Eightieth session
|
* A/80/50. |
Agenda item 137 of the preliminary list*
Proposed programme budget for 2026
Internal oversight: proposed programme budget for 2026
Report of the Independent Audit Advisory Committee
|
Summary |
|
The present report reflects the observations, advice and recommendations of the Independent Audit Advisory Committee on the proposed programme budget for 2026 of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). The Committee reaffirms its view that effective oversight by OIOS is essential to strengthening accountability and enhancing the Organization’s governance framework. It acknowledges the progress made by OIOS in addressing capacity gaps and improving internal processes, which are critical to fulfilling its oversight mandate. The Committee expects OIOS to implement fully the recommendations arising from recent external reviews of its functions. In particular, it emphasizes the importance of clearly articulating outcome objectives in relation to risk management and of enhancing the measurement and reporting of performance in terms of outcomes and impact on assessed risks. Given the current operational and financial environment, the Committee underscores the need for OIOS to prioritize its resources strategically to ensure that high-risk areas receive adequate attention. On the basis of on its review, the Committee supports and endorses the proposed programme budget for 2026 as submitted. |
|
|
I. Introduction
1. The Independent Audit Advisory Committee has undertaken a review of the proposed programme budget for 2026 of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) in accordance with paragraphs 2 (c) and (d) of its terms of reference (see resolution 61/275, annex). The Committee’s responsibility in this regard is to review the budget proposal of OIOS, taking into account its workplan, and to make recommendations to the General Assembly through the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions. The present report contains the Independent Audit Advisory Committee’s comments, advice and recommendations relating to the proposed programme budget for 2026 of OIOS for consideration by the Advisory Committee and the Assembly.
2. The Programme Planning and Budget Division shared the internal oversight section of the proposed programme budget for 2026 (A/80/6 (Sect. 30)) with the Independent Audit Advisory Committee. The Committee also received supplementary information from OIOS. Together, that information aided the Committee in its review of the budget proposals.
II. Review of the proposed programme budget for 2026 of the Office of Internal Oversight Services
Priorities of the Office for 2026
3. OIOS informed the Committee that the main priorities for the 2026 budget included the review of the following: (a) implementation of reforms to the management, peace and security, and development pillars; (b) strengthening of the organizational culture; (c) procurement and supply chain management, including management of fraud and corruption risks; (d) management of mission drawdown; and (e) strengthening of the protection against retaliation (whistle-blower protection) system. These priorities remain consistent with those for 2025. The Committee was further informed that, in 2026, OIOS would continue to undertake cross-cutting initiatives, such as: (a) provision of support to Member States on the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals; and (b) implementation of the Secretary-General’s strategies on gender equality, racial equality, environmental sustainability, disability inclusion and data.
4. To achieve those priorities and objectives, the Committee was informed that OIOS had developed risk-based workplans that supported the Office’s overall assurance strategy and the attainment of the strategic objectives contained in the programme planning documents. This was done by considering initiatives such as: (a) the enterprise risk management results of the Organization, including Secretariat risk registers and risk treatment plans for the management of both strategic and systemic risks and entity-specific risks; (b) the review of General Assembly resolutions, reports of the Advisory Committee, results of other independent oversight bodies, as well as its own results, to identify relevant emerging risks and strategic priorities for the Organization; (c) discussions with senior management to make sure it understands and integrates management insights, concerns and priorities in considering risks; (d) views expressed on enterprise risks and trends by the relevant independent audit committees; and (e) the development of risk registers/profiles for each entity and for cross-cutting issues.
5. In the light of the external reviews of the Divisions of OIOS, in order to achieve best practices, the Committee encourages OIOS to review and update, as necessary: (a) the articulation of its objectives in terms of measurable outcomes that the strategies seek to deliver; (b) the linkage of OIOS priorities with the risk-based methodology; and (c) the performance measures that OIOS uses to demonstrate its contribution to the achievement of the Secretary General’s oversight responsibilities.
6. For the 2026 period, the Committee was informed that: (a) the Internal Audit Division planned to conduct 62 assignments, slightly higher than the 61 assignments planned for 2025; (b) the Inspection and Evaluation Division had scheduled 11 assignments, which was equivalent to the revised number of assignments planned in 2025; and (c) the Investigations Division anticipated opening approximately 569 investigation cases overall, including 131 relating to the regular budget, which remained similar to the level projected for 2025. Of those 131 cases, with current resources, the Office expected to complete 96 regular investigations. OIOS further emphasized that it employed a risk-based approach in selecting planned assignments. This approach varied across divisions and is elaborated upon in subsequent sections.
Resource requirements
7. The projected resources requirement for OIOS for the 2026 fiscal year from the regular budget (before recosting), combined with other assessed and extrabudgetary resources, totalled $75,752,700, compared with $72,824,100 for 2025. This represents an increase of $2,928,600, or 4 per cent overall. The post resources are expected to remain unchanged, at 292 (see table 1 below).
Table 1
Overall financial and post resources for the Office of Internal Oversight Services, by source of funding (before recosting)
(Thousands of United States dollars)
|
|
Financial resources |
|
Post resources |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
Percentage of the 2026 total budget |
Variance |
|
|
|
Variance |
||
|
|
2025 appropriation |
2026 estimates |
Amount |
Percentage |
2025 approved |
2026 proposed |
Number of posts |
Percentage |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Regular budget |
26 342.8 |
26 284.3 |
34.7 |
(58.5) |
(0.2) |
116 |
116 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
B. Other assessed |
31 515.9 |
34 503.0 |
45.6 |
2 987.1 |
9.5 |
130 |
130 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
C. Extrabudgetary |
14 965.4 |
14 965.4 |
19.8 |
– |
0.0 |
46 |
46 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
Total |
72 824.1 |
75 752.7 |
100 |
2 928.6 |
4.0 |
292 |
292 |
– |
0.0 |
|
Note: Budget figures were based on section 30, Internal oversight, of the proposed programme budget for 2026 (A/80/6 (Sect.30)), and the relevant supplementary information. The figures under other assessed have been adjusted to reflect the relevant portions of two annual budgets that use a July–June fiscal period.
8. The regular budget proposal for OIOS for 2026 compared with the appropriation for 2025 is shown in table 2 below. The proposed programme budget for OIOS for 2026 (regular budget) is estimated at $26,284,300 (before recosting), which is $58,500, or 0.2 per cent, less than the 2025 appropriation of $26,342,800. The post resources have also remained constant at 116 posts.
Table 2
Regular budget financial and post resources, by programme (before recosting)
(Thousands of United States dollars)
|
|
Financial resources |
|
Post resources |
|||||||
|
2025 appropriation |
2026 estimate |
Percentage of 2026 total budget |
Variance |
2025 appropriation |
2026 estimate |
Variance |
||||
|
Amount |
Percentage |
Number of posts |
Percentage |
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Executive direction and management |
1 751.8 |
1 774.3 |
7 |
22.5 |
1.3 |
8 |
8 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
B. Programme of work |
23 017.6 |
23 000.1 |
– |
(17.5) |
(0.1) |
101 |
101 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
Subprogramme 1. Internal audit |
10 132.0 |
10 114.5 |
38 |
(17.5) |
(0.2) |
44 |
44 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
Subprogramme 2. Inspection and evaluation |
4 977.6 |
4 977.6 |
19 |
– |
– |
24 |
24 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
Subprogramme 3. Investigations |
7 908.0 |
7 908.0 |
30 |
– |
– |
33 |
33 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
C. Programme support costs |
1 573.4 |
1 509.9 |
6 |
(63.5) |
(4.0) |
7 |
7 |
– |
0.0 |
|
|
Subtotal |
26 342.8 |
26 284.3 |
100.0 |
(58.5) |
(0.2) |
116 |
116 |
– |
0.0 |
|
Note: Budget figures were based on section 30, Internal oversight, of the proposed programme budget for 2026 (A/80/6 (Sect. 30)), and the relevant supplementary information.
9. The Committee recognizes that the consideration of the OIOS budget proposals for the specific grade level of OIOS posts and requests for non-post resources falls within the remit of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions. The Independent Audit Advisory Committee, therefore, focuses its review, comments and advice with respect to the workplan and budget of OIOS.
A. Executive direction and management
10. As indicated in table 2, the financial resources for 2026 for executive direction and management amount to $1,774,300. The share of the total programme budget for executive direction and management is 7 per cent, or 1.3 per cent higher than the 2025 appropriation, although post resources are expected to remain at the same level. According to OIOS, the proposed nominal increase is due to additional requirements under contractual services to conduct the external quality assessment of the entire programme of OIOS.
11. The Committee supports the proposed budget for executive direction and management as presented in table 2.
B. Programme of work
Subprogramme 1
Internal Audit Division
Priorities of the Internal Audit Division
12. The Committee was informed that, for 2026, the Internal Audit Division had set five strategic initiatives to contribute to the objectives of OIOS, namely: (a) enhancing internal audit activities to recommend improvements to key controls; (b) supporting management efforts to strengthen the Secretariat’s accountability framework; (c) focusing on data governance and data security by identifying and monitoring audit assignments that address cross-cutting priorities across management, programme and strategic areas; (d) strengthening the annual work planning process to ensure alignment with organizational priorities; and (e) implementing recommendations from the forthcoming external assessment to improve audit quality and effectiveness.
13. According to OIOS, the above priorities are expected to result in the following outcomes: (a) strengthened accountability and transparency in the use of resources by United Nations organizations and entities; (b) improved risk identification and mitigation by United Nations organizations and entities; and (c) high quality of internal audit assurance provided to the Secretary-General, heads of organizations and entities and Member States on the adequacy and effectiveness of risk management and internal control systems.
14. To achieve those objectives, the proposed programme budget for 2026 for subprogramme 1, Internal audit, is $10,114,500, which is 38 per cent of the total programme budget. This amount reflects a slight decrease from the $10,132,000 approved for 2025. The number of posts will remain unchanged at 44 (see table 2).
Workplan implementation
15. The Committee was informed that, for the 2024 workplan, the Division had planned to conduct a total of 68 assignments, comprising 41 under the regular budget (including 38 assurance and 3 advisory engagements) and 27 funded from extrabudgetary sources (26 assurance and 1 advisory). According to OIOS, as at 31 December 2024, 45 assignments had been completed and 23 were in progress or had been carried over to 2025 (see table 3 below).
16. Similarly, for the 2025 workplan, the Division had planned to conduct 61 assignments: 42 regular budget assignments (40 assurance and 2 advisory) and 19 extrabudgetary (18 assurance and 1 advisory). As at 31 March 2025, 4 assignments had been completed, 40 were in progress and 17 had not yet started (see table 3).
Table 3
Status of implementation of the Internal Audit Division workplan
|
|
2024 workplan |
2025 workplan |
2026 workplan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of assignments brought forward |
20 |
23 |
17 |
|
Number of planned new assignments |
48 |
38 |
45 |
|
Total assignments |
68 |
61 |
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assignments completed or to be completed |
45 |
4 |
4 |
|
Assignments in progress |
– |
40 |
40 |
|
Total assignments to be completed in the current year |
45 |
44 |
44 |
|
Assignments carried forward |
23 |
17 |
18 |
Implementation of the recommendations of the external assessment
17. The Committee was informed that OIOS was actively implementing the external quality assessment recommendations aimed at strengthening the Internal Audit Division in line with international standards. Key initiatives included clarifying the role of the Under-Secretary-General as the Chief Audit Executive and defining the responsibilities of the Director of the Division. In addition, a working group had been established to develop a data analytics strategy to enhance audit capabilities through advanced tools and techniques. According to OIOS, those efforts were part of a broader commitment to improve audit quality and responsiveness.
18. In the context of performance and risk management, the Committee was informed that the assessment had resulted in recommendations focusing on aligning the Division’s strategic direction with broader United Nation priorities, such as Our Common Agenda and United Nations 2.0. OIOS indicated that it was enhancing its audit planning and management systems to better demonstrate assurance coverage across Secretariat-wide risks. This included mapping the Secretariat’s risk register to the annual work plan and improving documentation of how individual audits contribute to risk mitigation. These steps aimed to ensure a more systematic and transparent approach to performance and risk oversight.
19. OIOS further noted that it was addressing governance and operational efficiency by exploring how internal audit could support the Secretariat’s statement on internal control and other governance components. Enhancements were under way to improve the monitoring of recommendation implementation, integrate information technology and data risk considerations into audit planning and strengthen resource tracking for audit assignments. Tools such as dashboards were being developed to monitor staff effort, travel costs and timesheet accuracy, ensuring better resource utilization and accountability.
20. The Committee notes that implementation of the recommendations of the Internal Audit Division’s external quality assessment was in progress and that the target date to fully implement these recommendations is 31 December 2025. The Committee urges OIOS to ensure that the Division adheres to the deadline for implementing these important recommendations. The Committee also calls on OIOS to provide the Committee with an assessment of the impact of the implementation of those recommendations on the work of the Division.
Risk-based work planning process and capacity analysis
21. The Committee continued to hold discussions with OIOS on the Office’s risk-based work planning process and to ascertain how the Internal Audit Division takes organizational risk coverage into account in determining the risk level for auditing purposes, and the level of resources required to deliver the programme of work. The Committee continues to advocate that using risk assessments to prioritize and allocate audit resources is a best practice, and this is a position the Committee has supported in its previous reports on the budget for OIOS. In that regard, OIOS informed the Committee that, as part of the 2025 risk-based planning exercise, the Division had recently revalidated its assurance strategy through the Secretariat and entity-level risk assessments and analysis. According to OIOS, the assurance strategy continued to be based on a five-year horizon, covering medium risks every five years and high risks every three years. OIOS noted that, in developing a workplan that implemented its overall assurance strategy, the Division examined the assignments completed over the prior two years and identified the assignments planned to be conducted over the coming three years in order to ensure that risks were being covered as planned. As noted in paragraph 6 above, for the 2026 workplan, the Division intended to complete 62 assignments (43 regular budget assignments and 19 extrabudgetary assignments), which is slightly higher than the 61 assignments planned for 2025.
22. The Committee was also informed of the workplan priorities of the Division for the biennium 2025–2026, including that more than half of all assignments (63 per cent) would address programme performance management, delegation of authority, and procurement and supply chain (see figure I below).
Figure I
Priorities of the Internal Audit Division workplan (2025–2026)
(Percentage)
Source: OIOS data provided to the Committee.
23. The Division also showed how the Secretariat risks are covered by assignments during the period (see figure II below). The Committee notes that the audit of information and communications technology and Data Management risks makes up the largest share of the Division’s work.
Figure II
Link between Secretariat risks and assignments of the Internal Audit Division
(Percentage)
Source: OIOS data provided to the Committee.
24. The Committee enquired about the disconnect between risk assessment and the priority areas, as described in the enterprise risk management categories contained in the Secretariat risk register. In response, OIOS informed the Committee that most of the assignments that the Internal Audit Division planned to conduct would include at least some examination of information and communications technology and data management risks within their scope. This reflected both the increasing reliance on and pervasiveness of data and information and communications technology for effective programme implementation in the Organization, as well as the level of associated risk.
25. The Committee encourages OIOS to demonstrate the linkage between the workplan prioritization and the critical risks of the Organization.
26. Within the context of its methodology for work planning, OIOS informed the Committee that the Division had examined the resources required to conduct the assignments included in the strategy for the current workplan year (2025), given the approved posts and vacancy rates, to analyse the capacity gap. According to OIOS, the capacity gap in the Division represented the additional resources needed to cover risks in line with the approved strategy.
27. OIOS noted that, after taking into account the budgeted vacancies, a net gap of five posts existed across the regular budget and extrabudgetary resources. According to OIOS, no additional resources were being requested for the 2026 budget. Rather, this gap would be managed: (a) through the current efforts to fill vacant posts; (b) by rescoping of assignments, if necessary; and (c) by identifying opportunities to work with other Division audit teams to mainstream coverage of information and communications technology-related risks into other assignments in the workplan.
28. The Committee acknowledges the efforts of OIOS to undertake the activities of the Internal Audit Division according to the adopted strategy. The Committee urges OIOS to continue to prioritize its assignments strategically, ensuring that available resources are directed towards the areas of highest risk and impact, thereby maximizing the effectiveness and relevance of its engagements. The Committee endorses the programme budget proposal, which calls for a maintenance budget of $10,114,500 and a post resource level of 44 posts for the Division, as presented in table 1 above.
Subprogramme 2
Inspection and Evaluation Division
Priorities of the Inspection and Evaluation Division
29. The Committee was informed that the priorities of the Independent Evaluation Division for 2026 included enhancing the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness and impact of programme implementation and legislative mandates within the Organization. In addition, the Division aimed to strengthen decision-making, accountability and learning.
30. To achieve those priorities, the Division plans to: (a) conduct evaluations, focusing on subprogramme-level outcomes achieved by Secretariat entities in the areas of peace and security, sustainable development, human rights and humanitarian assistance; (b) support accountability for programme improvement through the monitoring of the implementation of evaluation recommendations and their outcomes, including by conducting triennial reviews of OIOS evaluation reports; (c) integrate the Secretary-General’s cross-cutting strategies in evaluation design and implementation; (d) refine its inspection and evaluation methodology and further develop and strengthen evaluation design and data collection and analysis methods; (e) provide evaluation methodological guidance and quality assurance support to Secretariat entities and to the wider Organization; (f) enhance evaluation knowledge-sharing through the production of the biennial report on strengthening evaluation, evaluation newsletters and evaluation synthesis reports; and (g) support system-wide evaluation through collaboration with the United Nations Sustainable Development Group System-Wide Evaluation Office. The Division has further indicated that those plans are developed through their risk-based planning, as explained in greater detail below.
31. According to OIOS, the planned work is expected to result in: (a) increased learning and accountability of Secretariat entities towards achieving the planned outcomes of programmes and subprogrammes; (b) strengthened evaluation capacity and performance; and (c) greater use of evaluation results to inform programme planning and achievement of results within the Organization. As shown in table 2 above, to achieve the above priorities, the proposed programme budget for 2026 for subprogramme 2, Inspection and evaluation, amounts to $4,977,600, which is 19 per cent of the total OIOS proposed budget, and is equivalent to the 2025 appropriation. The post resources also remained the same, at 24 posts.
Workplan implementation
32. OIOS informed the Committee that, in 2024, 12 regular budget and extrabudgetary assignments had been completed. These included 10 that had been started in 2023 and completed in 2024, and 2 that had been started and completed in 2024. The remaining 10 had been started in 2024 and were slated for completion in 2025 (see table 4 below).
Table 4
Status of implementation of the Independent Evaluation Division workplan as at April 2025
|
|
2024 workplan |
2025 workplan |
2026 workplan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Started in the previous budget year and completed in current budget year |
9 |
10 |
11 |
|
Started and projected to be completed in current budget year |
3 |
1 |
– |
|
Total completed in budget year |
12 |
11 |
11 |
|
Started in the current budget year and projected to be completed in next budget year |
10 |
11 |
10a |
|
Total planned assignments |
22 |
22 |
21 |
a Indicative estimate to be confirmed during workplan review in the third quarter of 2025.
33. Regarding the 2025 workplan, the Committee was informed that 11 assignments were planned for completion in 2025, including 10 that had been carried over from 2024. In addition, six assignments initiated in 2025 were scheduled for completion in 2026. Of those, four assignments had already been completed:
(a) Evaluation of Secretariat partnerships in support of the Sustainable Development Goals;
(b) Evaluation of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights;
(c) Biennial report on strengthening the role of evaluation and the application of evaluation findings in programme design, delivery and policy directives;
(d) Triennial review of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.
34. OIOS further noted that the Division planned to initiate the remaining six assignments in 2025 for completion in 2026 (see table 4).
Implementation of the recommendations of the external assessment
35. The Committee was informed that the Independent Evaluation Division external quality assessment had been completed and that the implementation of a corresponding recommendation action plan was under way. According to OIOS, the assessment had produced seven overarching recommendations, focusing on the areas of communications, evaluation methods, tracking of utility, work planning, evaluation support, assessment focus and overall efficiency. The action plan included several initiatives already in progress, such as: revising the Division’s theory of change; developing guidelines to balance accountability and learning objectives; strengthening methodologies for evaluation design and programme modality assessments; and enhancing mechanisms for tracking the utility of evaluation reports.
36. The Committee notes that the Division’s external quality assessment has been completed and an action plan is under implementation. While several initiatives have already been launched – such as revising the theory of change and enhancing evaluation methodologies – there is a need for a systematic approach to ensure these efforts are effectively executed and yield measurable improvements. The Committee will continue to follow up with OIOS on the progress in this regard.
Risk assessment and the work planning process for 2026
37. The Committee was informed by OIOS that the workplan for 2026 continued to focus on the subprogramme outcome level and was based on five key risk criteria, namely: resources, entity evaluation, oversight coverage, OIOS risk assessment and strategic relevance. The latter two qualitative criteria allowed OIOS to identify which subprogrammes presented a more immediate or higher risk, requiring evaluation in the next two cycles.
38. The Committee was further informed that the Division had identified 74 evaluable topics. Those topics had been selected on the assumption that the unit of evaluation was to be at the entity level, noting that some entities may require more than one evaluation to cover all of the risks associated with the entity due to its mandate, budget, programme complexity and/or budget. The Committee was further informed that, taking into account the vacancy rate, the available staff of the Division would not be able to achieve the number of evaluations required for the mandated eight-year coverage cycle. The Committee was informed that, in order to meet that requirement, the Division would need about seven additional posts. However, no additional posts were being requested at this time.
39. The Committee enquired from OIOS what the impact of the capacity gap would be on the work of the Division and on the its ability to cover very high-risk or high-risk subprogrammes within an eight-year cycle. OIOS stated that, without the seven staff, the Division would conduct fewer assessments, implying that the coverage would take longer than the expected eight-year cycle.
40. OIOS informed the Committee that, to address the gap, it planned to take the following mitigating measures: (a) make greater use of additional assessment modalities, such as inspections and syntheses, for greater efficiencies; (b) focus on the entities and cross-cutting topics considered as high-risk on an eight-year cycle; (c) continue to undertake hybrid assignments covering peacekeeping and non‑peacekeeping; and (d) strengthen entity evaluation capacity within the Secretariat through methodological guidance and technical support.
41. The Committee acknowledges the proactive approach taken by the Inspection and Evaluation Division in addressing capacity constraints while maintaining its commitment to comprehensive evaluation. The Division has outlined the above-mentioned plan to bridge the resource gap. Based on the above, the Committee supports the 2026 resource request for the Inspection and Evaluation Division as presented, acknowledging the need to sustain critical oversight functions. At the same time, as was the case with the Internal Audit Division, the Committee urges OIOS to continue to prioritize its assignments strategically, ensuring that available resources are directed to areas of highest risk and impact, thereby maximizing the effectiveness and relevance of its evaluations.
Subprogramme 3
Investigations Division
Priorities of the Investigations Division
42. The Committee was informed that the objective of the Investigations Division was to contribute towards enhanced accountability and ethical behaviour within the Organization. To address those objectives, the Committee was informed that the Division aimed to: (a) receive and record all complaints; (b) investigate reports of violations; (c) enable the prevention of and response to complaints of misconduct; and (d) support the investigative capacity and capabilities of entities that carried out investigations that fell under category I.[1]
43. In reviewing the regular budget for the Division, the Committee also continues to be cognizant of the position of OIOS that the workforce plan/capacity analysis and resource analysis for the Investigations Division were based on the whole investigation portfolio rather than the funding source.
44. The Committee reviewed trend analyses provided by the Investigations Division, which, according to OIOS, informed the development of the 2026 fiscal year workplan. The Committee examined data on investigation intake levels, referrals and open cases. It was noted that intake levels in 2025 were on track to reach record highs, with 436 matters already received by the end of March. On the basis of that trajectory, the Division was projected to receive a total of 1,895 matters by year-end – surpassing the 1,847 received in 2024. Of those, approximately 800 cases were expected to be referred back to management (up from 761 in 2024), while 569 cases were anticipated to be opened for investigation by OIOS (compared with 543 last year). This upward trend was expected to contribute to a growing backlog of cases (see figure III below).
Figure III
Intake trends of the Investigations Division
Source: OIOS data provided to the Committee.
45. The Committee reiterates its concerns over the upward trend in the number of complaints received by the Investigations Division, which are projected to reach a record high in 2025. Despite prior recommendations to identify and address the root causes of this increase, the volume of cases continues to rise, contributing to a growing backlog and placing sustained pressure on investigative resources. Accordingly, the Committee recommends that OIOS perform an analysis of its caseload to gain insights about possible root causes. This analysis should go beyond surface-level trends and examine systemic, organizational and behavioural factors contributing to the increased caseload. Following such analysis, OIOS is encouraged to coordinate with management and other stakeholders to discuss the factors contributing to the ever-increasing caseloads. In the meantime, the Committee further recommends that OIOS further prioritize high-risk and high-impact cases in order to manage the growing backlog more effectively, while exploring opportunities to streamline investigative processes.
46. The Committee was further informed that fraud and corruption continued to be the most frequently investigated types of misconduct, with 60 per cent of open investigations relating to either fraud and corruption-related misconduct or personnel-related misconduct (see figure IV below).
Figure IV
Open investigations
(Percentage)
Source: OIOS data provided to the Committee.
47. The Committee notes that fraud and corruption-related misconduct and personnel-related misconduct continue to dominate the caseload of the Investigations Division. This persistent trend suggests potential vulnerabilities in internal controls, ethical culture and accountability mechanisms across the Organization.
48. Based on the above, the Committee recommends that: (a) OIOS conduct targeted risk assessments in areas and departments with a high incidence of alleged fraud and corruption in order to identify specific control weaknesses and operational risks; (b) OIOS, based on its assessment, make specific recommendations for preventive strategies that should be strengthened, potentially including enhanced ethics training, awareness campaigns and the promotion of a culture of integrity and accountability at all levels of the Organization; (c) management prioritize the implementation of robust internal controls and monitoring mechanisms, particularly in high-risk operational areas such as procurement, finance and human resources; and (d) OIOS and management collaborate to develop early warning indicators and data analytics tools to detect patterns of misconduct before they escalate into full investigations.
49. The Committee was informed that, despite the increase in intake and new investigations, the ageing of open cases and completion time had been going down since 2024, and that measures had been put in place to address the timeliness of quality assurance for reports. The Committee notes this development and will continue to review this progress in the light of the quality of the work and other performance matrices.
Capacity gap analysis
50. OIOS informed the Committee that the growth in open investigations continued to outpace growth in resources. According to OIOS, the Investigations Division now handled almost three times more complaints of alleged misconduct than it did a few years ago and was opening record numbers of cases for investigation and issuing record high numbers of investigation reports. In determining the Division’s capacity gap for 2026, OIOS informed the Committee of the planning assumptions used, including: (a) a 10 per cent vacancy rate; and (b) that each investigator would handle an average of five open investigations and would complete six investigations per year.
51. With respect to 2026, the Committee was informed that OIOS was projecting the number of investigation cases to be 131 pertaining to the regular budget, up from 110 projected for 2025. According to OIOS, the investigation of 131 cases would require an additional seven to eight investigators.
52. Based on what is noted in paragraph 45 above, the Committee continues to be of the view that addressing the capacity gap alone may not be sufficient. The Committee also recommends that a risk-based prioritization framework be formalized, enabling the Division to focus its limited resources on high-impact and high-risk cases, such as those involving fraud, corruption and systemic personnel misconduct. In view of the above, and given the prevailing financial situation, the Committee endorses the resource levels of $7,908,000, as noted in table 2 above.
C. Programme support
53. The proposed budget of $1,509,900 for programme support, which is 5.8 per cent of the total regular budget, for the 2026 fiscal year and the post resources are expected to remain unchanged. The Committee supports the proposed budget for the programme support as presented in table 2.
III. Conclusion
54. The members of the Independent Audit Advisory Committee respectfully submit the present report, containing its comments and recommendations for consideration, by the General Assembly.
(Signed) Anton V. Kosyanenko
Chair, Independent Audit Advisory Committee
(Signed) Suresh R. Sharma
Vice-Chair, Independent Audit Advisory Committee
(Signed) Dorothy A. Bradley
Member, Independent Audit Advisory Committee
(Signed) Jeanette Franzel
Member, Independent Audit Advisory Committee
(Signed) Eric O. Osae
Member, Independent Audit Advisory Committee
[1] According to OIOS, high-risk, complex matters and serious criminal cases belong to category I (see A/58/708, para. 26).
[Start1]<<ODS JOB NO>>N2514857E<<ODS JOB NO>>
<<ODS DOC SYMBOL1>>A/80/90<<ODS DOC SYMBOL1>>
<<ODS DOC SYMBOL2>><<ODS DOC SYMBOL2>>