Pass the IIA CIA IIA-CIA-Part2 Questions and answers with CertsForce

 CSR Policy Development: In developing a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policy, it is important that the principles of CSR are communicated and understood throughout the organization.

 Integration into Decision-Making: Management’s responsibility includes ensuring that CSR principles are not only communicated but also integrated into the organization's decision-making processes at all levels. This ensures that CSR is part of the organizational culture and operational strategies.

 Board’s Role: While the board has a role in overseeing and ensuring that CSR objectives are established and risks are managed, the day-to-day responsibility for integrating CSR into business operations lies with management.

 IIA Guidance: According to IIA guidance, internal auditors should evaluate the design, implementation, and effectiveness of the organization’s ethics-related objectives, programs, and activities, which include CSR initiatives (Standard 2110 - Governance).

 References:

Effective communication and integration of CSR principles ensure that the organization operates in a socially responsible manner, aligning its business practices with societal expectations and contributing to sustainable development​​​​.

The chief audit executive (CAE) is responsible for the approval of the engagement objectives and scope in internal auditing. While senior management, the head of customer service, and the board of directors may provide input and have interests in the audit engagement, it is ultimately the CAE who has the final authority to approve the objectives and scope. This ensures that the internal audit activity remains independent and that the engagement aligns with the overall audit plan and organizational priorities.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2010 - Planning

IIA Standard 2200 - Engagement Planning

The recognition element of a typical internal audit report should describe a brief synopsis of the process or area under review. This section provides context and background information about the scope and focus of the audit, helping readers understand the subject matter of the audit and its significance within the organization. It sets the stage for the detailed findings and recommendations that follow in the report.

Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), Standard 2410 – Criteria for Communicating.

In the context of internal auditing, activities that pose immediate and significant risks to health, safety, the environment, or that conceal inappropriate activities within an organization are of high importance and typically require formal communication to the chief audit executive (CAE). These activities could have severe legal, financial, and reputational consequences for the organization. While acts that favor one party to the detriment of another are concerning and may indicate ethical or procedural issues, they are generally considered less critical compared to the other options, as they do not necessarily imply immediate and severe risks to individuals or the organization as a whole.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), specifically Standard 2060: Reporting to Senior Management and the Board.

IIA Practice Guide on Communicating Unacceptable Risk.

The best possible engagement objectives are those derived from a comprehensive risk assessment that incorporates inputs from both senior management and the company's risk function experts. This approach ensures that the internal audit objectives are aligned with the organization's strategic priorities and risk landscape. By combining insights from senior management with the technical expertise of risk function experts, the internal audit activity can develop well-rounded and relevant engagement objectives that address the most significant risks facing the organization.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2010 – Planning: "The chief audit executive must establish risk-based plans to determine the priorities of the internal audit activity, consistent with the organization’s goals."

IIA Practice Guide on "Internal Audit Planning"

Detective controls are designed to identify and detect errors or fraud after they have occurred. Receipts for employee expenses serve as a detective control by providing evidence of transactions, enabling verification and review of expenses to identify any fraudulent or unauthorized activities. Awareness of prior incidents of fraud (Option A) is more of a preventive control, contractor non-disclosure agreements (Option B) are preventive controls to mitigate risks of information leakage, and verification of currency exchange rates (Option C) is more of a transaction control. References: IIA Glossary – Detective Controls, COSO Framework

According to the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards) issued by The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), the Chief Audit Executive (CAE) must communicate and obtain approval from the board for significant changes to the audit plan. A corporate merger is a significant event that introduces emerging risks, necessitating an interim adjustment to the audit plan. The CAE's responsibility includes ensuring that the board is informed and approves the revised audit plan to address these new risks adequately.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Standard 2020 – Communication and Approval: "The chief audit executive must communicate the internal audit activity’s plans and resource requirements, including significant interim changes, to senior management and the board for review and approval."

The correct approach aligns with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), particularly Standard 2400: Communicating Results. The auditor must promptly discuss material errors to prevent ongoing misstatements. Immediate correction ensures timely remediation and reduces the risk of material misstatement persisting in the financial records. Additionally, if the error is resolved before the engagement concludes, it may not necessitate inclusion in the final report, as per the guidance on handling material findings (Practice Advisory 2410-1). This approach also demonstrates collaboration and alignment with management, fostering trust.

When setting the scope for identifying and assessing key risks and controls in a process, developing the scope of the audit based on a bottom-up perspective is the least appropriate approach. A bottom-up perspective typically focuses on individual controls and processes without necessarily aligning with the organization’s critical business objectives and risk appetite. Effective risk assessment should begin with a top-down approach, identifying key business objectives and the associated risks, and then determining the necessary controls to manage these risks. References: IIA Practice Guide – Auditing Key Risk Management, IIA Standard 2200 – Engagement Planning

Independence Requirement: The IIA's mandatory guidance emphasizes the importance of the CAE's independence to ensure unbiased internal audit activities.

Conflict of Interest: Seeking senior management’s recommendation for the CAE’s salary adjustment can create a conflict of interest and potentially compromise the CAE’s independence.

Best Practices: To maintain independence, the CAE’s compensation should be determined by the board without influence from senior management.

Standard Compliance: According to the IIA's Attribute Standard 1110 – Organizational Independence, the CAE must report to a level within the organization that allows the internal audit activity to fulfill its responsibilities.

The chief audit executive (CAE) should prioritize risks to be used for the audit plan. Although the CAE is not accountable for managing risks, he is responsible for ensuring that the internal audit activity provides assurance on the effectiveness of the risk management processes. The CAE must understand the organization's risk landscape and determine which areas require audit attention based on their significance and potential impact. References: IIA Standard 2010 – Planning, IIA Practice Guide – Coordinating Risk Management and Assurance

Conflict of Interest: For both assurance and consulting engagements, it is crucial to avoid conflicts of interest. An auditor assessing processes they were previously responsible for can compromise objectivity and independence.

IIA Standards: The IIA's Code of Ethics and standards emphasize maintaining objectivity and avoiding conflicts of interest. This is particularly important in consulting engagements where the auditor's recommendations could be influenced by prior roles.

Appropriate Action:

Assurance Engagements: For assurance engagements, prior knowledge might be beneficial but still raises concerns about independence. Declining the consulting engagement due to previous responsibilities ensures objectivity.

IIA Standard 1130 - Impairment to Independence or Objectivity.

Identify the Conflict of Interest: The internal auditor learns about a large loan made to another auditor's relative, which represents a conflict of interest.

Refer to Professional Standards: According to the Institute of Internal Auditors' (IIA) standards, an internal auditor must maintain objectivity and avoid conflicts of interest (IIA Standard 1100 – Independence and Objectivity).

Escalate the Issue: The appropriate course of action is to escalate this matter to the chief audit executive (CAE) and management, as they are responsible for determining the impact of the conflict and the appropriate response.

Decision Making: The CAE and management will assess whether the conflict of interest could impair the auditor's objectivity and decide whether the auditor should be removed from the engagement or if additional oversight is needed.

Documentation: It is important to document the conflict and the decision-making process in the audit documentation for transparency and accountability.

 Internal audit activities include evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of internal controls, and part of this process involves analyzing and advising on the cost-benefit relationship of control activities.

 This function helps ensure that the internal controls in place are not only effective in mitigating risks but are also economically justified