The valuation data considered and presented in this part of the study only refer to the applicability of the principles of financial control in Portugal and Ukraine. The main reason for this is that the state control agencies (respectively the state financial inspection agencies) of a number of countries (such as Romania, Serbia, Italy, France, Great Britain, etc.) have not taken action on the application and impact assessment of the control principles. The lack of sufficient empirical data, even from the countries thus covered in the study (Switzerland, Finland, Greece, Ukraine, Portugal, and Estonia), is proof of the degree of complexity of the issues chosen for research.
TopIntroduction
The main goal of this part of the study is to prove one of the main hypotheses, namely whether it is possible to give an accurate assessment of the application and impact of the principles of financial control. We believe that in order to give an answer to the question posed in this way, it is necessary:
- 1.
To follow the sequence of stages in the application of the principles of financial control, presented in the second chapter of the work.
- 2.
To apply the methodology for researching the principles of financial control by PFIA.
Michael Scriven (Scriven, 2012) assumes that evaluation is a process of determining merit, and evaluation is a product of this process. In 1988, Patton also distinguished assessment from evaluation in the following way: according to him, the practice of evaluation involves the systematic collection of information about the activities, characteristics and results of programs, personnel, and products for use by specific people, to reduce uncertainty, improve performance and decision-making regarding what those programs, personnel, or products do (Patton, 1988).
According to Elizabeth Sommerlad, there are basically three types of problems in the evaluation process in practice. The first problem is conceptual, i.e. how people think about assessment. The following questions relate to this problem: what is the assessment for the interested parties; who cares about the findings; what is the approach or model that will guide the evaluation? The second problem is technical. The following questions to address relate to this problem: what methods are appropriate; what will be the unit of analysis; what steps will be taken to ensure data quality; what type of data will be collected; how should evaluation be incorporated into the decision-making process? The third problem is the operational one, which refers to solving questions such as: who will be responsible for the assessment; who will do the assessment; how people responsible for collecting or providing information are involved in planning the assessment; how the assessment will be managed (Sommerlad, 1992).
The opinions thus presented characterize the essence of assessment and evaluation too generally. Taken alone, these statements are true, but also incomplete from the point of view of financial control. We believe that the assessment of the application of the principles of financial control should be considered as a systematized method of gathering information on the impact of the principles of financial control, regulated in Art. 3 of the PFIA. This process should be implemented by expert assessors. Evaluation should be done after each completed inspection. The assessment of the application of the principles of financial control in PFIA should be considered as a process for characterizing and evaluating the various aspects of the application of these principles.
In order to carry out the evaluation process qualitatively, it is necessary for the expert to express his expert opinion unambiguously, competently and accurately and, according to the documents presented to him. Until now, in the control practice of PFIA, there has been no assessment of the application of the principles of financial control due to the circumstances that: