Kapitel 2: Mindestkriterien

Topic: Assurance System

C.1.10 - Accredited/approved assurance providers

MiK

 

CRITERIA QUESTION

Does the scheme owner maintain a current and publicly available list of all accredited/approved assurance providers?

 

RESPONSE OPTIONS

Accepted:  Yes 

Not accepted: No 

 

REQUIREMENTS

  • A system to list all assurance providers accepted by the scheme or accredited by respective oversight providers is available, up-to-date and complete. This list could also be available on accepted oversight providers’ websites.

Kommentare (2)

Kommentare können Sie nur abgeben, wenn Sie angemeldet sind.

HerrJam

ID: 341 16.04.2021 14:38

Checking for conflict of interests is a good point raised by Ajit. From our perspective of scheme owner this should be limited to personal overlap. Financial dependance is a thin line for newly established audit companies (and puts them at an unfair disadvantage). Also very hard to verify unless self-declarations are accepted. If self-declarations are accepted, little informative value…

AjitThamburaj

ID: 333 05.04.2021 12:31

If I understand this Criteria right, a scheme can unilaterally "accept" an assurance provider even without the assurance provider being accredited under a system with clear, transparent rules?

In order to avoid conflict of interest, personal and financial independence of 3rd party assessments from scheme owner (and of course certificate holder) have to be guaranteed. This is actually a pivotal criteria. Therefore, simple declarations should not be accepted. While assessing a standard, it should be checked whether there is a financial dependence or even personal overlap (e.g. the people in the board of directors etc.)