Free Practice Questions for IIA IIA-CIA-Part2 Exam

According to the IIA's guidance, internal audit can accept consulting engagements, including providing training, as long as it does not impair their independence and objectivity. In this scenario, the most appropriate action for the chief audit executive (CAE) is to accept the engagement and hire an external specialist to deliver the training. This ensures that the internal audit activity does not compromise its independence by training on areas where they might later need to provide objective assurance. By using an external expert, the CAE ensures the training is conducted by someone with the requisite expertise and without any conflict of interest.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), Standard 1130: Impairment to Independence or Objectivity.

IIA Practice Guide, "Independence and Objectivity."

The current ratio = Current Assets ÷ Current Liabilities. This is a key liquidity measure, showing an organization’s ability to pay short-term obligations with short-term assets.

Debt-to-equity (A) measures leverage.

Profit margin (B) measures profitability.

Times interest earned (D) measures ability to cover interest expense.Thus, the correct ratio for short-term debt-paying ability is the current ratio.

According to IIA guidance, interim reports are typically produced during lengthy audit engagements that involve several organizational units. These reports help keep management informed about the progress of the audit, highlight any significant issues identified early on, and allow for timely corrective actions. Interim reports facilitate communication between the internal audit activity and management, ensuring that any critical issues are addressed promptly rather than waiting for the final report.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Practice Guide on "Audit Reports"

IIA Standard 2410 – Criteria for Communicating: "Interim reports may be used to communicate information and issues that require immediate attention."

According to the IIA Standards, particularly Standard 2500 - Monitoring Progress, internal auditors are responsible for monitoring the disposition of results communicated to management. They need to assess whether management has taken appropriate action to address audit findings or has consciously accepted the risk of not taking action. The follow-up process is crucial to ensure that identified risks are managed effectively. References: = IIA’s Standard 2500 - Monitoring Progress and Practice Guide on Follow-up Processes.

In the risk control map, Risk C is positioned in the upper left quadrant, indicating it is critical (high risk significance) but with a low level of control. This suggests that the current controls are insufficient to mitigate the high level of risk associated with Risk C. For critical risks, a higher level of control is necessary to ensure that the risk is properly managed and mitigated. References:

"Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services" (The Institute of Internal Auditors)

"Risk Management Framework" (COSO)

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

To assist the board of directors in understanding the degree of ethics awareness within the organization, an organization-wide employee survey on ethical practices (option D) is the most effective action. Here's why:

Direct Insight from Employees: Surveys can capture the perspectives of a broad employee base, providing direct insights into the awareness and attitudes towards ethics within the organization.

Quantitative and Qualitative Data: A well-designed survey can gather both quantitative data (e.g., percentage of employees aware of the code of ethics) and qualitative data (e.g., specific instances of ethical dilemmas faced by employees).

Identifying Areas of Improvement: Surveys can identify specific areas where employees feel the organization is lacking in terms of ethical practices, which can guide targeted improvements.

Confidentiality and Anonymity: Surveys often ensure confidentiality and anonymity, encouraging more honest and comprehensive responses from employees, which might not be achievable through other means.

Comprehensive Scope: Compared to internal audits or training, surveys can provide a comprehensive overview of the entire organization’s ethical climate, from various departments and levels.

This approach aligns with the best practices in internal auditing and organizational assessments as outlined by the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) and other related guidance​​.

Developing a tracking system to monitor the status of engagement recommendations ensures that the chief audit executive (CAE) can systematically track the progress and implementation of corrective actions. This approach provides continuous assurance that recommendations are being acted upon and allows the CAE to identify and address any delays or issues in the implementation process. It is a proactive strategy that enables regular follow-ups and reporting to senior management, thus maintaining accountability and transparency.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, Standard 2500 - Monitoring Progress

A physical inspection of the retail outlet would provide the most reliable evidence that the completed renovation work conformed to the plan. This method allows the auditor to directly observe the completed work and compare it with the original plans and specifications, ensuring that the renovation meets the required standards and expectations.

IIA Standards: 2310 - Identifying Information

IIA Practice Guide: Auditing Capital Projects and Construction

Root cause analysis identifies underlying reasons for control deficiencies or inefficiencies, enabling organizations to address systemic issues and enhance controls. IIA Practice Guide: Root Cause Analysis (2018) highlights its role in promoting continuous improvement. Reperformance (Option A) and vouching (Option B) are audit techniques to verify accuracy but do not diagnose systemic issues. Independent confirmation (Option C) corroborates evidence but does not uncover root causes. Root cause analysis aligns with the CIA Part 2 objective of enhancing organizational efficiency.

Ensuring Compliance: To ensure that audit findings and recommendations are addressed, formal follow-up procedures are necessary.

Follow-up Procedures: These procedures involve tracking the implementation of recommendations and verifying that management has taken appropriate action or has accepted the risks of not acting.

Reporting to Management: Regular reporting on the status of follow-up actions helps maintain accountability and transparency.

Standard Requirement: This aligns with the IIA’s Standard 2500 – Monitoring Progress, which requires internal audit activities to establish and maintain a system to monitor the disposition of results communicated to management.

Partnership liquidation refers to the process of dissolving a partnership, where all assets are sold, liabilities are paid off, and any remaining assets are distributed among the partners. This process marks the end of the partnership's legal existence and its economic activities.

Legal and Economic Termination: Upon liquidation, the partnership ceases to exist legally and economically. This means that it can no longer operate or enter into new business transactions.

Asset Distribution: The liquidation process ensures that all assets are sold, and the proceeds are used to pay off any outstanding debts. Any remaining funds are distributed to the partners according to the partnership agreement.

Capital Deficiency: While capital deficiency might prompt liquidation, it is not a defining characteristic of the process.

Creditors Payment: Creditors are paid from the partnership's assets, not directly by the partners unless agreed otherwise or if the assets are insufficient to cover the liabilities.

Metadata is data about data — it describes the content, context, and structure of information. In big data environments, metadata allows organizations to classify, label, organize, and make large datasets searchable. Data security (B) protects information, a business application (C) uses data, and a data owner (D) assigns accountability. Only metadata enables the required classification and search functionality.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

An effective ethics program requires clear policies, communication, monitoring, and investigation procedures. To evaluate its adequacy, the auditor should examine established investigation protocols (B) — i.e., how allegations of misconduct are handled, investigated, and resolved. The strategic plan (A) is high-level and does not directly address ethics processes. The overall budget (C) is too broad, and officer remuneration (D) is not core evidence of program quality. According to IIA guidance, assessing the ethics program involves verifying that mechanisms exist for reporting, investigating, and addressing ethical issues. Therefore, the most relevant scope element is Option B.

The chief audit executive should give the most consideration to the organization's risk management policy when communicating an identified unacceptable risk to management. The risk management policy outlines the organization's approach to managing risk, including risk tolerance levels, risk appetite, and the procedures for identifying, assessing, and mitigating risks. By aligning the communication with the risk management policy, the CAE ensures that the discussion about unacceptable risk is framed within the context of the organization's established risk management framework, facilitating a more structured and effective response from management.

The IIA's International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, Standard 2010 - Planning and COSO's Enterprise Risk Management Framework.