestic resource mobilization, partnerships, and aid coordination; as well as

strengthening the institutions involved with reforms.

To achieve this all, citizens have a role to play to ensure that corruption is eradicated, or at least

reduced to the minimum level possible. To succeed in the fight, the country must deal ruthlessly

with the root causes of corruption that hold back sustainable economic development and this

requires the adoption of some radical and stringent measures such as a strong internal control

system.

Although works of literature expressed concern over the effectiveness of internal control in the

public sector there are still gaps because there is little empirical evidence on Gambia’s public

sector in the area of internal control.

This study, therefore, will be focused on the effectiveness of internal control on financial

accountability in The Gambia public sector and those connected with it in line with statutory and

professional requirements.
4|Page

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The specific problems highlighted in this study are the effectiveness of internal control on financial

accountability in The Gambian public sector. The problems include poor accountability, slow

economic development, in-effective legal measures. The citizens of The Gambia over the years

have advocated for a proper internal check-in all government establishment which will detect and

control fraud for the citizens to enjoy better service delivery. Of great concern is that although

Information Technology is used to drive internal control in The Gambia’s Public Sector this has

not been adequately incorporated in the guiding documents especially the Financial Instruction

(FI).

The Gambia is one of five countries to have recorded deterioration in the Ibrahim Index of African

Governance (IIAG) in every category in the past four years. The Gambia shows overall governance

deterioration (-1.7) since 2011. In the 2015 IIAG, Gambia scored 50.5 out of 100 in overall

governance, ranking 27th out of 54 countries in Africa. This trend is reinforced at the sub-category

level, with the Gambia registering only minimal progress in Rights, Business Environment and

Education. The Gambia’s broad-based downturn in governance performance, even in the Human

Development category, in which it receives its highest rank, is a particular cause for concern.

Furthermore, Gambia scored 29 points out of 100 in Transparency International’s 2014 Corruption

Perceptions Index. The index in the Gambia averaged 27.83 points from 2003 until 2014, reaching

an all-time high of 35 points in 2011 and a record low of 19 points in 2008.

According to the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) Assessment 2014; The

effect of non-compliance with internal control rules and procedures undermines efficient service

delivery through potential wastage of resources. Efficient service delivery is also jeopardized by

arrears accumulated outside the system, which, as abovementioned, have caused new and

supplementary appropriations to be directed to the payment of outstanding arrears from previous

years, and by the large reallocations during the year between budget headings
5|Page

Salawu &Agbeja (2007) study, which examined auditing and accountability mechanisms in the

public sector, provided a significant contribution towards the need for strong internal control. In

The Gambia, there is very little empirical evidence on the study of internal control in the public

sector. Therefore, this study focuses on evaluating the effectiveness of internal control on financial

accountability in the public sector.

1.3 Research Questions

This study attempts to provide answers to the following questions in order to achieve the set

objectives:

1.3.1 General Question

How effective is the internal control system in The Gambia public sector, to ensure financial

accountability?

1.3.2 Specific Question

To what extent is an internal control system operative in The Gambia’s Public Sector?

To what extent does the control environment adhere to the FI guidelines and COSO integrated

framework?

To what extent does the control activity adhere to the FI guidelines and COSO integrated

framework?

To what extent does the information and communication technology help to evaluate the reporting

system and test if the FI guidelines are working?

To what extent does monitoring and evaluation help in the internal control system?

Is the risk assessment mechanism effective to detect risk the institution is exposed to?

1.4 0bjectives of the Study

The objective of this research is to:

i. Evaluate the effectiveness of the internal control framework of checks and balances

instituted by the government on transparent financial management in the Public Sector.

6|Page

iii. Provide a basis for understanding the effect of inefficient and unreliable internal control

system on accountability.

1.5 Research Hypothesis

H0: The internal control systems of The Gambia public sector is not effective to ensure financial

accountability

H1: The internal control systems of The Gambia public sector are effective to ensure financial

accountability.

1.6 Scope of Study

This study examines and attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of the internal control system in

The Gambia public sector in its entity focusing on public service. The focus of the research in

terms of the study area is the public enterprises/agencies. This research work covers public

institutions with proximity mainly due to time, finance, distance, and other commitments. The

research, therefore, uses convenience sampling.

This study is limited to respondents located in public enterprises/agencies with proximity to the

UTG due to financial and logistics constraints. Future research is necessary to extend the scope of

the study to cover the nation. Also, the study is concerned with the internal control operatives in

the public sector; the future study should cover other areas.

Finally, the operational aspect of internal control was a major focus of this study, it is suggested

that the human aspect of internal control and intensive effect of Information Technology on

Internal Control should be studied in future.

1.7 Significance of the Study

This study will contribute to the literature designed to assess the consequences of a lack of effective

internal control in The Gambia’s public service. It will be among the first to provide evidence

about the potential benefits of strong internal control in terms of the quality of externally reported

financial information. Amudo & Inanga (2009) opined that a proactive preventive approach to

addressing the importance of internal control requires a critical evaluation of internal control
7|Page

structures to determine their effectiveness. This study will empirically link the strength of financial

accountability in The Gambia public sector to the effectiveness of internal control most

importantly because the research design will allow testing of the effectiveness of internal control

on financial accountability in The Gambia public sector.

This study will add to the existing literature on internal control, financial accountability in

Gambia’s public sector. The study will have the potential of improving internal control system

development in the public sector with a view to achieving an effective and efficient public sector

financial accountability.

By covering all material areas of public opinion linking internal control to financial accountability,

this study will afford government setting high-level principles, broad thinking and appropriate

perception about the application of the internal control system. It will also provide a basis for

improving communications with the Public Accounts Committee (PAC and identify promising

future research opportunities for the academic community. It will specifically focus on how the

communication process may affect overall financial reporting quality, internal controls, control

environments, as well as matters that potentially impact financial reporting and should interest the

PAC/PEC such as in the area of management discussion and analysis.

Finally, the study will specifically link the findings from academic research to the discussion

questions posed by the public from time to time. Several potential implications of the findings

should also interest regulators addressing issues related to public governance and financial

accountability. This study will be of immense value to public servants as it highlights the effect of

compliance with the internal control system. It will be of benefit to students, and researchers in

the face of little empirical literature available in this area of study. The outcome of the study shall

provide a reference for the internal control of public sector financial accountability. Policy

recommendations and opportunities for future research will be enhanced through this study.
8|Page

CHAPTER TWO

Literature Review

2.1 Conceptual Framework

In the modern business world, the term “Internal Control” is being used to refer to two basic

concepts: The Internal Control System and the Internal Control itself.

2.1.1 Internal Control System

The Internal Control System refers to an organized amalgamation of functions and

procedures, within a complete system of controls established by the management and whose

purpose is the successful function of the business (Cheung, 1997). The Internal Control System

is all the methods and procedures followed by the management in order to ensure, to a great extent,

as much successful cooperation as possible with the director of the company, the insurance of the

capital, the prevention and the detection of fraud, as well as the early preparation of all the useful

financial information (Meigs, 1984 ; Papadatou, 2005). According to Cook & Wincle (1976), the

Internal Control System resembles the human nervous system which is spread throughout the

business carrying orders and reactions to and from the management. This means it is directly linked

to the organizational structure and the general rules of the business.

2.1.2. Internal Control

The term was adopted by the Anglo-Saxons (“Internal Auditing”) and refers to the unit of

Internal Control which aims at the evaluation of the sufficient functioning of the Internal Control

System, that is the secondary functions (Controls) and suggests that there is room for

improvements in cases where weaknesses are being discovered (Financial Postman magazine,

2004). Coso (1998) divided internal controls into two complementary forms, the accounting

controls, and administrative controls. Accounting controls were viewed as safeguards to control

assets and ensure accuracy of financial records while administrative controls are safeguards

designed to provide operational efficiency and adherence to policies and procedures. In essence,

a system of internal control goes beyond those matters which relate directly to the functions of
9|Page

accounting and the financial statements. In addition, based on the ASOBAC (Committee on Basic

Auditing Concepts, 1973), internal control is a systematic procedure which will lead to evaluate

the degree of correlation between those established criteria and the real results of the business.

Internal Control, as defined by the APC (Auditing Practices Committee, 1980), is an independent

examination and certification from an inspector appointed by the business to control the finances

according to the legal framework established each time. It further states that; internal control is a

systematic review and a subjective investigation of one element and encompasses the verification

of the specific information as these are determined from the general practice. The internal control

helps the company to achieve its goals using a systematic approach to assess the effectiveness of

handling dangers. Internal control, as defined by the Hellenic Institute of Internal Auditors

(Η.Ι.Ι.Α., 2004) is an independent, objective, adequately designed and organized procedure, which

through the technical and the scientific approaches, assess how adequately the system of internal

control functions. From the above definitions, the internal control is not just a one-sided tool for

controlling the order and rightness of certain situations, but it is a method of detecting the value

added up to a company, achieving the index of effectiveness and profitability of the company.

“Besides, the purpose of this control is the intentional, and focused effect of the company on the

current situation, so as this situation to be reformed in the future and become the one that ought to

exist” (Mcnamee & Mcnamee, 1995). The deviation between the already achieved and the

programmed situation can also become possible through controlling the parameter of correct

handling of dangerous situations. Βounton & KellerWalter (1996) claimed that the objective of

Internal Control is, on the one hand, the allowance of the specific and high level of services offered

towards the management, and on the other hand, the allowance of assistance towards the members

of the organization for the most effective practicing of their duties. The Internal Control Systems

are being implemented in businesses as tools that add up value to the company. In this way, we

can achieve a systematic approach towards the most effective operation of the organization, as a

unity (Schleifer and Greenwalt, 1996). Finally, According to COSO(2004), Internal Control is a
10 | P a g e

system consisting of specific policies and procedures designed to provide management with

reliable assurance that the goals and objectives it believes important to the entity will be met. In

their view, the reasons to have internal controls is to promote operational effectiveness and

efficiency, provide reliable financial and administrative information, safeguard assets and records,

encourage adherence to prescribed policies and compliance with regulatory agencies.

2.1.3 Financial Accountability

To have an effective public institution that can deliver basic public services to the citizens,

building a variant financial accountability system is essential. The concept of accountability refers

to the manner resources are used in relation to the objectives of the organization. The term

“accountability” is commonly found in modern public administration theory and practice and is

defined as the fact or condition of being accountable. It means the duty or obligation of those given

responsibilities and resources to explain and justify how they have used the responsibility and

resources in the achievement of agreed objectives (Doussy & Doussy, 2014). Accountability is

originated from financial accounting which is focused on checking the way the books are kept and

how the money is spent This means financial accounting and financial accountability all hope to

achieve a simpler objective. It is the obligation for public officials to report on the usage of public

resources and to achieve performance standards as it relates specifically to the public sector.

However, Khan (2010) construed it as the obligation to render an account for responsibility

conferred. Apaza (2011) opined that an individual who is assigned a task needs to be constrained

over the power exercised. Financial accountability, therefore, is a concern with tracking and

reporting on allocation, disbursement and utilization of financial resources, using the tools of

auditing, budgeting and accounting (Brinkerhoff (2001). The concept of government financial

accountability therefore, is the degree to which the government explains or justifies what it has

done or fails to do to the public or people within its jurisdiction. It connotes the degree to which

those entrusted with public funds apply it for the purposes meant and for the good of the people,

financial accountability ensures that the public money is used in a responsible and productive
11 | P a g e

manner. It involves the verification of legality and regularity of financial accounts to ensure that

the rules and regulations in relation to the programmes and projects under the local government

are complied with and to ensure that the value for money is obtained in the use of the resources

(Rabrenovic 2007). Ibietan (2013) also in a similar view, that financial accountability demands

that government at all levels to ensure that the public funds or resources are judiciously utilized

and be backed with adequate and appropriate records that are supposed to be made publicly

available and accessible and on time for the public assessment to ensure transparency.

Accountability is the obligation that one undertakes for ensuring that a commitment to perform a

responsibility is achieved . Accountability means being able to provide an explanation or

justification and accept responsibility for events or transactions and one’s own actions in relation

to these events or transactions (KIkonyogo, 1999). Munene (2004) stressed that accountability

can be analyzed at the individual, organizational, and general levels. In his view, accountability is

like a Semantic tree: the trunk is governance; the main branch is financial accountability which

feeds other branches like budgeting, accounting, auditing, and records management.

IFAC 2008, describe accountability as a process whereby public service organizations and

individuals within them are held responsible for their decisions and actions, including their

stewardship of public funds, fairness, and all aspects of performance. This will be realized by

developing, maintaining and making available reliable and relevant financial and non-financial

information and by means of fair disclosure of that information in timely reports to internal as well

as external stakeholders. Non-financial information may relate to the economy, efficiency and

effectiveness of policies and operations (performance information), and to internal control and its

effectiveness.

Accountability is likened to enterprise governance when it explains it as “the set of responsibilities

and practices exercised by the board and executive management with the goal of providing

strategic direction, ensuring that objectives are achieved, ascertaining that risks are managed

appropriately and verifying that the organization’s resources are used responsibly”(IFAC 2008).
12 | P a g e

Accordingly, enterprise governance constitutes the entire accountability framework of the

organization.

IFAC (2008), there are two dimensions of enterprise governance: conformance and performance.

Conformance covers issues such as board structures and roles, executive remuneration, and

compliance with the regulation. The conformance dimension focuses on accountability and

assurance while the performance dimension focuses on strategy and value creation.

The above postulations indicated that accountability has the characteristics of transparency,

efficiency, effectiveness and good service delivery where achievements are below agreed levels,

the causes of the underperformance are recognized and possible corrective actions are taken. An

accountability relationship without follow-ups is clearly incomplete and unlikely to be effective.

It is necessary to understand the basic principles of effective accountability.

Kimberly Barata, Piers Cain, Anne Thurston (Aug 1999) in their report on accountability in The

Gambia said, the hallmark of transparency is information that is available on-demand through

regularized and known information channels. This assumes the government’s establishment of a

formal process to inform both its staff and the public. An inadequate information framework is

one of the factors that undermine accountability in The Gambia. Thus, improved access to

information, as well as better-quality information, is crucial for holding public officials responsible

for their actions.

Kimberly Barata, Piers Cain, Anne Thurston (Aug 1999) also argue in their report that many of

the fundamental problems of accountability in The Gambia public service were well known to the

government and its advisors, but the action was delayed. As was the case throughout Africa,

institutional problems were far more serious than originally anticipated, for example, mediocre

leadership, the absence of ‘agencies of constraint,’ and a general lack of accountability (due to,

nepotism, opportunism and corruption). Many Gambian officials and ordinary citizens recognized

that there were abuses within the system and that the government was not accountable to the

people.
13 | P a g e

2.1.4. Effectiveness of internal control

In order to determine internal control efficiency evaluation principles, it is important to

analyze the conceptual framework of internal control. According to the COSO Framework (2013)

for management to conclude that its system of internal control is effective, all five components of

internal control and all relevant principles must be present and functioning. Being “present”

implies a given component or principle exists within the design and implementation of an entity’s

system of internal control. “Functioning” implies the component or principle continues to exist in

the operation and conduct of the control system. Effective internal control also requires that all

five components operate together in an integrated manner.

According to COSO (1998), there exist five components internal controls that must be present in

order to conclude that internal controls are effective namely; Control environment, control

activities, risk assessment, information and communication, and monitoring.

Control environment: Anthony (2004) noted that the control environment sets the tone for the

organization, influencing the consciousness of its people. It is the foundation for all the other

components of internal controls. Success (2004) states that the control environment is the

consciousness of the organization, thus, the atmosphere that compels organizational members to

conduct their activities and responsibilities as per the laid down control objectives. The Institute

of Internal Auditors looks at the control environment as one that dictates upon organizational

members a feeling of consciousness that their continued stay at an organization is assured by the

demonstration of their expected level of competence as well as their comprehension of authority

and responsibility limits.

Control Activities: Craig (1999) states that control activities are the administrative and supervisory

actions that management engages in to keep the organization focused and cautious in addition to

keeping members effective and efficient at task execution. Dublin (1999) considers control

activities as activities that provide evidence that a loss has occurred. They include; analysis,

reconciliations, and reviews.

14 | P a g e

Risk Assessment: COSO (2004) considers risk assessment as the process of identifying and

analyzing relevant risks to the achievement of the entity’s objectives and determining the

appropriate response. It includes risk identification from external and internal factors, at the entity

and the activity levels, risk evaluation, assessment of risk appetite of the organization and the

developing responses of all the risks in the organization.

Information Flow: ACCA (2005) considers information flow as a process through which the right

organizational members receive the right information at the right time. Here, formal and informal

channels information flows are noted. Formal channels comprise of downward or top-down,

upward or respondents and horizontal or lateral forms. The informal channels comprise the

majority grapevine. It is further noted that for information to achieve its intended purpose, it must

be identified, captured, processed and communicated in an authentic, useful and timely manner.

In addition, the information communicated must be reliable, accurate, complete, specific,

understandable, directed to the right people and relevant to the intended users.

Monitoring and Evaluation: The Institute of Internal Auditors (1995) considers monitoring to

encompass activities such as periodical evaluations, Internal audits, and management self-

assessments. Monitoring aims at determining whether organizational members are carrying out or

have carried out their tasks efficiently and effectively as required by the organization’s policies

(Spillane,& Reimer, 2000).

As is explained by the INTOSAI Guidance on Good Governance, i.e. the introductory part of the

GOV 9100 Guidelines, the assessment of internal control systems is a generally accepted standard

for conducting the controls. The guidelines for the internal control standards built on the COSO

model are on the one hand used by the managers of the organizations of public finances as an

example for establishing a solid control framework for their entities, and on the other hand, these

may be applied by the controllers of the public sector as a tool for assessing the internal control

system.
15 | P a g e

Hence, one of the most comprehensive definitions is given by Michael Sass (March 2003). He said

internal control is a fundamental feature of financial management. It is critical to the overall control

of the organization and, ultimately, the quality of delivery of services and performance of

functions. Moreover, it ensures compliance with applicable laws and regulations and safeguards

against loss, misuse, and damage. He said internal control is; (i) a process affected by people (ii)

expected to provide reasonable assurance (iii), not an absolute assurance (iv) geared towards the

achievement of objectives.

János Ivanyos – József Roóz (2009) said internal control is a complex process both with regard to

the public and private sectors, realized by the management and staff of an organization, and

established for the definition of risks and for obtaining reasonable certainty.

The 2013 COSO Framework also indicates major deficiency that exists if an internal control

deficiency or combination thereof severely reduces the likelihood of an entity achieving its

objectives. In other words, if management used its professional judgment to determine that a

control objective isn’t being met because a relevant principle or associated component isn’t present

and functioning, or the five components aren’t operating together, the entity has a major

deficiency.

Though the 2013 Framework uses and defines the terms deficiency and major deficiency,

management should use relevant criteria as established by regulators, standards-setting bodies, and

other relevant third parties for defining the severity of, evaluating, and reporting internal control

deficiencies when reporting under those regulations or standards. Based on the institutional

environment, one can conclude that many standards can be used in order to assess the effectiveness

of internal control. This paper extends the above studies by presenting empirical evidence that

evaluates internal control by assessing the components (as described by the COSO Report) of the

internal control system. In line with the above, the five interrelated components (or criteria) are:

(COSO Framework 2013): Control Environment, Risk Assessment, Control Activities,

Information and Communication, and Monitoring.

16 | P a g e

2.1.5 Internal Control and Accountability

Internal control bridges the credibility gap that may be due to accidental errors, lack of knowledge

of accounting principles, unintentional bias, deliberate falsification and departure from Generally

Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Internal control emphasizes the importance of

transparency as an essential feature of public sector accountability. Internal control fulfills

accountability obligations. According to Gendion Cooper &Townley (2000), internal control is a

management function that is crucial for proper accountability and, accountability for all funds

should be maintained at all times.

According to Kimberly Barata, Piers Cain, Anne Thurston (Aug 1999) The Accounting System of

The Gambia’s public sector reflects all transactions involving the receipt, transfer, and

disbursement of government funds and property. They argue that Control is the dominant, if not

primary, the reason for developing the accounting systems. Effective systems must be comprised

of a set of internal controls that manage the cycle of recording, analyzing, classifying,

summarizing, communicating and interpreting financial information both in aggregate and in detail

to support public sector accounting. These controls regulate the quality of information passing

through the system. They are based on verifiable procedures that control whether transactions are

originated, checked, authorized and recorded according to the accounting manual instructions and

financial regulations.

Kimberly Barata, Piers Cain, Anne Thurston (Aug 1999) further argue in their research that the

disorganized state of the financial records system is a major deterrent for the auditors in achieving

their mandate. As the Auditor General once stated, an audit is all about promoting and upholding

public accountability. Auditors must review a whole range of financial statements, financial

systems and now with the mandate to conduct performance audits; they have to review

management practices. This is where documentary evidence is crucial. In the absence of records

as evidence, an audit cannot proceed, which is what the Auditor General’s Office is currently
17 | P a g e

experiencing. Whenever the office embarks on an audit the first constraint faced is that records are

either not there or, if they are, they are disorganized.

They argue further that; the internal control function does not appear to be effective in securing

compliance with existing accounting procedures. This led to the formation of an Internal Audit

Unit under the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs to provide an appraisal of control

systems and to assist Accounting Officers in fulfilling their responsibilities. The Audit Manual

stipulates that there should be an independent appraisal within the organization to examine,

evaluate and report on accounting, financial and other operations as a service to management.

However, the Internal Audit Unit is, in fact, employed on budgetary control duties and supplying

internal expenditure checks on day-to-day transactions. The Auditor General’s Office has

emphasized the need to define the Internal Audit Unit’s role more clearly and return it to its original

purpose.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

2.2.1 Agency theory approach

According to articles of Coase, R.H. (1937) and Berle, A.A. & Means, G.C. (1967), agency

theory became an important framework to help researchers examine the nature of conflicts

between owners and managers of an organization, thus finding the appropriate solutions to solve

these conflicts. It is perceived as agency problems arise when the counterparties have different

objectives and work assignments (Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W., 1976; Ross, S., 1973).

Specifically, it focuses on agency relationships; in which, one party is the owner and the other is

the manager (the agent). Jensen, M.C. & Meckling, W. (1976), Fama, E.F. (1980), Fama E.F. &

Jensen, M.C. (1983a, 1983b), Jensen, M.C. & Ruback, R.S. (1983) defines an agency relationship

is “a contract under which one or many parties hire another party (the agent) to perform some

service on their behalf and authorize agent to make decisions” (delegate making-decision

authorities to the agent). According to Eisenhardt, K. (1989), agency theory focuses on resolving

two problems rising in agency relationship: agency problem and risk-sharing problem. An agency
18 | P a g e

problem arises when the interests of the owner and the agent lead to conflict, this will lead to

difficulties and the cost of monitoring agents. On the other hand, the problem of sharing risk arises

when the owner and the agent have a different risk attitude. Based on the agency theory by Jensen,

M.C. & Meckling, W. (1976), separating ownership and control will lead to interest conflict; which

often happens in most of the individual activities in a decentralization system between owner and

agent. Consequently, corporate governance is necessary to help enterprises unify interest and share

risks of all members (Hart, O., 1995). It is a system of regulations, rules and policies; to orient,

function and control operations of an enterprise (Gillan, S., 2006). It includes relationships

between various parties, not only with company insiders like shareholders, executive managers,

the board of directors but also with outsiders who have relevant interest: governmental authorities,

business partners and the environment, community and society. As a result, the mechanism of

corporate governance can be divided into internal governance mechanisms and external

governance mechanisms (Gillan, S., 2006; Rezaee, Z., 2007). The internal governance

mechanisms originate from members of the board of directors, executive managers, internal

control and internal audit functions. On the opposite, the external governance mechanisms

originate from the capital market, labor market, government situation, shareholders and investment

activities. The quality of the internal governance mechanism is closely relevant to the better

performance effectiveness of corporate governance (Aman, H. & Nguyen, P., 2008). Among the

above internal governance mechanisms, the governance mechanism of internal control is used in

this study. In conclusion, the agency theory states that the existing agency problems in the

corporate are “the separation of ownership and control, which leads to conflicts in interests”, and

‘risk-sharing”. Corporate governance helps balance the interests of company members. The

corporate governance mechanism can be divided into internal governance and external governance

mechanism. Internal control is one of the internal corporate governance mechanisms.

19 | P a g e

2.2.2 Contingency theory approach

Researchers incorporate theories believe that it is possible to determine the optimized

organizational structure for all companies ((Taylor, M., 1911; Weber, F.W, 1946; Fayol, H., 1949).

However, in reality, the organizational structure has considerably changed. Researchers state that

the previous theories following the viewpoint of Weber, F.W. và Taylor, M. are failed because the

governance style and structure of organizations are affected by environmental aspects, which are

random factors. Thus, there is no best way for leaders and corporate organization. Effectiveness

of a corporate depends on the suitability to structure and organizational contexts such as

environment, strategy, technology, size, organization culture (Chenhall, R.H., 2007). The

suitability theories between organizational structure and situational variables are named

contingency theory. Contingency theory is concerned by many authors and explained in various

ways: “The management or optimized corporate organization is under pressure from internal and

external factors” (Fiedler, F.E., 1964); “The best way to organize depends on organizational

environment of company activities” (Scott, W.R., 1992); “The effectiveness of the solutions rely

on the conditions of the implemented solutions at the company” (Galbraith, J., 1973). The main

research topics in contingency, the situation and organization structure, have to be compatible in

order to work well in a company (Drazin, R. et al, 1985). Donaldson, L. (2001) has an approach

to contingency quite soon in organization theory, he builds up three core factors of the research

model applied in internal control: (1) there is connection between contingency characteristics and

internal control structure; (2) contingency characteristics determine internal control structure; (3)

there is a fit of the level of the internal control structure to each level of contingency characteristics.

The interpretations about contingency are similar documents and internal control framework. The

internal control framework affirms the requirement of internal control is different due to

organization characteristics. These differences are company size, culture, governance philosophy,

objectives, operational environment (Girinjnas L., 2009; Lakis, V. & Girinjnas, L., 2012). This

statement presented in the internal control framework (COSO 1992 and Basel 1998) is analogous
20 | P a g e

to contingency theory that claims that each organization has to choose the most suitable control

system by taking into account contingency characteristics (Fisher, J., 1995; Chapman, C., 1997;

Chenhall, R.H., 2003; Luft, J. & Shields, M., 2003). For the above reasons, the contingency theory

approach provides an explanation of the diversity of internal control in reality (Jokipii, A., 2010).

Contingency theory forms a new approach to examine internal control. The fundamentals of

contingency theory are chosen to be the foundation of the internal framework COSO and Basel.

To conclude, internal control is crucial to corporate operations, but it can change. Contingency

theory provides an approach to research internal control and its effectiveness. Contingency theory

is a new method to examine internal control (Jokipii, A., 2010).

2.2.3 Stewardship Theory

In complementing the above theory, stewardship theory of Donaldson and Davis (1991)

was found significant in explaining internal audit the research framework. This is because the

theory is mainly concerned with the identification of situations in which the interests of the

principal and the steward are aligned. In fact, Ebimobowei and Binaebi (2013) noted that auditing

exists as a result of stewardship concept and stewardship accounting. Adoption of stewardship

approaches within the government sectors will bring a number of changes within the sector

because stewardship theory serves as accountability mechanisms for ensuring good monitoring,

good audit and reporting in order to assists in objective achievement (Cribb, 2006). Equally,

Ebimobowei and Binaebi (2013) recommended that auditing enhance appropriate stewardship

reporting. Therefore, using this kind of theory within the context of government agencies will lead

to the attainment of their respective objectives because the stewardship theory has concerned that

might lead to organizational success. Stewardship theorists put down a model of governance that

promotes the ability of employees to contribute toward strategic objectives achievement

(Hernandez, 2012). Stewardship theory is concerned with the matters that organizations leaders

have the obligation of ensuring better achievement of such organization activities than any other

selfishness (Donaldson & Davis, 1991). Therefore, if the organization did well, its staff will also
21 | P a g e

do well thereby investing their energy in their respective organization’s success (Davis, Allen &

Hayes, 2010). The same applies to local government context, if the local government councils do

well therefore, their internal auditors will also do well toward the objective achievement of the

local government. Stewardship theory has been considered as another alternative to agency theory;

due to the fact that the theory is more comprehensive and more realistic in viewing management

actions and motivations than agency theory. This is because agency theory is based on the

economic models whereas stewardship theory is based upon the psychological literature and

sociological as well (Albrecht, et al, 2004). Stewardship is been considered as a construct that is

suitable to shape important employee behaviors (Schepers, et al (2012). Stewardship theory also

emphasized that stewardship outcomes can be contingent upon specific organizational structures

(Hernandez, 2012). That is why the stewardship theory has also been used for the purpose of

explaining relationships amongst various cultures in family businesses; due to the fact that

researchers have extensively revealed that stewardship assists toward the greater achievement of

family business operations (Davis et al., 2010). Therefore, the theory can also serve as a

complementary theory on the above theory in the context of internal audit effectiveness researches.

2.3 Empirical Review of Related Literature

Ntongo(2012) studied the relationship between internal controls, financial accountability and

service delivery in private health providers of Kampala district. A cross-sectional survey design

was employed in the study and a population of 130 private health facilities mainly those that

participate in government health programs were targeted. The study revealed that there is a

significant positive relationship between internal controls and financial accountability, between

internal control and service delivery, and between financial accountability and service delivery.

Ademola & Alade (2015) examined the effect of an internal control system in Nigeria public sector

using the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation as a case study. Both primary and secondary

sources of data was used while Chi-square and Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to test
22 | P a g e

the hypothesis. The questionnaire elicited measures on segregation of duties, internal verification,

physical control and dues process variables using 150 respondents drawn from finance,

administration, marketing and purchasing departments of the corporation. The study reveals that

the establishment of internal control plays an important role in the prevention of fraud and

irregularities.

International Journal of Commerce and Management Research (July 2018) studied the relationship

between Internal control systems and financial accountability in Uganda: A case of selected

districts in western Uganda: The study conducted was based on cross-sectional survey design.

Both purposive and simple random sampling was used for a sample size of 113 respondents and

the response rate was 100%. The study revealed that the relationship between internal control

systems and financial accountability in local governments appeared to be weak, and the actual

contribution of internal control systems in the financial operations of the district is negligible. It

also identified that an internal control system is inadequate in accounting for the staffing gaps in

local governments and the untimely release of financial reports.

Munene (2013) investigated the effects of internal controls on financial performance in Kenya.

Internal controls were looked at from the perspective of the control environment, internal audit

and control activities whereas financial performance focused on liquidity, accountability and

reporting as its measures. The research was conducted using a survey, correlation and case study

as research designs. Data was collected using Questionnaires as well as a review of available

documents and records from a population of 37 government training institutions in Kenya. Data

were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The study found that management

of the institutions is committed to the control systems, actively participates in monitoring and

supervision of the activities of the government training institutions in Kenya. It was further

revealed that there is a clear separation of roles, weaknesses in the system are addressed. The

investigation recommends competence profiling in the internal audit department and that the
23 | P a g e

institutions establishes and manages a knowledge/information management system to enable all

parties within the institution to freely access and utilize the official information.

William Ofori (2012) examines the effectiveness of internal controls: perception or reality? the

evidence of Ghana post company limited in the Ashanti region. The study uses both purposive and

convenience sampling techniques to select from the different categories of personnel. A sample

size of 50 was drawn from a target population of Ghana Post Company Limited

Ashanti Kumasi. The study revealed that there are internal control systems in Ghana Post

Company Limited. However, the effectiveness of the internal control could not be described

as very strong but rather satisfactory. It further revealed that there was no internal audit unit to

independently monitor compliance of internal control policies and procedures.

Aramide & Bashir (2015) examine the effectiveness of the internal control system and financial

accountability at the local government level in Nigeria. Data were gathered through the distribution

of one hundred and fifty (150) copies of the questionnaire, the responses were analyzed and were

tested using chi-square statistics. Findings from this study show that the internal control system is

positively significant for good financial accountability in the local government area council in

Nigeria. The study recommends that local government authority should increase an effort to ensure

proper and highly effective internal controls system is put in place within local government to

enhance their financial accountability.

Moses (2007) examines the effectiveness of internal control systems in achieving value for money

in local governments. Using the regression analysis, it was revealed that internal control systems

have a significant positive effect in achieving Value for Money. The study further reveals that

there is a significant positive relationship between the control environment, control activities, risk

assessment, information and communication and monitoring and value for money in local

governments.

Adewale (2014) examined the internal control system: A managerial tool for proper accountability

in the Nigerian customs service. The studies recognize two main groups of players in the Nigeria
24 | P a g e

Customs Service namely, administration and enforcement from which 100 officers responded to a

validated questionnaire was used. The hypotheses formulated were tested using Chi-square and it

reveals that a significant difference existed between the internal control system and proper

accountability. Also, effective utilization of information technology plays an important role in the

collection of customs duties. The study also ascertains that an effective internal control system

ensures high revenue generation. These findings provide vivid evidence for recommendations such

as adequate motivation of officers to avoid financial fraud; information technology gadgets should

be provided for all commands and a competent team, of experts to work out the logic of standard

internal control should be put in place.

Morelo (2011) examined the importance of internal control in the Brazilian public administration.

Using a content analytical method, the study reveals that there is existence of records of bribes

payments from suppliers to an employee of the organization, existence of an off-the-books payroll

scheme; service providers hired without the proper selection procedures or execution of a formal

contract, and staffed with significant numbers of family members of institution personnel;

overbilling and overcharging of civil construction projects; uncompleted projects and continued

illicit payments to third parties for advantages not authorized in the legislation governing the

execution of contracts. The study recommends, among others, that proper internal controls should

be enacted to ensure accountability in terms of administration and service delivery.

Cuomo (2005) examined internal control and financial accountability for not-for-profit boards

using charities organizations in America. The study uses a discussion-based model. The study

reviews that carrying out fiduciary responsibilities by the board of directors and officers such as

being financially accountable to the organization is essential to the survival of the organization. A

failure to meet these obligations is a breach of fiduciary duty and can result in financial and other

liability for the board of directors and the officers. Therefore, the study concludes that effective

internal controls will help to protect an organization’s assets and assist in their proper management.
25 | P a g e

CHAPTER THREE

Methodology

This section explains the methods that were used in the study. It describes the research

design, study population, sample size and sampling technique, area of study, data types and

sources and, the data collection instruments. it also includes data analysis procedures employed in

the study.

3.1 Research Design

A cross-sectional survey design was employed in this study. Both qualitative and quantitative

approaches to data collection and analysis were employed in order to get an in-depth

understanding of the phenomenon under investigation and to confirm completeness for

instruments.

3.2 Area of Study

The study focuses on the operational effectiveness of an internal control system in public

enterprises/agencies in The Gambia. Out of the seventy-two public enterprises/agencies, the

researcher selected ten (10) institutions within the greater Banjul area as a sample and hundred

(100) copies of questionnaires were distributed among them. The finance, internal control/Audit

and administrative staff of the ten selected institutions were targeted to respond to the

questionnaires.

3.2 Population, Sampling Techniques, and Sample size.

According to Mason et a1. (2007), the population of a study is the collection of all possible

individuals, objects or measurements of interest. The target population of the study is the

the staff of State-owned enterprises and government that amount to about seventy-two institutions.

The study used both purposive and convenience sampling techniques to select from the different

categories of personnel. In the case of purposive sampling also known as judgmental sampling,

the researcher picks the sample that will deliver the best information in order to satisfy the research
26 | P a g e

objectives in question or with a purpose in mind. For instance, staff at the internal audit,

administration and finance departments were used for the study.

Convenience sampling is a type of non-probability sampling which involves the sample being

drawn from that part of the population which is easy to access. convenience sampling to determine

the number of respondents that will be asked to participate and give information regarding this

research. Convenience sampling will focus on individuals who are experienced or directly deal

with internal control issues in the public sector.

A sample can refer to a set of people or objects chosen from a larger population in order to

represent that population to a greater extent (Mason et al, 1997). In research, it is usually not

possible to study every member of the population involved but some researchers do overcome this

difficulty in situations where the study population itself is small and not very scattered. To address

the challenge of access to the complete population, representative samples are thus prescribed and

accepted in any scientific study. A sample is a finite part of a statistical population whose

properties are studied to gain information about the whole when dealing with people, it can be

defined as a set of respondents (people) selected from a larger population for the purpose of a

survey. A sample size of ten (10) different government institutions (GPPC, UTG, NAO, NEA,

GBOS, NYC, NAWCE, GAMTEL, GEIPA and NANA) participate in this research, this

constitutes 14% of the total population of 72 public enterprises.

3.3 Measurement of Variable:

Internal Control; Items were accomplished by a Likert scale to measure internal

controls. The scales in the following order; “Undecided (1) strongly disagree ( disagree (3) Agree

strongly agree (5)” and a total of all items computed from each respondent reflected internal

control. (Baker, Castro, Labrena & Meyer, 2005).

27 | P a g e

3.4 Type and Source of Data Collection

3.4.1 Type of data and source

A primary and secondary source of data is used largely for the study. Primary data was

sourced from the staff (Administration, Accounting and Internal Audit) often public institutions.

Secondary data was collected from textbooks, particularly in auditing and assurance services,

journals and other publications on internal controls.

3.4.2 Data collection

Questionnaire surveys are the primary method of data collection. The questionnaire was

developed base on the COSO framework of 2013. Internet and textbook surveys will be used to

collect secondary data. Internet surveys have been both hyped for their capabilities and criticized

for the security issues it brings. However, internet surveys require less time for the researcher. The

secondary sources of data also involved the use of books and journals. The study will, therefore,

based on three (3) related research efforts. The first of these involves the use of the internet aimed

at obtaining a broad picture of the effectiveness of internal control on financial accountability in

the public sector. A series of structured and detailed interviews base on the questionnaire will be

undertaken because some of the respondents might not be able to understand the questionnaire and

the third of it is a questionnaire survey. Data was gathered through the distribution of hundred

(100) copies of the questionnaire, eighty-three of the questionnaires were completed and the

responses are analyzed in chapter four.

3.5 Validation and Reliability of Research Instruments

To establish validity, the designed instruments were availed to the supervisor for review and he

gave approval for administration in a pilot survey in two public institutions. The 10 questionnaires

that were distributed in the pilot survey highlighted some weaknesses in the original questionnaire

design and this prompted the researcher to make some necessary adjustments accordingly. The

instruments were also availed to experts in the field of performance management and each item in
28 | P a g e

the instruments were evaluated to certify its relevancy in the questionnaire in relation to the

objectives of the study

3.5 Data Analysis Techniques

Data obtained from respondents were analyzed using the Stata statistical software package. The

result was presented using statistical tools such as tables and charts. Descriptive statistics were

used to analyses the data.

29 | P a g e

CHAPTER FOUR

Data Presentation and Analysis

This section will deal with the presentation of data, as well as analysis and interpretation of the

results. It presents data in the form frequency distribution tables, percentages, and charts to help

in the summary explanation of the findings. The presentation is guided by the research objectives

and statistics were generated with the aim of generating responses for the research questions.

A questionnaire was used to obtain data, it was made up of five (5) sections as per the components

of internal control system; Section A, B, C, D and E. Section A contains Nine (9) questions about

Control Environment, section B contains ten(10) questions relating to the Control Activities,

section C comprises of nine(9) questions focusing on Information and Communication, section D

focus on Risk Assessment whereas section E focus on Monitoring.

4.1 Characteristic of Respondents

The respondents of the study are characterized as follows; gender, age group, level of

education, level of management position held, department of the organization attached to and the

number of years spent in the department. The analysis was as shown in table 4.1

below.

Table 4.1. Socio-Demographic Characteristic of Respondents

Demographic Variable Freq. Percent

Gender

Female 42 50.6

Male 41 49.4

Age of the Respondents

20 – 29 37 44.58

30-39 30 36.14

40-49 12 14.46
30 | P a g e

50 year and above 4 4.82

Management Level

Top Level Management 16 19.28

Middle-Level Management 32 38.55

Low-Level Management 35 42.17

Level of Education

O Level 1 1.2

A Level 2 2.41

Diploma 16 19.28

Certificate 18 21.69

Degree 40 48.19

Others 6 7.23

Department

Administration 16 19.28

Accounts and Finance 43 51.81

Internal Audit 4 4.82

Others 20 24.1

Years In Current Department

1 to 5 years 56 67.47

6 - 10 years 19 22.89

11 -15 years 7 8.43

16 - 20 years 1 1.2

Source: Researchers survey data (2019)

From table 4.1 above, the Gender – characteristics shows that female respondents were the

majority constituting 50.6% in the sample as compared to their male counterparts who were 49.4

percent of the entire sample. This is also manifested on the chart below

Chart 4.1
31 | P a g e

Gender
100
42 41 50.6 49.4
50
0
Freq. Percent

Female Male

Age Group – characteristics; the results in table 4.1 above revealed that most of the respondents

were in the age-group of 20-29 years comprising 44.5 % and were followed by those in the age

group of 30-39 years representing 36.14% of the sample. The minority were in the age-group of

40-49 years and the 50 and above age-group constituting 14.46% and 4.82% respectively of the

sample.

Chart 4.2

Percent
4.82
14.46

44.58

36.14

20 - 29 30-39 40-49 50 year and above

Education level; table 4.1 above indicate that 16% of the respondents had

attained diploma level of education, 21% were certificate holders, 48.19% were degree holders,

1.2% had „O‟ level qualifications and 2.41% had attained „A‟ level standard. The implication is

that the respondents were well knowledgeable of the subject matter and as such made informed

decisions.
32 | P a g e

Chart 4.3

Level of Education
100
40 48.19
50 16 19.28 18 21.69
1 1.2 2 2.41 6 7.23
0
O Level A Level Diploma Certificate Degree Others

Freq. Percent

Source: Researchers survey data (2019)

Management Level; table 4.1 above show that most of the respondents

were of low-level management comprising of 35% of the sample and were followed by

Middle-level management constituting 32% while Top management constituted the minority of

16% of the sample. This result substantiates the presumption that institutions have more staff at

the low level and they have at the top level.

Table 4.2 Number of years spent in your department

1 to 5 6 - 10 11 -15 16 - 20
Dept Total
years years years years

% % % % %

Administration 43.8 37.5 18.8 0 100

Accounts and
69.8 25.6 2.3 2.3 100
Finance

Internal Audit 75 25 0 0 100

Others 80 5 15 0 100

Total 67.5 22.9 8.4 1.2 100

33 | P a g e

The above table shows the number of years the respondents spent in the different departments they

are currently working in. The result reveals that respondents from the administrative departments;

43.8% are within the age bracket of 20-29, 37.5% within the age bracket of 30-39 and 18.8%

within the age bracket of 40-49. Accounts and Finance; 69.8% are within the age bracket of 20-

29, 25.6% within the age bracket of 30-39, 23% within the age bracket of 40-49 and 2.3 within the

age bracket of 50 and above. Internal control has 75% of those respondents with the age bracket

of 20-29 and 25% within 30-39. This means that most of the respondents in all the departments

are within the age bracket 20-29, representing 67.5 percent of the total respondents.

4.2.1 Management Levels response to the Five Components

Table 4.3 Management Level and Control Environment

Control Middle

Environment Top Management Management Low Management Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % %

0 0 0 5.7 2.4

2 0 9.4 14.3 9.6

3 12.5 0 14.3 8.4

4 0 12.5 5.7 7.2

5 0 6.3 25.7 13.3

6 6.3 6.3 14.3 9.6

7 37.5 28.1 2.9 19.3

8 18.8 12.5 2.9 9.6

9 25 25 14.3 20.5

Total 100 100 100 100

Source: Researcher’s survey data (2019)

34 | P a g e

The above table shows the number of responses made by each respondent for each of the indicators

under the control environment. The figures in the first column represent the number of indicators

agreed to by respondents. The first row shows that only 5.7% of the respondents at the low level

of management do not agree that their institutions practice any of the principles of a controlled

environment but none of the respondents at the top and middle-level management said so, as

indicated by 0% for both columns. 5.7% represents 2.4% of the total respondents. Meanwhile,

figures in the last row show that 25%, 25% and 14% of the top, middle and low-level management

respectively agreed that their organizations adhere to all the nine indicators of the control

environment. This represents 20.5% of the total respondents.

Table 4.4 Management Level and Control Activities

Middle

Control Activities Top Management Management Low Management Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % %

3 12.5 0 17.1 9.6

4 0 0 5.7 2.4

5 6.3 6.3 8.6 7.2

6 0 18.8 8.6 10.8

7 12.5 34.4 28.6 27.7

8 37.5 6.3 20 18.1

9 25 15.6 5.7 13.3

10 6.3 18.8 5.7 10.8

Total 100 100 100 100

Source: Researchers survey data (2019)

The above table shows the number of responses made by each respondent for each of the indicators

under the control activity. The figures in the first column represent the number of indicators agreed
35 | P a g e

to by respondents. The first row shows that 12.5% and 17.1 of the respondents at the top and low

level of management respectively agreed that only three principles of the control activities are

adhered to by their institutions. 12.5% and 17.1% represent 9.6% of the total respondents.

Meanwhile, figures in the last row show that 6.3%, 18.8% and 5.7% of the top, middle and low-

level management respectively agreed that their organizations adhere to all the ten principles of

control activities. This represents 10.8% of the total respondents. This implies that more top

management of the public institutions agreed that their institutions are not practicing most of the

control activities than the number that said otherwise.

Table 4.5 Management Level and Risk Assessment

Middle

Risk Assesment Top Management Management Low Management Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % %

0 18.8 0 0 3.6

1 0 0 22.9 9.6

2 0 21.9 14.3 14.5

3 6.3 21.9 5.7 12

4 25 12.5 20 18.1

5 0 6.3 8.6 6

6 12.5 34.4 11.4 20.5

7 18.8 0 11.4 8.4

8 12.5 3.1 5.7 6

9 6.3 0 0 1.2

Total 100 100 100 100

Source: Researchers survey data (2019)

36 | P a g e

The above table shows the number of response made by each respondent for each of the indicators

under the risk assessment component. The figures in the first column represent the number of

indicators agreed to by respondents. The first row shows that only 18.8% of the respondents at the

top level of management do not agree that their institutions practice any of the indicators of a risk

assessment but none of the respondents at the low and middle-level management said so, as

indicated by 0% for both columns. 18.8% represents 3.6% of the total respondents. Similarly,

figures in the last row show that only 6.3% of top-level management agreed that their organizations

adhere to all the nine indicators of risk assessment. This represents 1.2% of the total respondents.

By comparing 18.8% and 6.3%, it will imply more top management of the public institutions

agreed that their institutions are not assessing most of the institution’s control risk than the number

that said otherwise.

37 | P a g e

Table 4.6 Management Level and Information & Communication

Information & Middle Low

Communication Top Management Management Management Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % %

0 18.8 9.4 20 15.7

1 0 6.3 22.9 12

2 0 12.5 14.3 10.8

3 6.3 9.4 11.4 9.6

4 0 0 5.7 2.4

5 6.3 18.8 5.7 10.8

6 0 3.1 5.7 3.6

7 25 15.6 8.6 14.5

8 43.8 25 0 18.1

9 0 0 5.7 2.4

Total 100 100 100 100

Source: Researchers survey data (2019)

The above table shows the number of response made by each respondent for each of the indicators

under the information communication component. The figures in the first column represent the

number of indicators agreed to by respondents. The first row shows that 18.8%, 9.4% and 20% of

the respondents at the top, middle and low levels of management respectively agreed that only

three indicators of the activities adhere to by their institutions. This represents 15.7% of the total

respondents. Meanwhile, figures in the last row show that only 5.7% of low-level management

agreed that their organizations adhere to all the ten indicators of information communication. This

represents 2.4% of the total respondents.

38 | P a g e

Table 4.7 Management Level Monitoring and Evaluation

Middle

M&E Top Management Management Low Management Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % %

0 6.3 3.1 0 2.4

1 0 6.3 8.6 6

2 31.3 0 22.9 15.7

3 0 18.8 28.6 19.3

4 6.3 31.3 25.7 24.1

5 25 9.4 8.6 12

6 31.3 31.3 5.7 20.5

Total 100 100 100 100

The above table shows the number of response made by each respondent for each of the indicators

under the monitoring and evaluation component. The figures in the first column represent the

number of indicators agreed to by respondents. The first row shows that 6.3% and 3.1% of the

respondents at the top and middle level of management respectively agreed that only three

indicators of the activities are adhered to by their institutions. 6.3% and 3.1% represent 2.4% of

the total respondents. Meanwhile, figures in the last row show that 31.3%, 31.3% and 5.7% of the

top, middle and low-level management respectively agreed that their organizations adhere to all

the ten indicators of monitoring and evaluation. This represents 10.8% of the total respondents.

This implies that most of the top management respondents agreed that their control systems are

being monitored while most low-level management disagreed with that fact.
39 | P a g e

4.2 Inferential Statistic

Table 4.8 Evaluating the effectiveness of the internal control components.

Con_Env Freq. Percent

Do not pass 42 50.6

Pass 80 % threshold 41 49.4

Total 83 100

Control Activities Freq. Percent

Do not pass 48 57.83

Pass 80 % threshold 35 42.17

Total 83 100

info & Com Freq. Percent

Do not pass 54 65.06

Pass 80 % threshold 29 34.94

Total 83 100

Risk Freq. Percent

Do not pass 70 84.34

Pass 80 % threshold 13 15.66

Total 83 100

M&E Freq. Percent

Do not pass 56 67.47

Pass 80 % threshold 27 32.53

Total 83 100

Source: Author’s own Calculation based on Survey data (2019)

The above table 4.8 shows the percentage pass of the aggregate responds from each of the

respondents on all five components. A threshold of 80% pass rate is included as the restriction in
40 | P a g e

the coding, such that, any respondent that do not agree to 80% and above of any control

component, is categorized under “Do not pass” and if agreed to at least 80%, is categorized as

“Pass 80 % threshold. This helps to provide a total percentage of 80% pass for each of the five

components of internal control components. The 80% threshold is in accordance with Section 404

of Sarbones-Oxley(2004) which states that; assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over

financial reporting is expressed at the level of reasonable assurance. The concept of reasonable

assurance is built into the definition of internal control over financial reporting and also is integral

to the auditor’s opinion. Reasonable assurance includes understanding that there is a remote

likelihood that material misstatements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

Although not absolute assurance, reasonable assurance is, nevertheless, a high level of assurance.

The is the reason the study using a high threshold of 80% to test the effectiveness of each of the

five components of internal control system

Control Environment: the result from the table revealed that 42 respondents (50.6%) agreed that

their institutions are adhering to over 80% of the control environment principles. while 41

respondents (49.4%) have indicated that their institutions are adhering to less than 80% of the

control environment principles. This implies that about 50% of the public institutions are adhering

to control environments principles

Control Activities: The result from the table revealed that only 35 respondents (42.17%) agreed

that their institutions are adhering to over 80% of the control activities principles while

48respondents (57.83%) have indicated, their institutions are adhering to less than 80% of the

control activities principles.

Control Activities: The result from the table revealed that 35 respondents (42.17%) agreed that

their institutions are adhering to over 80% of the control activities principles while 48respondents

(57.83%) have indicated, their institutions are adhering to less than 80% of the control activities

principles. This means only 42.17% of the sample public institutions are adhering to over 80% of

the control activities and over 57.83% are not.

41 | P a g e

Information and Communication: The result from the table revealed that 29 respondents (34.94%)

agreed that their institutions are adhering to over 80% of the control activities principles while 54

respondents (64.06%) have indicated, their institutions are adhering to less than 80% of the control

activities principles. This means only 34.94% of the sample public institutions are adhering over

80% of the control activities and over 64.06% are not

Risk Assessment: The result from the table revealed that 13 respondents (15.66%) agreed that their

institutions are adhering to over 80% of the control activities principles while 75 respondents

(84.34%) have indicated, their institutions are adhering to less than 80% of the information and

communication principles. This means only 15.66% of the sample public institutions are adhering

to over 80% of the control activities and over 84.34% are not.

Monitoring and Evaluation: The result from the table revealed that 27 respondents (32.53%)

agreed that their institutions are adhering to over 80% of the control activities principles while 56

respondents (67.47%) have indicated, their institutions are adhering to less than 80% of the control

activities principles. This means only 32.53% of the sample public institutions are adhering over

80% of the monitoring and evaluation principles and over 67.47% are not.

Table 4.9 Summary statistics of the components

Variable Obs Counts Mean Std. Dev. Min Max

con_env 83 5.939759 2.466109 0 9

con_act1 83 7.060241 1.971439 3 10

risk_Assess 83 4.180723 2.253153 0 9

informatio~1 83 4.156627 3.042311 0 9

m_and_e 83 3.746988 1.62933 0 6

Source: Author’s own Calculation based on Survey data (2019)

Table 4.9 shows the Mean and Standard Deviation (SD) of the responses for all the five

components of internal control. Control environment as a mean of about 6 and SD of 2.4. The

mean of 6 is quite good but the standard deviation of 2.4 shows a slightly high deviation of the rest
42 | P a g e

of the variable from the mean. The Control activities and M&E have a lesser deviation of just 1.7

and 1.6 respectively, showing a closer range of the data.

43 | P a g e

CHAPTER FIVE

Conclusions and Recommendations

This chapter presents discussions on the finding, conclusions, and recommendations

drawn from the study findings of the previous chapter. The chapter is organized into three sections;

the first section focuses on conclusions, the second section provides the recommendations, the

third section and finally, the fourth section presents areas for further study.

5.1 Conclusion

The finding in this research based on the analysis from chapter four (4), revealed that the internal

control systems of The Gambia public sector are not effective to ensure financial accountability

because all the components have major deficiencies. Therefore, the null hypothesis states that; the

internal control system of The Gambia public sector is not effective and efficient to ensure

financial accountability cannot be rejected. This is in line with the update COSO 2013 which state

that a deficiency is “a shortcoming in a component or components and relevant principle(s) that

reduce the likelihood that the company can achieve its objective.” it is important to recognize that

not every deficiency will result in a conclusion that the entity does not have an effective internal

control systems. When an organization determines that deficiency exists, management must assess

the severity of the impact of the deficiency on the internal control system. A major deficiency in

internal control is defined as an internal control deficiency or combination of deficiencies that can

severely reduce the likelihood that the entity can achieve its objectives. Such a deficiency exists

when management determines that a component or (and one or more relevant principles) is not

present or functioning or that the components are not operating together. The existence of a major

deficiency prevents the organization from concluding that the system of internal control is

effective. Therefore, as per table 4.8 of the previous chapter, none of the components met 50% and

above pass rate of 80%. This means, over fifty percent (50%) of the public institutions have major

deficiencies in their internal control system, thereby making it impossible to be considered

effective.
44 | P a g e

5.2 Recommendations

The findings revealed that there was a significant positive relationship between internal control

and financial accountability. This study reveals significant deficiencies in the control systems and

in accordance with Kakuro (2001), who argued that if internal controls are not well

implemented, it will negatively affect the performance and productivity of a firm. I

, therefore, recommend that;

➢ The government of The Gambia should promote effective internal controls that facilitate

financial accountability.

➢ The government should ensure the internal control directorate is empowered to rigorously

monitor the internal control system of all public institutions.

➢ The internal control directorate manual to clear the monitoring schedule of the unit and

advocate for the state to enact a law in the public finance act that makes it compulsory for

all state enterprises and agencies to put in place an internal control unit that independent of

finance and account unit.

➢ The government of The Gambia should establish an ethics office for strong compliance

with internal control through appropriate penalty for breach of ethical conduct and provide

protection for whist blowers against retaliation.

➢ The government to ensure there is an assessment of the risk its institutions are exposed to,

so as to be able to take a step to mitigate them.

5.3 Limitations of the Study

This study encountered several limitations in acquiring adequate information necessary for the

fulfilment of the research objective. The main limitation of the study was its inability to include

more public institutions across the country. This study could have been enriched by covering more

institutions across the public sector to provide a broader-based analysis from diverse public

institutions. This limitation was mainly due to time and resource constraints. The time frame

allocated for the study was also not adequate as it impacted on the coverage and in-depth study
45 | P a g e

and analysis of objectives. Some questionnaires were ignored while others were not returned or

lost due to a lack of interest. The researcher had to print more and struggle to explain the

importance of the study to the respondents in order to motivate them in participating in the study.

The small size of the sample could have limited confidence in the results, and this might limit

generalizations to other situations.

5.4 Suggested Areas for Future Research

(i) Further researchers can review the internal control policies

(ii) Futures researchers can increase the coverage to the whole country.

(iii) Future researchers can study the relationship between internal control and financial

performance and growth.

(iv)The intensive effect of information technology on internal control should be studied in the

future.
46 | P a g e

References

ACCA (2005). Managing people: London, Foulks Lynch

Ademola, I. S., Adedoyin, A. O., & Alade, O. R. (2015). Effect of an internal control system in

Nigeria Public Sectors: A case study of Nigeria. International Journal of Economics,

Commerce and Management, 3(6), 1093-1105.

Albrecht, W. S., Albrecht, C. C., & Albrecht, C. O. (2004). Fraud and corporate executives:

Agency, stewardship and Broken Trust. Journal of Forensic Accounting, V, 109-130

Aman, H., Nguyen, P. (2008). Do stock prices reflect the corporate governance quality of Japanese

firm. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 22, (4), 647-662.

Amudo, A. Inanga, E. L. (2009). Evaluation of internal control system: a case study from Uganda.

International Research of Journal of Finance and Economics, 27: 124-144.

Anthony, M. (2004). Internal Control: Governance framework and business risk assessment at

Reed Elsevier in Auditing, Journal of practice and Theory.

Aleksandra, R (2007) Financial accountability as a condition for EU membership, University of

Glasgow.

Aramide SF, Bashir MM(2015). The effectiveness of the internal control system and financial

accountability at the local government level in Nigeria. Internal Journal of research in

Business Management.; 3(8):1-6.

Barata. K, Cain. P, Thurston. An (Aug 1999), Managing accounting records as a strategic resource,

International Record Management, London.

Basel Report (1998). Framework for Internal Control Systems in Banking Organisations. Basel

Committee on Banking Supervision, Switzerland.

Bazzoil et al (2000). “Auditors knowledge organization: observations from audit practice and
47 | P a g e

heir implications”. Auditing, Journal of Practice and Theory.

Berle, A.A., & Means, G.C. (1967). The modern corporation and private property, 2nd edition

Harcourt, Brace and World, New York, ISBN 0-88738-887-6.

Bounton, William C. and KellWalter (1996), G. Modern Auditing, 6th edition, John Wiley & Sons.

Chenhall, R.H. (2003). Management control systems design within its organizational context:

Findings from contingency-based research and directions for the future. Accounting

Organizations and Society, 28, 127–168.

Chenhall, R.H. (2007). Theorizing Contingencies in Management Control Systems Research. In

C. Chapman, A. Hopwood & M. Shields (Editions), Handbook of Management Accounting

Research, Volume 1 Oxford: Elsevier.

Cheung. W.W.D(1997), Journal for Business Finance and AccountingVolume24, Issue9‐10, Pages

1343-1351.

Coase, R.H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, 4, 386-405

Committee on Basic Auditing Concepts (1973), A statement of basic auditing concepts, Sarasota,

Fla, American Accounting Association.

Cook & Wincle (1976), “Auditing, philosophy, and Technique”, pp.136

COSO (2013). The update COSO internal control framework, (4th ed.) Committee of Sponsoring

Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

COSO (2004). Enterprise Risk Management — Integrated Framework – Executive Summary.

Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.

COSO (1998), Internal control integrated framework report of the committee of sponsoring

organization of trade way commission, Jessey: American Institute of CPA,

48 | P a g e

Cribb, J. (2006). Agents or Stewards? Contracting with voluntary organizations. Policy Quarterly,

2 (2),11-17.

Davis, J. H., Allen, M. R., & Hayes, H. D. (2010). Is blood thicker than Water? A study of

stewardship perceptions in a family business. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 1093–

1116. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00415.x.

David T. McCoy,(2012) Office of the State Controller Risk Mitigation Services North Carolina.

Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. USA: Sage Publications.

Donaldson, L., & J. H. Davis. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and

shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16,49–64.

Doussy, E.& Doussy, F. (2012). Contextualizing financial accounting in public school

governance in South Africa. Paper delivered at the 4thInternational Congress of

Accounting and Finance, Corfu, Greece.

Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A.H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 514-539.

Dublin, A. (1999). Essentials of management (5th Ed,) Cincinnati: South-Eastern College

publishing.

Ebimobowei, A., & Binaebi, B. (2013). An Examination of the effectiveness of auditing of local

government financial reports in Bayelsa State, Nigeria. Current Research Journal of

SocialSciences 5 (2) 45-53

Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Agency Theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management

Review, 14(1), 57-74.

49 | P a g e

Eton M, Murezi C, Mwosi F, Ogwel4, B, P (2018), Internal control systems and financial

accountability in Uganda: A case of selected districts in western Uganda, International

Journal of Commerce and Management Research, Volume 4; Issue 4; Page No. 106-111

Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983a). Agency problems and residual claims. Journal of Law and

Economics, 26, 327- 349.

Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983b). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and

Economics, 26, 301- 325.

Federation of Accountants (IFAC) (2006), Handbook of international auditing, assurance and

ethics pronouncements, International Auditing and Assurance Standard Board, New York.

Fiedler, F.E. (1964). A Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness. Journal for Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, 1 (12), 149-190.

Financial Postman (2004). Business internal control, 12(2602): 64-65.

Galbraith, J. (1973). Designing Complex Organizations. Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.

Gendron, Y., Cooper, D., J., & Townley, B. (2000). In the name of Accountability state

Auditing, independence and new public management, Accounting, Auditing and

accountability Journal, Vol.14 No.3, pp 278 – 310.

Gillan, S. (2006). Recent Developments in Corporate Governance: An overview Journal of

Corporate Finance, 12, 381-402.

Guidance for Smaller Public Companies (2006) INTOSAI GOV 9100 (2004): Guidelines for

Internal Control Standards for the Public Sector.

Hart, O. (1995). Corporate Governance:Some Theory and Implications, The Economic Journal,

105.
50 | P a g e

Hernandez, M. (2012). Toward an understanding of the psychology of stewardship. Academy of

management Review, 37 (2), 172–193.

Ibietan.J, (2013), Corruption and public accountability in the Nigerian public sector: interrogating

the omission. European Journal of Business and Management, Vol 5, No 15 (2013).

János Ivanyos – József Roóz(2009), A new approach in the assessment of the internal control

systems applied in the public sector.

Jensen, M.C, & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and

ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305-360.

Jensen, M. C. & Ruback, R. S. (1983). The market for corporate control: The scientific evidence.

Journal of Financial Economics, 2, 5-50.

Jokipii, A. (2010). Determinants and consequences of internal control in firms: a contingency

theory-based analysis. Journal of Management & Governance, 14(2), 115-144.

Kakuru, J. (1998; 2001). Basic financial management, MUBS, Kamapla.

Lee,R.D, R.W. Johnson and P.G. Joyce. 2004. Public Budgeting System, 7th ed. Boston, MA:

Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Mason, M. F., Norton, M. I., Van Horn, J. D., Wegner, D. M., Grafton, S. T., & Macrae, C. N.

(2007). Wandering minds: the default network and stimulus-independent thought. Science,

315(5810), 393–395.

McNamee, D. and McNamee, T (1995). The transformation of internal auditing, Managerial

Auditing Journal, 10(2): page 34-37.

Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs. (2016). Public Financial Management Strategy 2016-

2020. Banjul, The Gambia.

51 | P a g e

Moses, A. (2007). Effectiveness of internal control systems in achieving value for money in local

governments. Journal of Auditing. 3(3), 54-61.

Ntongo V (2012), Internal controls, financial accountability and service delivery in private health

providers of Kampala district, Makerere University,

Papadatou, th. (2005). Internal and external control of joint-stock companies, Sakoulas ed.,

Greece.

Rezaee, Z. (2007). Corporate Governance post-Sarbanes Oxley: regulations, requirements, and

integrated processes. John Willey &Sons, Inc.

Salawu, R.O, and Agbeja. O. (2007), Auditing and accountability mechanism in the public sector,

International Journal of Applied Economics and Finance, 1(1); 45-54

Schepers, J., Falk, T., Ruyter, K., Jong, A., & Hammerschmidt, M. (2012). Principles and

principals: Do customer stewardship and agency control compete or complement when

shaping frontline employee behavior? Journal of Marketing, 1 (76), 1–20.1525

Schleifer, L.F. and Greenawalt, M.B (1996). The internal auditor and the critical thinking

process, Managerial Auditing Journal, 11(5): page: 5-13.

Soudani S. (2013). The Impact of Implementation of E-Accounting System on Financial

Performance with Effects of Internal Control Systems. Research Journal of Finance and

Accounting ISSN 2222-1697 (Paper) Vol.4, No.11, 2013Islamic Azad University U.A.E.

BranchDubai.

Spillane, J. P. & Relmer, T. (2000). “Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and

refocusing implementation research”, Review of Education Research, Vol.72, No. 3 pp387

– 431

Scott, W. R., (1992). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems. Englewood Cliffs:

Prentice-Hall.
52 | P a g e

Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper.

William Ofori (2012), Effectiveness of internal controls: perception or reality? the evidence of

ghana post company limited in Ashanti region, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science

and Technology,
53 | P a g e

Appendices

Questionnaire

Dear Respondent,

As part of my course at the University of the Gambia, I am carrying out research on the topic:

Effectiveness of Internal Controls Systems in the Public Sector. The study seeks to establish the

relationship between internal controls and Financial-accountability. As one of the target

respondents, your views and opinion are very important to this study. I hereby request you to

please spare some time and you fill this questionnaire. The responses obtained will be

confidential and strictly be used for academic purposes only.

Thank you for your co-operation.

Sulayman Marenah

Name (optional)……………………………………………….

Section A: Background Information.

1. Gender

Male Female

2. Age

20-29 30-39
54 | P a g e

40-49 50 and above

3. Level of Education

O level A level Diploma Certificate Degree

Others(specify)……………………………………

4. What is your current level of management in the organization?

Top management Middle management Lower management

5. Which departments are you attached to?

Administration Accounts & Finance Unit

Internal Audit Planning Unit Others

6. Number of years working in the Department

1 to 5years 6 to 10 years 11 to 15 year

16 to 20 years 20years and above

55 | P a g e

Please tick one box as appropriate to represent your response for each of the statements below :

(i) Control Environment Strongly Strongly

Agree Undecided
Agree Disagree Disagree

All jobs are given on a competency basis

All workers have work schedules hence

no job conflicts

All the duties are performed according

to the approved standards

The work structure is flexible such that

it allows staff to go on leave in the

month of their choice without pressure

The hiring process for contract staff is

transparent and the background of

candidates checked.

There is a mechanism to monitor

regular attendance of staff

The organization have written codes of

conduct and ethics for staff

All employees in charge of finance are

aware of the financial Instruction (FI)

guidelines

The FI guidelines are effectively

followed by the organization.

56 | P a g e

(ii) Control Activities Strongly Strongly

Agree Disagree Undecided
Agree Disagree

Staff are given up to date internal

control manuals for reference

purposes

Staff are aware of the penalties for

breaking internal control

procedures

Accounts are reconciled on a

monthly basis to detect errors and

fraud

All payments are authorized by the

responsible officer before

payment

All invoices or requests for

disbursements are backed by

appropriate supporting docs

All financial transactions are

recorded in vouchers for future

references

There is an internal check which

operates continuously as part of

the system

The internal auditor works

independently
57 | P a g e

The organization’s cash receipts

are directly transferred to the

organization’s account intact.

Numerically controlled receipt

books are used for all cash

receipts.
58 | P a g e

(iii) Risk Assessment Strongly Strongly

Agree Disagree Undecided
Agree Disagree

There are mechanisms in place to

identify and react to changes that

can have dramatic effects on the

organization

Risks are assessed in relation to

changes in the operational

environment

Changes of new staff are clearly

examined for the risks it may

cause.

New services possess fewer risks

to the organization

The reporting mechanism in place

is less risky to the organization

Internal audit has appropriate

controls for service delivery

The organization has competent

and knowledgeable personnel

This organization is kin in

identifying risks

All risks facing this organization

are measured
59 | P a g e

(iv) Information and Strongly Strongly

Agree Disagree Undecided
Communication Agree Disagree

The organization has clear

channels of communication.

Information flows freely without

any interference

Staff have information on internal

controls and accountability

There is no ambiguity in

information communicated

All operational information is

given to staff in time

There is good communication

between departments.

Staff have access to information

The current information flow is

quick and effective

Information flow delays

accountability
60 | P a g e

(v) Monitoring and Evaluation Strongly Strongly

Agree Disagree Undecided
Agree Disagree

Monitoring strategies are used at

any time during the monitoring

process

This organization’s projects are

monitored and reported as

required of their monitoring and

evaluation criteria

There is a reporting mechanism

for all activities of this

organization

Internal audit is independent of

management influence

External auditors can rely on the

work of internal auditors when

auditing

Segregation of duties or

mitigating controls exist within

transaction processing,

authorization custody, and

recording functions

What do you recommend that would improve the internal control systems of your organization?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
61 | P a g e

Percentage response per level of management

Management Level and Control Environment

Control Top Middle Low

Environment Management Management Management Total

No.of

Response

Agreed % % % %

0 0 0 100 100

2 0 37.5 62.5 100

3 28.6 0 71.4 100

4 0 66.7 33.3 100

5 0 18.2 81.8 100

6 12.5 25 62.5 100

7 37.5 56.3 6.3 100

8 37.5 50 12.5 100

9 23.5 47.1 29.4 100

Total 19.3 38.6 42.2 100

Management Level and Control Activities

Control Top Middle Low

Activities Management Management Management Total

No.of

Response

Agreed % % % %
62 | P a g e

3 25 0 75 100

4 0 0 100 100

5 16.7 33.3 50 100

6 0 66.7 33.3 100

7 8.7 47.8 43.5 100

8 40 13.3 46.7 100

9 36.4 45.5 18.2 100

10 11.1 66.7 22.2 100

Total 19.3 38.6 42.2 100

Management Level and Risk Assessment

Risk Top Middle Low

Assesment Management Management Management Total

No.of

Response

Agreed % % % %

0 100 0 0 100

1 0 0 100 100

2 0 58.3 41.7 100

3 10 70 20 100

4 26.7 26.7 46.7 100

5 0 40 60 100
63 | P a g e

6 11.8 64.7 23.5 100

7 42.9 0 57.1 100

8 40 20 40 100

9 100 0 0 100

Total 19.3 38.6 42.2 100

Management Level and Information & Communication

Top Middle Low

Information&Communication Management Management Management Total

No.of Response Agreed % % % %

0 23.1 23.1 53.8 100

1 0 20 80 100

2 0 44.4 55.6 100

3 12.5 37.5 50 100

4 0 0 100 100

5 11.1 66.7 22.2 100

6 0 33.3 66.7 100

7 33.3 41.7 25 100

8 46.7 53.3 0 100

9 0 0 100 100

Total 19.3 38.6 42.2 100

64 | P a g e

Management Level and Monitoring and Evaluation

Top Middle Low

M&E Management Management Management Total

No.of

Response

Agreed % % % %

0 50 50 0 100

1 0 40 60 100

2 38.5 0 61.5 100

3 0 37.5 62.5 100

4 5 50 45 100

5 40 30 30 100

6 29.4 58.8 11.8 100

Total 19.3 38.6 42.2 100

Percentage age distribution per department

1 Age Distribution per Department

50 year and

Dept 20 - 29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years above Total

% % % % %

Administration 37.5 37.5 25 0 100

Accounts and

Finance 44.2 37.2 9.3 9.3 100

Internal Audit 75 0 25 0 100

65 | P a g e

Others 45 40 15 0 100

Total 44.6 36.1 14.5 4.8 100

Percentage number of years respondents spent in their department

Number of years spent in your department

Control 16 - 20

Environment 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 100 0 0 0 100

2 87.5 0 0 12.5 100

3 71.4 28.6 0 0 100

4 33.3 66.7 0 0 100

5 100 0 0 0 100

6 87.5 12.5 0 0 100

7 81.3 0 18.8 0 100

8 12.5 37.5 50 0 100

9 47.1 52.9 0 0 100

Total 67.5 22.9 8.4 1.2 100

Number of years spent in your department

Control 16 - 20

Activities 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %
66 | P a g e

3 14.3 0 0 0 9.6

4 3.6 0 0 0 2.4

5 5.4 10.5 14.3 0 7.2

6 8.9 0 42.9 100 10.8

7 25 47.4 0 0 27.7

8 25 5.3 0 0 18.1

9 7.1 36.8 0 0 13.3

10 10.7 0 42.9 0 10.8

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Number of years spent in your department

Control 16 - 20

Activities 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

3 100 0 0 0 100

4 100 0 0 0 100

5 50 33.3 16.7 0 100

6 55.6 0 33.3 11.1 100

7 60.9 39.1 0 0 100

8 93.3 6.7 0 0 100

9 36.4 63.6 0 0 100

10 66.7 0 33.3 0 100

Total 67.5 22.9 8.4 1.2 100

Number of years spent in your department

67 | P a g e

16 - 20

M&E 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 0 10.5 0 0 2.4

1 8.9 0 0 0 6

2 21.4 5.3 0 0 15.7

3 17.9 10.5 42.9 100 19.3

4 23.2 26.3 28.6 0 24.1

5 12.5 15.8 0 0 12

6 16.1 31.6 28.6 0 20.5

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Number of years spent in your department

16 - 20

M&E 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 0 100 0 0 100

1 100 0 0 0 100

2 92.3 7.7 0 0 100

3 62.5 12.5 18.8 6.3 100

4 65 25 10 0 100

5 70 30 0 0 100

6 52.9 35.3 11.8 0 100

Total 67.5 22.9 8.4 1.2 100

68 | P a g e

Number of years spent in your department

Information 16 - 20

Communication 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 23.2 0 0 0 15.7

1 14.3 10.5 0 0 12

2 12.5 5.3 0 100 10.8

3 5.4 26.3 0 0 9.6

4 3.6 0 0 0 2.4

5 10.7 0 42.9 0 10.8

6 3.6 5.3 0 0 3.6

7 21.4 0 0 0 14.5

8 3.6 47.4 57.1 0 18.1

9 1.8 5.3 0 0 2.4

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Number of years spent in your department

Information 16 - 20

Communication 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 100 0 0 0 100

1 80 20 0 0 100

2 77.8 11.1 0 11.1 100

3 37.5 62.5 0 0 100

69 | P a g e

4 100 0 0 0 100

5 66.7 0 33.3 0 100

6 66.7 33.3 0 0 100

7 100 0 0 0 100

8 13.3 60 26.7 0 100

9 50 50 0 0 100

Total 67.5 22.9 8.4 1.2 100

Number of years spent in your department

16 - 20

Risk Assesment 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 5.4 0 0 0 3.6

1 14.3 0 0 0 9.6

2 17.9 0 28.6 0 14.5

3 8.9 26.3 0 0 12

4 23.2 5.3 0 100 18.1

5 3.6 10.5 14.3 0 6

6 12.5 31.6 57.1 0 20.5

7 5.4 21.1 0 0 8.4

8 7.1 5.3 0 0 6

9 1.8 0 0 0 1.2

Total 100 100 100 100 100

Number of years spent in your department

70 | P a g e

16 - 20

Risk Assesment 1 to 5 years 6 - 10 years 11 -15 years years Total

No.of Response

Agreed % % % % %

0 100 0 0 0 100

1 100 0 0 0 100

2 83.3 0 16.7 0 100

3 50 50 0 0 100

4 86.7 6.7 0 6.7 100

5 40 40 20 0 100

6 41.2 35.3 23.5 0 100

7 42.9 57.1 0 0 100

8 80 20 0 0 100

9 100 0 0 0 100

Total 67.5 22.9 8.4 1.2 100