Whether to Audit

Introduction

Deciding what, whether, and how to audit deserves attention so that ownership of audit results is well established and clear, and the implications of the audit are taken seriously. The questions below provide a way to consider whether to pursue a conservation audit. If you answer NO or MAYBE to one or more of these questions, then a conservation audit would be highly recommended.

• Are you confident that the project is comprehensively following established best practices for design and management?

• Are you confident that the project is being adaptively managed using sufficient and credible evidence?

• Are you confident that there are adequate resources (i.e., staff, financial) to ensure excellence in project design and management?

• Do the project team and relevant senior leadership have a clear and agreed set of priorities for strengthening the design and management of the project?

Costs and Benefits of Auditing

The questions above can be complemented by consideration of the costs and benefits of auditing.

Costs of auditing include time (a single project audit can take 2-8 hours depending on the level of rigor and participation pursued) and, possibly, direct costs to support the audit process (such as hiring an external consultant).

Regarding benefits, multiple parties benefit from a well-executed conservation audit. First and foremost, the assessment process itself and the resulting analysis and report assist the project team. Findings and recommendations that stem from a thorough conservation audit provide pragmatic and valuable feedback on project design and adaptive management. The transparent nature of the audit process and its reporting also can demonstrate the rigor and credibility of a conservation project to staff, partners, senior leadership, funders, more distant actors, and the public.

Depending on where it is in the design and adaptive management cycle, a conservation project can profit in various ways from different types of audits. Conservation projects with rigorous planning and management in accordance with the best practice standards will have their successes highlighted by a conservation audit; those requiring improvements in their adaptive management processes will identify specific ways to improve. Demonstration of adoption of those recommendations to strengthen project design and management can help to increase confidence in the project and its potential results, both internally and externally. Additionally, as more conservation audits are conducted, a larger network of lessons can be established and shared across the conservation community.

Past auditors and staff of audited projects also have said that conservation audits have helped to:

• Identify strengths and weaknesses in project design and management

• Provide an opportunity to “step back,” reflect, and focus on the big picture

• Increase visibility of the project within an organization and among senior staff

• Educate staff regarding industry-standard and/or organizational design and management frameworks

• Promote interaction and exchange within project teams

What a Conservation Audit Will NOT Provide

A conservation audit is a particular type of analysis involving the review of the design and management of a project against industry-standard or organizational best practice guidelines. As such, unless additional questions and methods are appended, this audit tool will not provide, or be:

• • • An evaluation (i.e., an assessment of the strategic relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, or sustainability of the project or its results),

    • A financial or administrative review,

    • An assessment of the sufficiency or performance of existing human resources,

    • A regulatory or "policing" analysis, or

    • A graded examination or test.

Regarding evaluations, conservation audits and evaluations initially seem like very similar processes, however understanding the distinctions is important. Evaluations of conservation projects tend to focus on the extent to which they achieve their specific goals and objectives and key factors affecting performance. Conservation audits, on the other hand, focus on how well projects adhere to a set of overall, established standards for planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation (M&E), and adaptive management. Because M&E is a key component of best practice standards, conservation audits are not blind to project results, In fact, a conservation audit can lend credibility to reported results by assessing the context and process through which the results were generated and reported. In short, the relationship between process and impacts is a key focus of good conservation project evaluations and of conservation audits, yet the emphasis is placed more strongly on results for the former and on processes in the latter. The page, Audits vs. Evals vs. Learning provides additional information on differences between audits and evaluations.