Free IIA IIA-CIA-Part2 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 3

According to the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, the final audit report should be distributed to those responsible for the functions being audited (audit client management) and to those who oversee or are accountable for the audit function (executive management). Additionally, the chief audit executive (CAE) can approve distribution to other relevant stakeholders as necessary. This ensures that all relevant parties are informed and can take appropriate action based on the audit findings. References:

IIA Standards - 2410: Criteria for Communicating

IIA Practice Guide - Communication with the Board

Management testimony of improper segregation of duties in the cash receipt process can be considered relevant. Relevant evidence directly relates to the matter being examined, which in this case is the proper segregation of duties in the cash receipt process. Testimony from management can provide insights and context that are pertinent to understanding and assessing this specific control issue.

IIA Standards: 2310 - Identifying Information

IIA Practice Guide: Evaluating Relevance and Reliability of Evidence

Introduction:

Review notes are comments or questions posed by engagement supervisors during the review of workpapers to ensure audit quality and completeness.

IIA Guidance on Review Notes:

According to the IIA, review notes serve as a tool for engagement supervisors to seek additional evidence or clarification.

Options Analysis:

Option A: This is correct as per IIA guidance, once concerns have been addressed, review notes can be cleared from the final documentation.

Option B: Management does not typically address review notes; these are internal audit processes.

Option C: The CAE does not need to initial or sign the review notes, as the engagement supervisor's review is sufficient.

Option D: While review notes must be addressed, they do not necessarily need to be retained after being resolved.

Conclusion:

The correct procedure allows for review notes to be cleared once the engagement supervisor’s concerns are addressed, streamlining the documentation process.

IIA’s International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF).

A significant governance issue that must be reported to the board is the absence of a formal risk management and control process, with risk management being solely the responsibility of operational managers. Effective governance requires a structured risk management framework overseen at the highest levels of the organization. The lack of such a process indicates a critical deficiency that can have severe implications for the organization's ability to manage and mitigate risks.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2110 – Governance: "The internal audit activity must assess and make appropriate recommendations to improve the organization’s governance processes."

Internal control questionnaires (ICQs) are used to gather information about the presence and effectiveness of controls within an organization. One of the limitations of ICQs is that the answers provided by respondents can be easily misinterpreted. This misinterpretation can occur due to unclear questions, differences in understanding terminology, or respondents not fully comprehending the context of the questions. Therefore, while ICQs are useful tools for identifying control issues, they require careful interpretation and often necessitate follow-up for clarification to ensure accurate understanding and assessment of the controls.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Practice Guide: "Internal Control Questionnaires"

IIA Standard 2310: Identifying Information

According to Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory, self-fulfillment or self-actualization represents the highest level of human motivation, where an individual seeks to achieve personal growth, professional development, and realization of their potential. Offering an assignment to a subordinate to support their professional growth and future advancement aligns with this concept, as it helps the individual achieve a sense of self-fulfillment.

According to IIA guidance, reliable information must be factual, adequate, and convincing to ensure that a prudent and informed person would reach the same conclusions as the internal auditor. This means that the information should be supported by sufficient and appropriate evidence that can be independently verified and substantiated. Reliability of information is crucial for the credibility of audit findings and for making informed decisions based on those findings.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2310 – Identifying Information: "Internal auditors must identify sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful information to achieve the engagement’s objectives."

IIA Practice Guide on "Audit Evidence"

 Incentive-based compensation can increase the risk of unethical behavior or fraudulent activities as employees might be tempted to manipulate results to achieve their performance targets.

 This could undermine the control environment and lead to significant risks if not managed properly

When using the balanced scorecard approach to assess the performance of the internal audit activity, a key performance indicator relevant to the audit client is the percentage of recommendations implemented by the corrective action date. This KPI measures the effectiveness and impact of the audit activity by tracking how well the audit recommendations are being acted upon within the agreed-upon timeframe. It reflects the responsiveness and commitment of the organization to address identified issues and improve its control environment, which is directly relevant to the interests and concerns of the audit clients.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Practice Guide: "Measuring Internal Audit Performance"

Kaplan, R.S. & Norton, D.P. (1996). "The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action"

If the chief audit executive (CAE) is uncertain that the current audit team has all the required knowledge to conduct the engagement, the most appropriate course of action is to use an external service provider. This helps preserve the independence and objectivity of the internal audit function.

Expertise: External service providers bring specialized knowledge and expertise that may not be available within the internal team.

Independence: Utilizing an external provider ensures that the audit maintains its independence and objectivity, avoiding any potential conflicts of interest.

Quality: Ensures that the audit engagement is conducted with the highest standards, leveraging the external provider's experience and skills.

Per Standard 2310 – Identifying Information, auditors must evaluate the significance of variances and determine whether further investigation is required. Not every small discrepancy requires full investigation or reporting; the auditor should apply professional judgment to assess materiality, risk, and root cause.

Option B is correct because it balances efficiency with sufficiency. Options A, C, and D either understate or overstate the auditor’s responsibility.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

A walkthrough is an audit procedure in which the auditor follows a transaction through the entire process, discussing with control owners and observing how policies and procedures are applied. The primary purpose of this exercise is to assess the design of internal controls (C). It helps the auditor verify whether controls exist, are properly designed, and are implemented as described. Collecting policies (A) supports documentation, but policies alone do not confirm control design. Financial results (B) relate to performance reporting, not walkthroughs. Engagement objectives (D) are defined during planning, not during walkthrough. Therefore, the walkthrough’s goal is to evaluate whether controls are appropriately designed to mitigate risks, aligning with IIA Standard 2310 (sufficiency and relevance of information).

Introduction:

Engaging an external fraud specialist brings several advantages to an investigation, particularly in preserving the integrity of evidence.

Advantages of External Fraud Specialists:

External specialists bring expertise, objectivity, and resources that may not be available internally.

Options Analysis:

Option A: Access to employees is not necessarily increased with external specialists.

Option B: External fraud specialists have the skills and protocols to preserve evidence and maintain the chain of command, ensuring legal and procedural compliance.

Option C: Scrutinizing business processes is part of their role, but the primary advantage lies in evidence preservation.

Option D: Access to software and proprietary data is not the primary advantage; internal controls can provide this access as needed.

Conclusion:

The main advantage of utilizing an external fraud specialist is their increased ability to preserve evidence and maintain the chain of command, which is critical in legal and compliance contexts.

Internal Audit Standards and Practice Guides .

To mitigate the risk that all bank accounts may not be included in the daily reconciliation process, the most effective response is to ensure that the treasury analyst reviews a daily report generated by the treasury system. This report highlights any bank statements that have not been uploaded into the accounting system, ensuring that all accounts are accounted for in the reconciliation process. This automated approach reduces the risk of human error and ensures completeness and accuracy in the reconciliation process.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Practice Guide: Auditing the Treasury Function

IIA Standard 2130 - Control