About the area of activity

Public Audit - logo
The National Audit Office carry out public audits in implementing the tasks entrusted to it.

Public audit is an independent and objective assessment carried out by the Supreme Audit Institution in audited entities.

The National Audit Office carry out three types of public audit:

  • Financial audit – where the National Audit Office assess the data in the audited entity's annual (consolidated) financial statements and budget execution reports and issues an independent auditor‘s opinion.
  • Performance audit – where the activities of the audited entity are assessed in terms of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.
  • Compliance audit – where it assesses the compliance of the audited entity's activities with legal and/or other requirements and may express an independent auditor's opinion.

In order to improve the performance of the audited entity(ies) and to increase the benefits to society, the results of the public audits are used to formulate proposals - recommendations to address problems identified during the audit. Public audits are an important factor in promoting the efficiency, accountability and effectiveness of public sector institutions and improving the lives of citizens.
   

DOCUMENTS PROVIDING GUIDANCE TO PUBLIC AUDITING

Professional standards and guidelines are essential to ensure the reliability, quality and professionalism of public sector audit. The National Audit Office carry out audits in accordance with the INTOSAI Framework of Professional Pronouncements consisting of the INTOSAI Principles (INTOSAI-P), the International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions (ISSAIs) and Guidelines (GUID). Financial audits are also guided by the International Standards on Auditing (ISAs) issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board of the International Federation of Accountants, which are incorporated into INTOSAI's Standards on Financial Auditing (ISSAIs 2000-2899).

In accordance with the requirements of the ISSAIs, ISAs (in the case of financial audits) and INTOSAI Guidelines, the National Audit Office has developed manuals on Financial, Performance, Compliance and Information Technology audits. The Information Technology Audit Manual also takes into account the Information Systems Audit Standards and Guidelines of the International Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA), as well as other ISACA methodological material. The objective of the audit guidance documents prepared by the National Audit Office is to provide and explain the general and procedural requirements for audits in order to ensure the audit quality.

 
AUDITOR’S RESPONSIBILITY IN PERFORMING FINANCIAL AUDIT

Illustration: Auditor’s responsibility for financial audits

By conducting audits in accordance with International Standards on Auditing and International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions, we use professional judgement and professional scepticism throughout the audit. We also:

  • Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the (consolidated) financial and budget implementation accounts, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform procedures in response to those risks, and obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for our opinion. Detection risk of a material misstatement due to fraud is greater than detection risk of a material misstatement due to error, as fraud may include deception, forgery, intentional omission, misinterpretation, or override of internal controls;
  • assess the internal control of the entities/group of entities involved in an audit to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity's/group of entities' internal control;
  • assess the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related management disclosures;
  • assess the overall presentation, structure and content, including disclosures, of the (consolidated) financial statements and the budget implementation reports and whether they present the underlying transactions and events in a manner that is consistent with the concept of fair presentation.

As part of our group audit, we also obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence about the financial information or activities of the entities within the group to enable us to express an opinion on the group's consolidated financial statements and budget implementation reports. We are responsible for directing, supervising and performing the group audit. We are solely responsible for expressing our opinion on the audit.

We communicate to those charged with governance, among other things, the scope and timing of the audit and significant audit observations, including significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify in the course of the audit.

Among the matters that we communicate to those charged with governance, we highlight those that were the most significant in the financial audit for the current period and are considered to be key audit matters. We describe such matters in the report if we are not prohibited by law or regulation from disclosing the matter publicly or if, in very limited circumstances, we determine that the matter should not be disclosed because the adverse consequences of disclosure might reasonably be expected to outweigh the benefits to the public.

PLANNING OF PUBLIC AUDIT

Illustration: Planning of public audit

In order to implement the tasks assigned to it, the National Audit Office determine each year the scope of activities in the Annual Activity Plan.

The Institution is independent in deciding which audits or assessments are carried out, and only the Seimas, by its resolution, may assign the National Audit Office to carry out public audit within the scope of its competence.

The institution’s Annual Activity Plan is drawn up in such a way to cover the most important areas of public sector activities and to carryout all public audits and assessments assigned to the National Audit Office by laws and other legal acts. The Annual Activity Plan is approved by the Auditor General after it has been presented to the Seimas Committee on Audit.

 
PUBLIC AUDIT RECOMMENDATIONS

Illustration: Public audit recommendations

In order to maximise the impact of public audits and positive developments in the public sector, public audit recommendations are provided during each audit. Taking into account the extent of changes for the implementation of goals of state policy, public governance and society, they are marked as high, medium and low importance. Recommendations are the possibility of the National Audit Office as the supreme audit institution to initiate processes of improvement of the activities of public sector institutions, increase the value of the public sector to society and benefit to the State.

For the implementation of the recommendations and for monitoring their implementation, each time a plan of implementation of recommendations is being prepared and coordinated with the audited entity, which is part of the public audit report. The plan specifies the changes sought by the implementation of the recommendations, their evaluation indicators and values, the deadlines for the implementation of the recommendations and the measures proposed by the audited entity implementing the recommendations, and other important information. The audited entity informs the National Audit Office of the results of the implementation of the recommendations within the deadlines agreed in the plan of implementation of recommendations.

In order to strengthen the impact of the audit on public finance management and control systems and on the improvement of public administration in audited areas, the National Audit Office carries out regular monitoring of the implementation of recommendations. The results of this monitoring: the status of implementation of the recommendations, the responsible entities and the changes that have taken place following the implementation of the recommendations can be followed in Lithuanian in continuously updated open data on the institution’s website. Twice a year, before the spring and autumn sessions of the Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania, the National Audit Office submits reports on the monitoring of the implementation of the recommendations to the Seimas Committee on Audit. The reports review the status of implementation of the audit recommendations of high importance for the past half-year, draw attention to the problems observed when implementing the recommendations, identify a list of laws necessary to implement the recommendations and achieve the impact of the audit. These reports are available on the website of the National Audit Office.

 
COOPERATION

Cooperation icon

When implementing its functions, the National Audit Office cooperates with many institutions, including the Office of the President, Seimas, Government, the Association of Municipal Controllers as well as directly with public sector institutions as present or former audited entities. Cooperation of the National Audit Office with the Seimas is very important in making a positive and effective impact of public audit on public finance and asset management and control system. When exercising parliamentary scrutiny of the executive, the Seimas uses the results of the public audit as one of the parts of the system of parliamentary scrutiny and seek that the entities in which the National Audit Office has carried out public audit implement public audit recommendations. The National Audit Office cooperates most intensively with the Seimas Committee on Audit, which regularly considers public audit reports. Depending on the area audited, audit reports (as well as other products produced in implementing other functions of the institution) are submitted for consideration to other committees and commissions of the Seimas.

To implement advanced methods of budgetary governance and internal control in the public sector close cooperation is maintained with the Ministry of Finance, the Association of Internal Auditors, the Association of Municipal Controllers, municipal control and audit services, the Lithuanian Chamber of Auditors in improving the audit and accounting legislation, public sector audit methodologies, and sharing experience.

The National Audit Office has concluded cooperation agreements with the Bank of Lithuania, the Chief Official Ethics Commission, the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Public Procurement Office, the Special Investigation Service, the Financial Crime Investigation Service, the State Tax Inspectorate, the Competition Council, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Social Security and Labour, the Faculty of Economics and Business Administration of Vilnius University, Vytautas Magnus University, Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuanian Chamber of Auditors, the Association of Municipal Controllers, the Association of Internal Auditors.

The National Audit Office also co-operates with various institutions when submitting conclusions, comments and proposals concerning drafts of laws and other legal acts, considers and prepares conclusions regarding draft decisions of the Government.

The National Audit Office maintains collegiate relations with the academic community: representatives of the institution are regularly invited to give lectures to students of higher education institutions, students of general education schools come to get acquainted with the activities of the institution.

The Institution also invites the general public to cooperate; when annually drawing up a public audit programme and deciding which audit topics to choose, the National Audit Office addresses the public by proposing to contribute to the development of the public audit programme in a specially designed tool for this purpose on the website where it is possible to indicate noticeable public sector failures that the National Audit Office could assess during the audit. Proposals of citizens are evaluated and taken into account when choosing directions and topics of public audit.

The National Audit Office also liaise with its peers in foreign countries – other supreme audit institutions. One of the most important expressions of this cooperation is the cooperative international audit. National Audit Office is an active member of the International Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions INTOSAI and the European Organisation of Supreme Audit Institutions EUROSAI, participates in the work of committees and working groups of these international organisations. Read more about this cooperation in the section Internationality.

Read more

News

  • Report on Key Results in Areas of Government Activity was audited for the first time—no significant discrepancies were identified, but it needs to be improved.
  • Significant errors were identified in the national, state, State Social Insurance Fund accounts and financial accounts of the Compulsory Health Insurance Fund; consequently, qualified audit opinions were issued. The most important recommendations were made to the Ministries of National Defence, Social Security and Labour, Health, and Finance.
  • The audit showed that the current data on the implementation of the consolidated budget still do not provide a reliable picture of public finances as a whole.
  • In the state budget implementation reports, EUR 916.8 million in expenditures were incorrectly classified by purpose.
  • More than EUR 1 billion was eliminated as internal debt among general government entities, but the information necessary to substantiate this amount was not provided.
  • State reserves increased by more than EUR 1.19 billion in 2025; therefore, it is important to establish clear principles for their accumulation and management as soon as possible to strengthen the state’s financial resilience.

Picture for Auditor General presented the results of audits of major accounts in the Seimas: important details are still missing from the puzzle of public financesToday, Auditor General Irena Segalovičienė will present the audit opinions on the country’s major financial accounts for 2025 to the Seimas. Ms. Segalovičienė noted that the government is taking important steps to strengthen accountability for performance results, but problems in public finance management still persist, making it difficult to clearly see how public funds are being used and what results are being achieved.
  
The National Audit Office fulfilled its constitutional duty and presented the opinions of its financial audits of the 2025 national and state financial accounts, as well as the accounts of the State social funds, the Compulsory Health Insurance Fund, and the Pension Annuity Fund. Qualified auditor’s opinions were issued on the national, state and State Social Insurance Fund accounts, as well as on the financial accounts of the Compulsory Health Insurance Fund. This means that significant errors were identified in the accounts relating to the accounting for state assets, the fund’s obligations regarding social benefits, and the actual amount of receivables.
  
“We have started to measure the results we achieve for the money spent in the country. However, important details are still missing from the public finance puzzle. Until we see the full picture, it will be more difficult to make the best decisions regarding state resources and future investments. That is why the auditors’ recommendations are aimed not only at correcting errors but also at strengthening public sector management,” says Auditor General Irena Segalovičienė.
  
The main factors underlying the auditors’ qualified opinions were problems with the accounting of state assets, deficiencies in the accounting and control of social benefits, and insufficient control over the use of a portion of state budget funds.
  
Problems with asset accounting persist
  
Of the EUR 90.87 billion in public sector assets reported in the national accounts, auditors were unable to confirm the accuracy of more than EUR 19 billion in data. In the State accounts, data on assets worth EUR 2.15 billion could not be confirmed, while in the municipal accounts, the figure was EUR 16.94 billion.
  
Auditors were unable to confirm the accuracy of some data on forest land and stands (EUR 15.8 billion), mineral resources (EUR 634.43 million), and cultural heritage assets (EUR 474.91 million). It was found that in some areas, reliable accounting and control systems have not yet been established to ensure accurate and comprehensive data on state-owned assets.
  
Social Insurance Fund has control gaps
  
The auditors were unable to confirm the accuracy of the EUR 454.9 million in expenditures for maternity, paternity, and childcare benefits. It was found that income from employment abroad is not taken into account when these benefits are granted and paid, and the control measures in place do not always ensure that similar benefits are not being paid for the same child in other countries at the same time. This also creates risks of abuse. The responsible authorities have committed to implementing the recommendations and submitting draft legislation within specific deadlines to close the gaps in legal regulation and protect the country’s social budget.
  
Significant problems with budget implementation data remain
  
The audit of the reports on the implementation of the state budget revealed that EUR 916.8 million in expenditures were classified under inappropriate expenditure categories, making it unclear in some cases how public funds were actually used. This problem has been recurring for several years and, in the auditors’ assessment, must be addressed by fundamentally changing the budget planning and reporting model.
  
The auditors were also unable to confirm the accuracy of EUR 26.5 million in expenditures. This was primarily due to shortcomings in the control of the use of state budget appropriations allocated to the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union. Furthermore, it was not possible to confirm the legal and economic justification for EUR 7.8 million in patient transportation services paid for with state budget funds.
  
Controls over the use of public funds in the areas of national defence and public health should be strengthened
  
The audit showed that, as government investments increase, it is particularly important to ensure not only funding but also clear accountability for how it is used and the results achieved. Significant control deficiencies were identified in both the national defence and health care sectors.
  
In the national defence system, one example is the funding of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union. In order to strengthen public resilience and territorial defence, funding allocated to the Riflemen’s Union is being consistently increased - from EUR 18.73 million in 2025 to a planned EUR 41.6 million in 2028. However, the auditors found that the Ministry of National Defence had not ensured adequate control over the use of these appropriations. It was found that in the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union’s 2025 report, a portion of the expenditures was incorrectly classified by purpose, and upon reviewing 32 of the 88 advance payments made in December 2025, deficiencies were identified in all of them. The National Audit Office recommended that the Ministry of National Defence establish clearer procedures for the planning and evaluation of the use of funds, as well as for financial reporting, and strengthen oversight of the activities of the Lithuanian Riflemen’s Union and the appropriations allocated to it.
  
In the health care sector, the auditors were unable to ascertain the legal and economic justification for patient transportation services funded by EUR 7.8 million in state budget funds. It was found that EUR 1.98 million in 2025 appropriations was used to pay for services provided as early as 2024. The audit also identified exceptionally expensive transportation cases - the cost of transporting a single patient reached 1,355 euros, and in some months, administrative costs for the service accounted for as much as 80–85 percent of all funds allocated for transportation. In the area of blood donation, the auditors found that the accounting for blood and its components has not yet been put in order, and the selling prices of blood components have not been reviewed since 2009, even though production costs have changed significantly during this period. The National Audit Office recommended that the Ministry of Health review the organization of patient transportation services, clearly define responsibilities, and implement a pricing system based on actual costs; and, in the area of blood donation, regulate the process of selling blood and its components and the principles of pricing.
  
The first-ever audit of the government‘s activity report
  
For the first time, the Report on Key Results in Areas of Government Activity was audited alongside the national accounts. In previous years, this report was not submitted to the National Audit Office on time, so the auditors were unable to assess the data presented in it and submit their opinion to the Seimas and the public. The purpose of this report is to present, in a single document, the most important results of government activities and the financial resources used to achieve them. The auditors did not identify any significant discrepancies between this report and the budget implementation data. However, the audit revealed that the report can and must be improved - for some indicators, not all information was provided, and the results achieved and their links to the funding used were not always clearly disclosed.
  
Data on the implementation of the consolidated budget remain inconclusive
  
Starting in 2024, in Lithuania consolidated budget, which covers the finances of the state, municipalities, and social funds, is being adopted. The audit revealed that current budget implementation data are not sufficiently accurate or informative - errors in the classification of expenditures, advance payments, and other discrepancies were identified that distort the state’s financial position. Therefore, it is recommended that the Ministry of Finance consider transitioning to an accrual-based budget model, which would provide a more accurate picture of the state’s financial position, liabilities, and risks, and reduce the burden of double reporting. In the National Audit Office’s assessment, the fact that the government uses two different financial accounting systems simultaneously (cash-based accounting, which shows only cash flows but does not reflect the actual situation, since it does not show debts or funds that we will be required to pay in the future, and accrual accounting, which is based on actual revenue and all future obligations), is not only an administrative burden but also an inefficient use of expertise, time, and state resources.
  
Public debt and reserves: a focus on data reliability and long-term management
  
Information on public debt is provided along with the national set of accounts. The audit confirmed that the unconsolidated data on debt incurred on behalf of the state is accurate in all material respects. However, it was found that the State Data Agency had eliminated more than EUR 1 billion as internal debt among general government entities but did not provide the information necessary to substantiate this amount.
  
Reserves are also important when assessing the state’s financial resilience. At the end of 2025, their total amount reached EUR 6.03 billion, an increase of more than EUR 1.19 billion (24.6 percent) over the year. The largest share of the reserves was accounted for by the SODRA reserve - EUR 4.52 billion - and its increase accounted for approximately 75 percent of the total annual growth in reserves. The Reserve (Stabilization) Fund held EUR 791 million, while the Compulsory Health Insurance Fund’s reserve stood at EUR 723.7 million. Although reserves have been growing steadily, there is still no clear definition of the amount of reserves needed to cushion against various state risks. The National Audit Office has previously recommended that the Ministry of Finance systematically review the legal framework governing reserves and establish general principles for their creation and management, linking them to the government’s borrowing policy. The Ministry of Finance has indicated that it is preparing a strategic rationale for reserve management. It is expected that this work will help create a coherent reserve management system, strengthen the government’s financial resilience, and enable planning for financial security over a horizon of more than three years.

Picture for The need to finance defence will not end in 2030 - it is essential to ensure strategic continuity

  • A historically high level of funding is being allocated to national defence, but strategic planning must also reflect the changed security situation and new national defence priorities.
  • NATO member states have agreed to allocate at least 5 percent of GDP to defence by 2035, but at the national strategic level, Lithuania has only planned its defence capabilities and the necessary funding until 2030.
  • There is a lack of a consolidated picture of the implementation of the national defence system priorities.

Picture for The need to finance defence will not end in 2030 - it is essential to ensure strategic continuityOver the past three years, funding for the national defence system has increased by 73 percent and is projected to reach 5.38 percent of GDP in 2026. However, the National Audit Office’s audit, “Financial Management of the National Defence System”, shows that the state does not yet have a planning system adapted to this level of funding. Some of the key documents have not been updated for more than a decade, and the state still lacks a unified system that would allow it to link defence priorities, the funding allocated to them, and the results achieved.
  
“Lithuania has made a strategic decision to significantly increase investment in defence. However, increased funding alone is not enough. If we are embarking on a decade-long journey, it is not enough to know how much fuel we have today—we need to understand the entire route, future needs, and potential obstacles along the way. The more money is allocated to national defence, the more important it is to have a clear long-term plan, a unified system for monitoring priorities, and data that show how these investments strengthen the state’s defence capabilities,” says Auditor General Irena Segalovičienė.
  
Defence funding has increased, but strategic decisions do not reflect the new reality
  
NATO member states have agreed to allocate at least 5 percent of GDP to defence by 2035. However, at the national strategic level, Lithuania has only planned its defence capabilities, the resources required for them, and its funding needs until 2030.
  
Lithuania has decided to develop a national division, host a German brigade, and thereby strengthen its armed forces more rapidly; however, some of the strategic decisions used to assess future needs and plan investments still do not reflect these objectives. The strategic continuity of funding beyond 2030 must be clearly enshrined in national legislation to ensure the sustainability of development and the trust of partners.
  
In the auditors’ view, when billions of euros are to be allocated to defence not just for a single year, but for ten or more years, decisions must be based on reliable data that make it possible to assess what capabilities will be needed in the future, how much they will cost, and what financial resources will be required.
  
A unified system is essential for long-term planning of defence funding
  
The audit revealed that the national defence system lacks links between priorities, funding, and results. As a result, it is difficult to assess how many resources are allocated to the key defence priorities and what progress has been made in implementing them. Information on needs, appropriations, and results achieved is stored in different systems. Some priority needs are planned based on data that is not linked to one another, so decision-makers are unable to monitor progress in implementing priorities in real time.
  
The evenness of fund utilization needs to be improved. With just one quarter of the year remaining, one-third of the total defence budget remains unspent. This poses a direct risk of rushed purchases at the end of the year. According to the National Audit Office, long-term planning of defence funding requires a unified system that would allow for linking priorities, funding, and results, as well as for promptly monitoring progress in their implementation.
  
It must be clear who is responsible for the outcome and what progress has been made
  
The audit revealed that more than half (59 percent) of the national defence system's objectives and indicators are duplicated across different programs. Since programs are structured around military forces and units rather than desired outcomes, responsibility for common goals is fragmented. For example, the objective of staffing the armed forces is implemented through several programs, so it is unclear who is responsible for the final result, and information must be gathered from the coordinators of several programs. This structure leads to internal bureaucracy. Last year alone, the system had to make budget reallocations totalling EUR 440.9 million to ensure that funds were not lost at the end of the year.
  
A financial indicator - money spent - does not in itself defend the state or guarantee national security. Therefore, it is important for decision-makers to see, in real time, not just invoices, but the capabilities being built and the progress made. Currently, there is no single indicator that provides an overview of the total funding allocated to modernisation and its results. As investment in national defence increases, it is essential to ensure that the structure of the programs clearly reflects responsibilities and the progress achieved.
  
Financial management in national defence must be based on more flexible scenarios
  
The audit showed that there is currently no flexible model for the financial management of the national defence system in the event of war or a state of emergency. This means that, in the event of war or a state of emergency, the same procedures would be followed as under normal circumstances.
  
The current financial planning and accounting procedures consist of 19 stages. In the auditors’ assessment, such lengthy and multi-stage processes are appropriate in peacetime; however, under exceptional circumstances, it is important for the state to have a clear procedure in place in advance for how the financial resources necessary for national defence are to be planned, allocated, and managed.
  
The National Audit Office recommended that the Ministry of National Defence establish procedures for how the financial management of the national defence system would operate during wartime or a state of emergency, in order to ensure prompt and smooth decision-making.
  
Army staffing is improving
  
The audit showed that military staffing is improving. The staffing rate for professional military personnel increased from 91.1 to 94.5 percent over two years, while that for cadets rose from 70.7 to 78.6 percent.
According to the auditors, long-term personnel and financial planning is hampered by the fact that there is no established target for the number of junior officers (captains, captain lieutenants, first lieutenants, and lieutenants) required. As a result, it is not clearly defined how many officers in this rank group the armed forces will need in the future, and personnel and financial planning lacks greater detail and consistency.
  
In the National Audit Office’s assessment, in order to ensure long-term, data-driven personnel planning and consistent officer training, it is important to establish the projected need for junior officers.
  
The National Audit Office recommends improving the strategic management of the national defence system
  
The National Audit Office has made recommendations to the Ministry of National Defence aimed at strengthening the strategic management, financial planning, control, and monitoring of the national defence system. Once implemented, these recommendations would provide a clearer picture of the capabilities Lithuania is seeking to develop, how much they will cost, what financial resources will be required, and what progress has been made in building them.
  
It is expected that the implementation of these recommendations will have a complex impact on the entire national defence system:

  • A percentage of GDP for long-term funding will be established, and capacity development plans will be updated to reflect the current threat environment;
  • Processes will be established to ensure the financial management of the national defence system during wartime or a state of emergency;
  • An optimised number of programs within the strategic action plan will enable efficient financial management, appropriate allocation of responsibilities, and monitoring of the overall results achieved by the national defence system;
  • Automated data exchange will increase the efficiency, accuracy, and speed of defence planning processes;
  • Established and implemented control procedures will help prevent potentially hasty and irrational decisions regarding the use of appropriations at the end of the year.

Picture for Increasing defence funding poses new challenges for the management of public procurement in the national defence systemThe National Audit Office conducted an audit assigned by the Seimas titled “Funds Allocated to the National Defence System for the Procurement of Goods, Services, and Works for 2021–2025”. The results show that the national defence procurement system operates effectively, but growing needs highlight its weaknesses - fragmentation, lack of expertise, and limited monitoring of processes and results. As defence funding increases, it is essential to strengthen procurement planning, performance evaluation, internal control, the capacity of specialists, and risk monitoring.


Picture for Increasing defence funding poses new challenges for the management of public procurement in the national defence systemBetween 2021 and 2025, goods and services worth EUR 7.2 billion were purchased for the national defence system. For a detailed assessment, the auditors selected and evaluated 36 higher-risk procurement contracts (out of 111,000 procurement contracts carried out by national defence system contracting authorities between 2021 and 2025) and the activities of 12 national defence system contracting authorities. It is important to note that the procurement of arms and military equipment was not assessed during this audit—the National Audit Office is conducting a separate audit on “Procurement of Arms and Military Equipment,” which will be completed shortly.

“The national defence procurement system currently operates in an extremely dynamic environment, where it is important to balance the operational responsiveness required to meet national security needs with the efficient use of public funds. The audit revealed that growing investments in defence require stronger planning, data-driven monitoring, and more consistent controls. The biggest challenge today is to strike the right balance between the flexibility and efficiency of financial and procurement management control systems through clear priorities, data, and accountability,” emphasises Auditor General Irena Segalovičienė.
  
The procurement model used by the national defence system must ensure expediency and efficiency
  
The simplified procedures and decentralised procurement model provided for in legislation within the national defence system offer greater flexibility and allow for a more rapid response to changing needs. By the end of 2025, 73 contracting authorities were conducting procurement within the national defence system, and an average of approximately 22,000 decentralised procurements were carried out each year. This model provides greater flexibility and speed in supplying the armed forces and other institutions within the system with the necessary goods, services, and works.
  
However, the audit results show that there is insufficient data or basis to conclude that the current model is optimal for the entire national defence system. Its cost-effectiveness has not been assessed, procurement monitoring is fragmented, and there are insufficient control safeguards in cases where exceptions to procurement rules are applied. The shortage of procurement specialists poses an additional risk. At the end of the year, the organisations assessed were short one-fifth (19 percent) of these specialists. This may affect the quality of procurement planning, organisation, and control, as well as the timely execution of procurements.
  
Therefore, the National Audit Office recommended assessing the efficiency of the current procurement model, strengthening procurement monitoring, ensuring sufficient capacity among procurement specialists, and establishing clearer control safeguards for procurements subject to exceptions.
  
An assessment of the highest-risk procurements revealed a need to strengthen internal control
  
The audit assessed how contracting authorities within the national defence system conduct public procurement. To this end, 36 procurement contracts and 12 of the 73 contracting authorities were selected. The procurement contracts with the highest risk were selected for the assessment; therefore, the audit results do not reflect the entirety of public procurement within the national defence system and cannot be directly applied to all procurement contracts.
  
Under special exemptions, where the requirements of the Law on Public Procurement do not apply, 14 procurements were carried out within the national defence system, with a total value of EUR 950 million. Internal regulations did not establish minimum mandatory procedural requirements for these procurements. Unit heads decide for themselves which procurement procedures to apply, which increases the risk of a lack of transparency and the irrational use of funds.
  
Procurers conducting procurements through negotiated procedure without prior publication are not required to contact direct service providers, manufacturers of goods, or their official representatives (there is a risk that the procuring entity will fail to evaluate the potentially lowest bids and will purchase the goods or services at a higher price). We recommended establishing an obligation to also contact manufacturers of goods or their official representatives directly when conducting procurements through negotiated procedure.
  
47 percent (17 out of 36) of the highest-risk procurements assessed during the audit revealed moderate or significant non-compliance, highlighting the areas of highest risk where controls need to be strengthened. Most of the shortcomings were identified during the initial stage of preparation and initiation of procurement (risks related to restrictions on competition and inaccurate technical specifications).
  
It was found that the list of centralised procurements for the national defence system is compiled and amended without clear criteria, i.e., the rationale for compiling and amending the list is not ensured. 83 percent (10 out of 12) of the contracting authorities selected for assessment during the audit saw their procurement plans increase by more than 15 percent in terms of both number and value over the course of the year, and the plans are amended on average as many as 14 times per year. The fact that significant procurement groups, in terms of the number and value of procurements, were not planned at the beginning of the year indicates insufficient identification of procurement needs, hinders targeted procurement management, and increases the risk of procurement delays and insufficient competition in procurements. The National Audit Office notes that it is necessary to introduce a unified procurement data management system and strengthen controls over changes to the procurement plan.
  
The identified discrepancies indicate that it is necessary to strengthen procurement planning, the internal control system, risk management, and procurement oversight so that growing investments in national defence are used as efficiently as possible.
  
Rising procurement volumes highlight the importance of preventive controls
  
The audit showed that the functions and responsibilities of the institutions responsible for the supervision and control of procurement in the national defence system have been defined and provide a basis for carrying out procurement oversight. However, as the volume and complexity of procurement increase, it is necessary to strengthen preventive controls and make better use of available data to identify potential risks.
  
The assessments and inspections conducted by the Public Procurement Service within the national defence system accounted for only about 2 percent of all assessments and inspections it carried out. Most of the inspections and assessments conducted by the Public Procurement Service revealed non-compliance with legislation (97 percent of inspections and 61 percent of assessments), which indicates risks in the organisation and implementation of procurement within the national defence system, as well as insufficient preventive measures. Given the significant increase in funding for the national defence system, it is important to strengthen the oversight of procurement within the national defence system and provide methodological support at the national level.
  
The National Audit Office recommended strengthening the oversight of high-risk procurements, making better use of available data, and ensuring a more consistent application of control measures throughout the national defence system.
  
The procurement system must remain balanced - prompt, transparent, and efficient
  
The national defence procurement system should be developed in such a way that it can quickly adapt to a changing security environment, ensure prompt decision-making, and provide reliable control over processes.
  
To ensure that growing investments in defence are managed not only promptly but also as efficiently as possible, the National Audit Office recommended that the Ministry of National Defence define the procurement organisation model more clearly, evaluate its efficiency based on data, strengthen the capacity of procurement specialists, improve procurement planning, and ensure more consistent preventive control.