Free Practice Questions for IIA IIA-CIA-Part2 Exam

In a mature control environment with limited internal audit resources, internal auditors should focus their testing on preventive key controls. Preventive controls are designed to stop errors or irregularities before they occur, making them crucial for maintaining control effectiveness. Key controls are the most important controls in mitigating risks to an acceptable level. By focusing on these, internal auditors can ensure that the most critical risks are managed effectively despite limited resources. References:

The IIA’s International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards), specifically Standard 2320 - Analysis and Evaluation.

The IIA’s Practice Guide on Assessing the Adequacy of Control Processes.

 Non-Assurance Engagements: Non-assurance engagements focus on advisory and consulting services rather than providing an independent assessment. These engagements aim to add value by offering insights and recommendations to management.

 Objective Characteristics:

Informing Management: Providing information on potential risks and advising on risk management strategies is typical for non-assurance engagements. This helps management make informed decisions and manage risks effectively.

Assessment and Compliance: Options A, C, and D are more aligned with assurance engagements, where the internal audit activity provides an independent assessment or ensures compliance with policies and procedures.

 IIA Guidance:

Standard 2120 – Risk Management: Internal auditors must evaluate and contribute to the improvement of risk management processes, often through advisory services in non-assurance roles.

 References:

Non-assurance engagements focus on informing and advising management about risks, improvements, and strategic decisions, as exemplified by informing management about risks related to moving the data warehouse to a third-party cloud server​​​​.

Retained earnings represent the cumulative profits reinvested in the organization rather than distributed as dividends. They reflect the organization’s ability to generate resources internally, supporting working capital, expansion, and long-term sustainability.

Option A is incorrect: retained earnings are not the same as dividends.

Option B is incorrect: retained earnings are not equal to excess cash.

Option D is incorrect: rating agencies use broader financial measures, not retained earnings alone.

Thus, the best explanation is Option C: retained earnings show that the organization has been able to generate and reinvest resources from its own operations.

When an internal audit team leader encounters difficulties due to the lack of a system of internal controls, the most appropriate course of action is to add a consulting component to the scheduled assurance engagement. This approach allows the internal audit team to provide advice and recommendations on establishing internal controls while still fulfilling their assurance responsibilities. By integrating consulting activities, the auditors can help the business unit improve its control environment, which can then be assessed in the assurance engagement.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Practice Guide: Consulting Engagements

IIA Standard 1130 - Impairment to Independence or Objectivity

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

A risk matrix maps risks based on likelihood and impact. To identify risks at the process level, the auditor should consider possible scenarios (B) that may threaten the achievement of objectives. Examples include fraud scenarios, compliance failures, or operational breakdowns. Possible controls (C) are identified after risks, as mitigations. Possible tests (A) and samples (D) relate to audit procedures, not risk identification. According to Standard 2210.A1, objectives of an engagement must consider risks, and this starts with scenario analysis. Thus, the correct choice is Option B.

Introduction:

When duplicate payments are identified and corrected, the management’s response typically addresses the immediate impact or effect of the issue.

Types of Action Plans:

Condition-Based: Addresses the condition or the issue itself.

Cause-Based: Focuses on the underlying cause of the issue.

Root Cause-Based: Delves deeper to identify and address the fundamental reason for the issue.

Effect-Based: Focuses on addressing the consequences or the effects of the issue.

Options Analysis:

Option A: A condition-based action plan would involve identifying and rectifying the condition that led to the duplicate payments.

Option B: A cause-based action plan would address the immediate causes of the duplicate payments.

Option C: A root cause-based action plan would investigate and mitigate the fundamental reasons behind the duplicate payments.

Option D: An effect-based action plan addresses the consequences of the duplicate payments, such as recouping the funds, which is what management did in this scenario.

Conclusion:

Management’s action in recouping the duplicate payments is an effect-based action plan as it focuses on addressing the impact of the error.

Internal Audit Standards and Practice Guides .

The primary purposes of a walk-through during the initial stages of an assurance engagement are to help develop process maps (A), determine segregation of duties (B), and identify residual risks (C). Testing the adequacy of controls (D) is generally performed after these initial steps to ensure a thorough understanding of the process and risks involved. References: = IIA Standard 2201 - Planning Considerations and IIA Practice Guide: “Walkthroughs for Internal Auditors”.

According to the IIA guidance, reviewing and approving payroll timesheets by the timekeeper before processing is considered least effective in managing the risk of payroll fraud. While this procedure might detect some errors or irregularities, it does not provide a robust control against fraud because the timekeeper can collude with employees or fail to review timesheets adequately. On the other hand, procedures such as comparing payroll lists to personnel records, deactivating payroll database access upon termination, and validating changes to payroll by the personnel department involve checks and balances that are more effective at preventing or detecting fraudulent activities.

IIA Practice Guide: Managing the Business Risk of Fraud: A Practical Guide

IIA Standards and Guidance: IPPF – Practice Guide

When the rate of deviations discovered in the sample equals the tolerable deviation rate, it means that the control is functioning at the level deemed acceptable by the auditor's predefined criteria. This does not necessarily imply that the control is flawless, but rather that its effectiveness meets the minimum standards set by the audit plan. Therefore, the internal auditor can conclude that the control is acceptably effective, but should also note the potential need for improvement.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, Standard 2320 - Analysis and Evaluation

COSO Framework - Control Activities

Issuing an opinion on the overall effectiveness of internal control inherently carries the risk of increased audit risk and associated legal implications. This is because the opinion represents a high level of assurance, and any errors or omissions in the underlying audit work can lead to significant consequences, including potential legal liability. Therefore, auditors must be thorough and ensure that their conclusions are well-supported by the evidence obtained during the audit process.

The Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) Practice Guide: Forming an Opinion on the Overall Adequacy and Effectiveness of Internal Controls

IIA Standard 2400 - Communicating Results

Introduction:

Understanding cost behavior is crucial in managing production and financial performance in manufacturing.

Cost Characteristics:

Fixed costs remain constant in total but vary per unit with changes in production volume.

Variable costs vary directly with production volume but remain constant per unit.

Options Analysis:

Option A: Variable costs per unit remain constant regardless of production volume.

Option B: Fixed costs per unit decrease as production volume increases, not directly.

Option C: Total variable costs vary directly with production volume, not inversely.

Option D: Fixed costs per unit will decline as the number of units produced increases due to the spreading of fixed costs over a larger number of units.

Conclusion:

When production increases by 30%, the fixed cost per unit will decline as the same total fixed cost is allocated over a greater number of units.

Cost Accounting Standards and Practices .

Non-assurance engagements, such as consulting activities, involve providing advisory services that add value to management without the auditor expressing a formal opinion or providing assurance on the effectiveness of controls or processes.

IIA Definition of Non-Assurance (Consulting) Services:

Non-assurance services, as defined by the IIA, are advisory and related client service activities. These activities are intended to provide advice and insight into specific issues, such as potential risks in new initiatives, without the internal audit function expressing an assurance opinion.

Consulting Engagements:

In a consulting engagement, the internal audit activity provides information and recommendations to management, allowing them to make informed decisions. In this case, informing management about potential risks of moving the data warehouse to a cloud server is an advisory role, typical of a non-assurance engagement.

IIA Standard 2120 – Risk Management:

While this standard relates to risk management assurance, in a consulting role, the internal audit activity would inform management of risks, allowing them to manage these risks proactively.

Option A (Assessing effects of changes in maintenance strategy): This is more aligned with an assurance engagement where the auditor evaluates the impact of changes.

Option C (Ascertaining data center security compliance): This is an assurance activity focused on compliance.

Option D (Ensuring equipment downtime risks are managed): This implies an assurance role, as it involves verifying compliance with internal policy.

Detailed Explanation:Why Not Other Options?Conclusion: Option B is correct as it reflects a typical non-assurance engagement where the internal audit function provides advisory services on risk without providing formal assurance.

 Ensuring Quality: To ensure the quality of the consulting engagement in the human resources department, the chief audit executive (CAE) can implement a fieldwork peer review process. This involves having experienced auditors review the work of their colleagues to ensure adherence to audit standards and procedures.

 Efficiency and Effectiveness:

Peer Review: This method helps identify any issues or improvements needed in real-time, enhancing both the efficiency and effectiveness of the audit process.

Standardized Work Programs: While standardized work programs (option C) provide consistency, peer review adds a layer of quality assurance.

Supervision: Personal supervision by the CAE (option D) is not practical for ensuring the quality of all engagements.

When an internal auditor finds that the incidents of noncompliance exceed the organization's acceptable tolerance level, this should be included in the final engagement report. In this case, the 8 out of 90 desks found with sensitive information represent an 8.9% noncompliance rate, which exceeds the organization's tolerance limit of 4%. Reporting this observation in the final engagement report ensures that management is informed and can take necessary corrective actions to address the noncompliance.

IIA Standards: 2410 - Criteria for Communicating

IIA Practice Guide: Reporting and Monitoring

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

Cyclic counting is a control technique used to verify inventory accuracy and prevent fraud or misstatement. While documentation of approvals (A), valuation reconciliations (D), and frequency of counts (C) all contribute to control effectiveness, the most relevant evidence for evaluating fraud control adequacy is whether the organization analyzes root causes of differences and implements corrective actions (B). Simply reconciling and adjusting balances does not address why discrepancies occur, and fraud risks remain if underlying causes go unexamined. For example, if theft or unauthorized removals are occurring, approving adjustments without corrective measures merely hides the issue. By identifying and addressing root causes, management ensures sustainable fraud prevention and strengthens internal controls. Thus, the focus must be on corrective actions tied to root cause analysis, aligning with IIA guidance on ensuring controls address risks rather than only reporting deviations.