IIA IIA-CIA-Part3 - Business Knowledge for Internal Auditing

A hot recovery plan (hot site) is a fully operational, duplicate site that is pre-configured and ready for immediate use in case of a disaster. This approach allows an organization to recover critical operations quickly with minimal downtime.

(A) Cold recovery plan.

Incorrect: A cold site is a facility that has infrastructure but no active IT systems or data until set up after a disaster, resulting in longer recovery times.

(B) Outsourced recovery plan.

Incorrect: Outsourcing recovery refers to third-party disaster recovery services, but does not specifically describe a fully operational duplicate site.

(C) Storage area network recovery plan.

Incorrect: A storage area network (SAN) recovery plan focuses on data storage redundancy, not a fully operational duplicate facility.

(D) Hot recovery plan. (Correct Answer)

A hot site is the fastest and most effective disaster recovery solution, ensuring immediate failover with minimal downtime.

IIA GTAG 10 – Business Continuity Management highlights hot sites as the most effective for mission-critical operations.

IIA GTAG 10 – Business Continuity Management: Recommends hot sites for critical recovery scenarios.

IIA Standard 2120 – Risk Management: Emphasizes preparedness for disaster recovery planning.

Analysis of Each Option:IIA References Supporting the Answer:Thus, the correct answer is (D) Hot recovery plan, as it ensures a fully operational backup site for immediate disaster recovery.

The Global Internal Audit Standards require that workpapers be properly supervised and reviewed to ensure quality and compliance. A sole auditor cannot perform a meaningful self-review (Option A). Having clients review workpapers (Option B) compromises independence. Having management or the board sign off (Option C) is also inappropriate as it undermines audit objectivity.

The most suitable solution is to arrange for peer reviews from external auditors or other organizations, with confidentiality and legal safeguards in place. This provides independent oversight while maintaining audit quality.

According to IIA guidance, if a nonconformance occurs, the CAE must evaluate its impact on the overall scope and operations of the internal audit activity. If the deficiency materially affects internal audit’s overall ability to fulfill its responsibilities, conformance cannot be claimed. If the impact is limited, conformance may still be declared with appropriate disclosure.

Options A and B assume automatic conformance without evaluation. Option C is incorrect because there is no concept of “partial conformance” under the Standards.

Internal audit methodologies are determined by the CAE and should be aligned with the IIA’s principles of confidentiality, integrity, objectivity, and competency. This ensures methodology design is consistent with professional standards.

Option A misstates the objective—methodologies are not for client validation. Option B is incorrect because methodologies are not required to be publicly posted. Option C mischaracterizes the objective: methodology ensures audit consistency, not execution of organizational strategy directly.

To optimize efficiency, the CAE should coordinate with other assurance providers such as compliance, quality assurance, and external auditors. This reduces duplication, minimizes disruption, and ensures resources are used effectively.

Option A may lead to unnecessary duplication rather than coordination. Option C contradicts IIA guidance, which emphasizes coordination (Standard 2050). Option D excludes areas entirely, which is inappropriate because internal audit must still assess whether reliance is valid.

A directive control is a policy, procedure, or guideline that establishes expected behavior to mitigate risks. In the context of outsourcing HR functions, a data protection clause in the contract ensures that the service provider is legally obligated to protect sensitive employee data.

Legal and Regulatory Compliance – It ensures the service provider complies with GDPR, CCPA, ISO 27001, SOC 2, and other data protection laws.

Defines Security Responsibilities – Specifies encryption, access controls, data retention policies, and penalties for non-compliance.

Enforceable Accountability – The contract holds the provider accountable for data breaches or misuse.

Industry Best Practice – Most outsourcing agreements include a Data Processing Agreement (DPA) as part of contractual terms.

A. Require a SOC report – A SOC (Service Organization Control) report assesses the provider’s internal controls, but it does not enforce compliance.

C. Obtain a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) – An NDA is useful, but it only prevents individuals from sharing data; it does not define data security requirements.

D. Encrypt the employees' data before transmitting it – Encryption is a strong preventive control, but it does not provide a directive policy like a contract clause does.

IIA’s International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF) – Standard 2201 – Requires internal auditors to assess contract terms related to risk management.

COSO’s Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework – Recommends contractual agreements for third-party risk mitigation.

ISO 27001 Annex A.15.1.2 – Specifies that security requirements must be addressed in supplier contracts.

Why a Data Protection Clause Is the Most Appropriate Directive Control?Why Not the Other Options?IIA References:✅ Final Answer: B. Include a data protection clause in the contract with the service provider. (Most appropriate directive control).

Earned Value Analysis (EVA) is a project management technique that integrates scope, time, and cost data to measure project performance and progress objectively. EVA allows internal auditors to assess whether a software development project is on track by comparing planned work with completed work and actual costs.

Here’s why EVA is the most appropriate choice:

Evaluates Project Progress and Performance – EVA measures how much work has been completed against the planned schedule and budget, helping auditors analyze project efficiency.

Identifies Deviations – It highlights cost overruns or delays in task completion, which is critical for software development projects.

Uses Key Metrics – EVA includes essential indicators like:

Planned Value (PV) – The budgeted cost of work scheduled.

Earned Value (EV) – The value of actual work performed.

Actual Cost (AC) – The real cost incurred for work completed.

Schedule Variance (SV) and Cost Variance (CV) – Indicators of deviations from planned performance.

Supports Risk-Based Internal Audit Approach – The IIA emphasizes risk-based auditing, and EVA helps auditors assess risks related to project cost overruns, schedule slippage, and performance gaps.

A. A Balanced Scorecard – This measures overall organizational performance across perspectives (financial, customer, internal processes, and learning & growth), but it is not specifically designed for evaluating project task completion.

B. A Quality Audit – This focuses on compliance with quality standards and does not measure project task completion efficiency.

D. Trend Analysis – This evaluates patterns over time but does not provide a structured measurement of project progress in terms of cost, time, and completion percentage.

The IIA’s GTAG (Global Technology Audit Guide) on IT Project Management – Recommends using earned value analysis for project auditing.

IIA’s International Professional Practices Framework (IPPF) – Performance Standard 2120 (Risk Management) – Emphasizes the need for internal auditors to evaluate the effectiveness of project risk management, which EVA supports.

COSO’s Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Framework – Encourages structured performance measurement techniques like EVA to monitor projects.

Why Not the Other Options?IIA References:Thus, Earned Value Analysis (EVA) is the correct answer because it provides a precise, quantitative way to measure project performance. ✅

In a hierarchical audit structure, work is reviewed across multiple levels of management, resulting in higher costs because highly skilled and experienced auditors are required for supervisory roles. This increases the cost base compared to a flat structure.

Option A exaggerates benefits of a flat structure. Option B is incorrect because hierarchical structures require more—not less—supervision. Option C is misleading because flat structures typically limit growth opportunities due to fewer layers of promotion.

The CAE must communicate the results of the QAIP, including both ongoing monitoring and periodic assessments, to the board and senior management. Specifically, results of ongoing monitoring must be reported annually, ensuring the board remains informed about the internal audit activity’s quality and conformance.

Options B and C are incorrect because results are reported after completion, not before. Option D is useful for external assessors but not a reporting requirement.

The CAE must communicate the results of the QAIP to the board and senior management. This includes results from ongoing monitoring, periodic self-assessments, and external assessments.

Option A (board oversight) is part of governance but not a QAIP requirement. Option B is incorrect because conformance is assessed for the activity overall, not per engagement. Option C is incorrect because self-assessments are ongoing, while external assessments are required at least once every five years.

Thus, the essential QAIP requirement for conformance is reporting results to the board (Option D).

The CAE should use the organization’s risk acceptance policy to determine when unimplemented audit recommendations represent risks that exceed acceptable tolerance. This ensures consistency with governance frameworks and prevents reliance solely on personal judgment.

Option A lacks formal criteria and would not ensure consistency. The code of conduct (Option B) addresses ethical behavior, not risk acceptance. The audit charter (Option D) defines internal audit’s authority and responsibility but does not guide which issues must be escalated.

The internal audit plan should be risk-based. To achieve this, the CAE should develop an audit universe that lists all auditable units (processes, functions, systems, etc.) and use it as the foundation for risk assessment and prioritization.

Option B is too narrow (monetary value is just one factor). Option C is incomplete since senior management’s input is important but not the sole basis. Option D is incorrect because eliminating units not mandated by law ignores risk-based planning requirements.

Thus, the most appropriate approach is Option A: establishing an audit universe.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Gain sharing is a compensation program where employees receive bonuses tied directly to the company's cost-saving measures and productivity improvements. This approach aligns employees' interests with organizational goals by rewarding them for identifying and implementing efficiencies that reduce costs. Unlike profit sharing, which is based on overall profitability, gain sharing focuses specifically on performance improvements that lead to cost savings. Commissions are typically related to sales performance, and pensions are long-term retirement benefits not directly linked to immediate cost-saving efforts. Therefore, gain sharing is the most indicative of targeting cost-saving objectives.