Operational auditing by CPA firms; Exposure draft (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants), 1980, June 18

Accounting firms were making reviews of client operations long before audits of financial statements became commonplace. However, the literature of the AICPA contains few references to and little guidance for operational audits ing, the term in general use for reviews of operations. The Special Committee on Operational and Management Auditing was appointed in 1978 to research the subject and develop appropriate information for Institute members. This report contains information on operational auditing engagements which the Special Committee believes will be of interest to practitioners. It has been prepared with the following objectives: 1. To define operational audit engagements and to provide descriptive information on engagements that may be referred to as such in an agreement on services to be rendered. 2. To describe important differences in approach between operational audits and financial audits. When the AICPA formed the Special Committee on Operational and Management Auditing, with members suggested by its Auditing Standards, Management Advisory Services (MAS), and Federal Government Divisions, it was asked to consider questions such as: a. What is operational auditing? b. What are the similarities and differences between an operational audit and an audit of financial statements? c. To what extent do professional standards apply to operational audits? d. What measurement criteria might be used in operational audits? e. What form of report may be appropriate for operational audits? This document responds to these questions and tries to cover, as well, the unasked questions that we, as practitioners, would want answered. The content is not intended to be authoritative, but simply to provide information that would be useful to those who wish to become more familiar with the nature of operational audits and with the role of the CPA firm that provides operational auditing services. For those operational audit engagements which would be subject to the Standards for Audit of Governmental Organizations, Programs, Activities, and Functions, issued by the United States General Accounting Office, review of that publication and the AICPA publication, Guidelines for CPA Participation in Government Audit Engagements to Evaluate Economy, Efficiency, and Program Results, would be helpful.https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sop/1419/thumbnail.jp

2022 Audit Work Plan and Executed Work

The material identifies the Institutional Management Audit System, presents an executive summary of risk-based audits and a list of virtual audits and reviews at Headquarters and Country Offices

Integrating NIST and ISO Cybersecurity Audit and Risk Assessment Frameworks into Cameroonian Law

This paper reviews cybersecurity laws and regulations in Cameroon, focusing on cybersecurity and information security audits and risk assessments. The importance of cybersecurity risk assessment and the implementation of security controls to cure deficiencies noted during risk assessments or audits is a critical step in developing cybersecurity resilience. Cameroon\u27s cybersecurity legal framework provides for audits but does not explicitly enumerate controls. Consequently, integrating relevant controls from the NIST frameworks and ISO Standards can improve the cybersecurity posture in Cameroon while waiting for a comprehensive revision of the legal framework. NIST and ISO are internationally recognized as best practices in information security systems and cybersecurity risk management. This paper highlights the lack of specific international law provisions addressing cybersecurity audits and risk assessments. Overall, the paper highlights the importance of continuous risk assessment and monitoring, implementation of security controls, and compliance with organizational policies, relevant laws and regulations to ensure the adequate protection of information systems. Finally, the paper underscores the importance of improving Cameroon\u27s cybersecurity regulations by integrating provisions from NIST and ISO

Environmental management system auditing within Australasian companies

Reviews the literature on environmental management auditing, and surveys 132 ISO 14001 certified organizations in Australia and in New Zealand. Identifies the main reason for internal environmental audit, and the most frequent actions that result from the audit process, such as formation of a preventive plan. Looks at review procedures by top management, and the frequency of audit. Reveals the length of time an audit takes and the method of documentation adopted, by different industries. Notes six major findings and recommends sharing the findings of audits with employees and&nbsp; suppliers so that improvements can be identified and implemented.<br /

Post-EQA Accountability: A Menu of Policy Options

In 2007, the Massachusetts Legislature decided to phase out the Office of Educational Quality and Accountability (EQA). Legislators and policymakers began exploring options for establishing a new accountability function for the Commonwealth's school districts.Accountability, one of the key components of standards-based education reform, is intended to spur academic achievement for all students by applying pressure and consequences to public schools and school districts. Aligned with the accountability provisions envisioned in the Massachusetts Education Reform Act (MERA) of 1993, the Office of Educational Quality and Accountability (EQA) was created by the Legislature in 2000 to provide an "independent mechanism to verify the efforts of school districts and charter schools in order to promote higher levels of academic achievement by students." However, EQA has faced steady criticism about the ways in which it has operated, and policymakers are determining a new way to perform the district accountability function.The Rennie Center's policy brief, entitled Post-EQA Accountability: A Menu of Policy Options, is intended to inform policy discussions focused on the creation of a new accountability function in Massachusetts. This brief includes case examples of accountability models from four other states -- New Jersey, Ohio, West Virginia, Kentucky, and three countries -- England, New Zealand and Singapore

Learning Lessons with Knowledge Audits

{Excerpt} Knowledge from evaluations will not be used effectively if the specific organizational context, knowledge, and relationships of evaluation agencies, and the external environment they face, are not dealt with in an integrated and coherent manner. Knowledge management can shed light on this and related initiatives can catalyze and facilitate identification, creation, storage, sharing, and use of lessons. Most development agencies have committed to become learning organizations. But the use of evaluation for learning may be less important than that of other inputs, such as self evaluation and training, and evaluation results may only marginally support policy, strategy, and operational changes. In 2006, the Independent Evaluation Department in the Asian Development Bank determined to apply knowledge management to lesson learning. In 2007, it formulated a strategic framework to improve the organizational culture, management system, business processes, information technology solutions, community of practice, and external relations and networking for that. These Knowledge Solutions explain the strategic framework. They also describe the knowledge audit methodology developed to tie in with the department’s audiences. The online, questionnaire-based survey of perceptions conducted as a first exercise that year provided ready and multiple entry points against which the department can take measures to that intent, as well as a comprehensive baseline assessment against which to judge progress. Fundamentally, these Knowledge Solutions contend that evaluation agencies should move from “make-and-sell,” at the simplest level, to “sense-and-respond” in ways that are increasingly satisfying to stakeholders. Knowledge from evaluations will not be used effectively if the specific organizational context, knowledge, and relationships of evaluation agencies, and the external environment they face, are not dealt with in an integrated and coherent manner. Knowledge management can shed light on possible operating frameworks for this and knowledge management initiatives can be applied to catalyze and facilitate identification, creation, storage, sharing, and use of lessons. That would be knowledge utilization indeed