diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'content/blog/2023-06-20-audit-review-template.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | content/blog/2023-06-20-audit-review-template.md | 77 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 77 deletions
diff --git a/content/blog/2023-06-20-audit-review-template.md b/content/blog/2023-06-20-audit-review-template.md deleted file mode 100644 index ede3092..0000000 --- a/content/blog/2023-06-20-audit-review-template.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,77 +0,0 @@ -+++ -date = 2023-06-20 -title = "Audit Testing Review Template" -description = "" -draft = false -+++ - -# Overview - -This post is a _very_ brief overview on the basic process to review audit test -results, focusing on work done as part of a financial statement audit (FSA) or -service organization controls (SOC) report. - -While there are numerous different things to review and look for - all varying -wildly depending on the report, client, and tester - this list serves as a solid -base foundation for a reviewer. - -I have used this throughout my career as a starting point to my reviews, and it -has worked wonders for creating a consistent and objective template to my -reviews. The goal is to keep this base high-level enough to be used on a wide -variety of engagements, while still ensuring that all key areas are covered. - -# Review Template - -1. [ ] Check all documents for spelling and grammar. -2. [ ] Ensure all acronyms are fully explained upon first use. -3. [ ] For all people referenced, use their full names and job titles upon first - use. -4. [ ] All supporting documents must cross-reference to the lead sheet and - vice-versa. -5. [ ] Verify that the control has been adequately tested: - - [ ] **Test of Design**: Did the tester obtain information regarding how - the control should perform normally and abnormally (e.g., emergency - scenarios)? - - [ ] **Test of Operating Effectiveness**: Did the tester inquire, observe, - inspect, or re-perform sufficient evidence to support their conclusion - over the control? Inquiry alone is not adequate! -6. [ ] For any information used in the control, whether by the control operator - or by the tester, did the tester appropriately document the source - (system or person), extraction method, parameters, and completeness and - accuracy (C&A)? - - [ ] For any reports, queries, etc. used in the extraction, did the tester - include a copy and notate C&A considerations? -7. [ ] Did the tester document the specific criteria that the control is being - tested against? -8. [ ] Did the tester notate in the supporting documents where each criterion - was satisfied? -9. [ ] If testing specific policies or procedures, are the documents adequate? - - [ ] e.g., a test to validate that a review of policy XYZ occurs - periodically should also evaluate the sufficiency of the policy - itself, if meant to cover the risk that such a policy does not exist - and is not reviewed. -10. [ ] Does the test cover the appropriate period under review? - - [ ] If the test is meant to cover only a portion of the audit period, do - other controls exist to mitigate the risks that exist for the - remainder of the period? -11. [ ] For any computer-aided audit tools (CAATs) or other automation - techniques used in the test, is the use of such tools explained and - appropriately documented? -12. [ ] If prior-period documentation exists, are there any missing pieces of - evidence that would further enhance the quality of the test? -13. [ ] Was any information discovered during the walkthrough or inquiry phase - that was not incorporated into the test? -14. [ ] Are there new rules or expectations from your company's internal - guidance or your regulatory bodies that would affect the audit approach - for this control? -15. [ ] Was an exception, finding, or deficiency identified as a result of this - test? - - [ ] Was the control deficient in design, operation, or both? - - [ ] What was the root cause of the finding? - - [ ] Does the finding indicate other findings or potential fraud? - - [ ] What's the severity and scope of the finding? - - [ ] Do other controls exist as a form of compensation against the - finding's severity, and do they mitigate the risk within the control - objective? - - [ ] Does the finding exist at the end of the period, or was it resolved - within the audit period? |