Free IIA IIA-CIA-Part2 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 15

The International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing encourage auditors to acknowledge satisfactory performance to provide a balanced report. However, it is not a mandatory requirement. Including positive observations can help foster a constructive relationship with management and provide a more balanced view of the audited area.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards)

"Internal Auditing: Assurance and Advisory Services" by Urton L. Anderson et al.

When communicating the results of the quality assurance and improvement program (QAIP) to the board of a large organization, the chief audit executive (CAE) should explain the rating conclusions and the impact of the results from the external assessment. This ensures transparency and helps the board understand the effectiveness and areas for improvement in the internal audit function.

Rating Conclusions: These provide a summary of the overall quality and performance of the internal audit function.

Impact Explanation: Discussing the impact helps the board understand how the results affect the internal audit's ability to fulfill its responsibilities and improve its processes.

Transparency: Clear communication of these aspects helps build trust and provides a basis for informed decision-making by the board.

Professional Responsibility: Internal auditors are expected to demonstrate their commitment to professional standards and ethics.

Code of Ethics: The IIA’s Code of Ethics outlines principles that internal auditors must follow, including integrity, objectivity, confidentiality, and competency.

Annual Declaration: Signing an annual declaration reinforces the auditor's commitment to these principles and ensures ongoing adherence to the professional standards.

Demonstration of Due Care: By signing this declaration, auditors formally acknowledge their responsibility to uphold ethical standards, which is a demonstration of due professional care.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

Even though this is an advisory engagement, internal auditors must still evaluate significant control gaps discovered during the engagement (Standard 2120 – Risk Management). Since a key procurement control is missing, the auditor should not ignore the risk (D). Expanding the advisory engagement scope (C) would be outside the engagement mandate unless approved. Deferring review to next year’s plan (A) delays needed assurance. The most appropriate step is to perform a root cause analysis and test whether the approved workaround is effective (B). This ensures that risks are mitigated in the interim until a permanent control is implemented, providing management with actionable feedback.

When a client decides not to implement recommended process improvements from a consulting engagement, the internal audit activity should confirm the decision with management and document it in the audit file. This approach ensures that the audit trail is complete and that there is a record of management’s acceptance of the associated risks. Escalating the issue to the board (Option A) or initiating an assurance engagement (Option D) might be necessary if the risks are significant, but these actions are not the immediate next steps. Continuous follow-up (Option C) is more relevant to assurance engagements rather than consulting engagements.

IIA Standard 2500: Monitoring Progress.

IIA Practice Guide on Consulting Engagements.

The observation provided in the final engagement communication includes the criteria (competitive bidding requirements), condition (three of the 10 contracts reviewed did not meet these requirements), and cause (senior management deemed these purchases critical and awarded them as sole-source). However, it lacks the effect, which would explain the potential consequences or impact of not meeting the competitive bidding requirements, such as increased costs, lack of transparency, or potential for favoritism. References:

The IIA’s International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), Standard 2410 - Criteria for Communicating.

The IIA’s Practice Guide on Communicating Results.

When an internal auditor finds that there are no written policies regarding the treatment of suspense accounts, the most appropriate first response is to inquire with management about any undocumented policies or procedures that may be in place. This approach helps the auditor understand the existing practices and assess their adequacy. Jumping to conclusions without this understanding could lead to inaccurate audit findings. Ensuring that the auditor comprehensively understands all relevant practices is crucial before evaluating their effectiveness or making recommendations.

IIA Standard 2210: Engagement Objectives

IIA Practice Guide: Auditing the Management of Internal Controls

In addition to gathering information, a primary objective of a client interview during the planning stage of an audit engagement is to establish rapport with the client. Building rapport helps in fostering a cooperative relationship, ensuring that the client is open and forthcoming with information, which can significantly enhance the effectiveness of the audit.

IIA References:

IIA Standard 2201: Planning Considerations suggests that internal auditors should establish good communication and rapport with clients during the planning phase to facilitate the audit process.

The Practice Guide on Effective Interviewing Techniques emphasizes that establishing rapport during initial meetings is crucial for gaining the client’s trust and cooperation throughout the audit.

If the Chief Audit Executive (CAE) disagrees with management's decision to deem certain action plans no longer necessary, the CAE must discuss the matter with the board. The board has the ultimate responsibility for oversight of the internal audit function and for ensuring that management addresses audit recommendations appropriately. Escalating the issue to the board ensures that the CAE fulfills their duty to report significant issues and disagreements to those charged with governance.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2600 – Communicating the Acceptance of Risks: "When the chief audit executive believes that senior management has accepted a level of residual risk that may be unacceptable to the organization, the chief audit executive must discuss the matter with senior management. If the decision regarding residual risk is not resolved, the chief audit executive must report the matter to the board for resolution."

The role of the CAE includes ensuring that all significant risks, including those related to health and safety, are properly managed. Even though the chief health and safety officer reports directly to the CEO, the CAE should still coordinate with and review the work of this officer to understand and evaluate the management of health and safety risks. This helps ensure a comprehensive risk management approach within the organization and supports the overall assurance framework. It is not appropriate for the CAE to have no role (Option A), report directly to the regulator (Option C), or hire an external specialist annually without internal coordination (Option D).

IIA Standard 2010: Planning.

IIA Practice Guide on Coordinating Risk Management and Assurance.

A. Information obtained from historic audits and memos:Useful for context but not typically part of the formal work program.

B. Risk and control registers or matrices:Used in the planning phase but not part of the detailed execution in the work program.

C. Resource deployment plans and sampling methodologies:Correct. These are essential components of the work program, guiding audit execution and resource allocation.

D. Prior findings and management responses:Inform planning but do not typically appear in the work program itself.

CIA Exam Syllabus Reference:

Domain V: Performing Internal Audit Services – Engagement Work Program.

Professional skepticism is an essential attitude for internal auditors, particularly when assessing the risk of fraud. According to the IIA's Practice Guide "Internal Auditing and Fraud", one of the red flags that may heighten an internal auditor’s professional skepticism is the presence of employees whose qualifications or credentials do not match the requirements of their positions. In this case, a procurement manager lacking the expected academic credentials raises concerns because it could indicate potential fraudulent activities such as unqualified decision-making or manipulation of procurement processes.

Promoting objectivity in internal auditing involves ensuring that auditors avoid conflicts of interest and maintain independence in both fact and appearance. Policies that clearly define and give examples of inappropriate business relationships help auditors understand and avoid situations that could impair their objectivity.

IIA Standard 1120 (Individual Objectivity) emphasizes the importance of internal auditors maintaining an unbiased mindset and avoiding conflicts of interest.

According to the CIA Exam syllabus, internal auditors must design and perform procedures that provide sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful information (Standard 2310). Simply visually confirming equipment on-site does not confirm ownership; it only establishes physical existence. Ownership requires review of purchase invoices, titles, or registration documents.

The other procedures listed (vouching checks, reconciling invoices with shipping documents, and recalculating allowances) are appropriate and provide reliable audit evidence. Option A would therefore be questioned, as it does not sufficiently address the stated audit objective of ownership verification.