Framework of Quality Assurance 18 PDF
Framework of Quality Assurance 18 PDF
O v e rv i e w
A critical asset for an internal audit activity is its credibility with stakeholders. To provide cred-
ible assistance and constructive challenge to management, internal auditors must be perceived
as professionals. Professionalism requires conforming to a set of professional standards. This
chapter provides an overview of The IIA’s International Standards for the Professional Practice of
Internal Auditing and the other elements that make up the International Professional Practices
Framework (IPPF). It explains how each has evolved as the profession has matured, and how
their application should be tailored to each organization without compromising conformance
with the Standards. In particular, it presents and discusses the 1300 series of the Standards
that deals specifically with quality assurance.
9
S ta n d a r d s R e q u i r e Q ua l i t y
Assurance Focus
Chief audit executives (CAEs) need assurance that their internal audit activity and each member
of their staff conform to all mandatory elements of the IPPF, and they need to demonstrate
this conformance to their stakeholders. The only way to meet these expectations is with a
comprehensive quality assurance and improvement program (QAIP) that includes ongoing
monitoring of performance, periodic internal assessments, external assessments conducted
by a qualified, independent assessor or assessment team from outside the organization, and
communication of the results.
The requirements and characteristics of quality in an internal audit activity are defined by
the IPPF, which consists of mandatory and recommended guidance, all provided within the
context of the Mission of Internal Audit as defined in the IPPF.
11
Mandatory Guidance
Mandatory guidance is considered essential for the professional practice of internal auditing.
Mandatory guidance is submitted for review by the entire global profession through the expo-
sure draft process. It consists of four elements:
• Core Principles: The Core Principles for the Professional Practice of Internal
Auditing are the foundation for the IPPF and support internal audit effectiveness.
• Code of Ethics: The Principles and Rules of Conduct of the Code of Ethics
define ethical behavior for a professional internal auditor.
Recommended Guidance
Recommended guidance is endorsed by The IIA through a formal approval process. It
describes practices for the effective implementation of the Core Principles, the Definition
of Internal Auditing, the Code of Ethics, and the Standards. Recommended guidance helps
internal auditors understand and apply the Standards and may provide insight into going
beyond conformance to a higher level of adding value, or addressing issues of concern not
related to a specific standard. Recommended guidance is described in terms of implemen-
tation guidance and supplemental guidance and is available to IIA members on The IIA’s
websites: global.theiia.org and na.theiia.org.
Interpretation:
A quality assurance and improvement program is designed to enable an evaluation of the internal
audit activity’s conformance with the Standards and an evaluation of whether internal auditors
apply the Code of Ethics. The program also assesses the efficiency and effectiveness of the internal
audit activity and identifies opportunities for improvement. The chief audit executive should
encourage board oversight in the quality assurance and improvement program.
Interpretation:
Ongoing monitoring is an integral part of the day-to-day supervision, review, and measurement of
the internal audit activity. Ongoing monitoring is incorporated into the routine policies and prac-
tices used to manage the internal audit activity and uses processes, tools, and information considered
necessary to evaluate conformance with the Code of Ethics and the Standards.
Periodic assessments are conducted to evaluate conformance with the Code of Ethics and the
Standards.
Interpretation:
A qualified assessor or assessment team demonstrates competence in two areas: the professional prac-
tice of internal auditing and the external assessment process. Competence can be demonstrated
through a mixture of experience and theoretical learning. Experience gained in organizations of
similar size, complexity, sector or industry, and technical issues is more valuable than less relevant
experience. In the case of an assessment team, not all members of the team need to have all the
competencies; it is the team as a whole that is qualified. The chief audit executive uses professional
judgment when assessing whether an assessor or assessment team demonstrates sufficient compe-
tence to be qualified.
An independent assessor or assessment team means not having an actual or perceived conflict of
interest and not being a part of, or under the control of, the organization to which the internal
audit activity belongs. The chief audit executive should encourage board oversight in the external
assessment to reduce perceived or potential conflicts of interest.
• The scope and frequency of both the internal and external assessments.
• Conclusions of assessors.
Interpretation:
The form, content, and frequency of communicating the results of the quality assurance and improve-
ment program is established through discussions with senior management and the board and
considers the responsibilities of the internal audit activity and chief audit executive as contained in 15
the internal audit charter. To demonstrate conformance with the Code of Ethics and the Standards,
the results of external and periodic internal assessments are communicated upon completion of such
assessments and the results of ongoing monitoring are communicated at least annually. The results
include the assessor’s or assessment team’s assessment with respect to the degree of conformance.
Interpretation:
The internal audit activity conforms with the Code of Ethics and the Standards when it achieves
the outcomes described therein. The results of the quality assurance and improvement program
include the results of both internal and external assessments. All internal audit activities will have
A p p l i ca t i o n of the IPP F
The IPPF is the foundation of quality for an internal audit activity. While it is equally applicable
to all internal audit activities, the actual practice of internal auditing within an organization
must be adapted to such factors as an organization’s legal, regulatory, and cultural environ-
ment, and industry, size, and stakeholder expectations. The CAE must adapt internal auditing
to the organization’s environment while still conforming with the Standards. Assessors should
consider this adaptation.
16
Internal auditing may be less mature in emerging countries, privately held (not listed) compa-
nies, not-for-profit organizations, small companies, and organizations with a relatively new
internal audit activity. At the same time, many mature internal audit activities that are gener-
ally in conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics look for ways to provide
context to the operation of their activity. Maturity models are used in some of these orga-
nizations to provide this context. Examples of maturity models are available on the internet
and can be adapted by an organization to provide additional insight into maturity levels for
specific internal audit processes or elements of infrastructure.
Establishing a Quality
Assurance and
Improvement Program
O v e rv i e w
Standard 1300 – Quality Assurance and Improvement Program states, “The chief audit exec-
utive must develop and maintain a quality assurance and improvement program that covers
all aspects of the internal audit activity.” The QAIP should encompass all aspects of operating
and managing the internal audit activity—including consulting engagements—as found in
the mandatory elements of the IPPF. It may also be beneficial for the QAIP to consider best
practices in the internal audit profession.
Implementation Guide 1300 states, “The QAIP is designed to enable an evaluation of the
internal audit activity’s conformance with the International Standards for the Professional
Practice of Internal Auditing (Standards) and whether internal auditors apply The IIA’s Code
of Ethics.” Through conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics, the internal
audit activity also achieves alignment with the Definition of Internal Auditing and the Core
Principles.
17
The QAIP must include ongoing and periodic internal assessments, and external assessments
by a qualified independent assessor or assessment team from outside the organization. Quality
should be built into, not onto, the way the activity conducts its business—through its internal
audit methodology, policies and procedures, and human resource practices. Building quality
into a process is essential to validate and continuously improve the internal audit activity,
demonstrating value as defined by stakeholders.
Using key concepts of quality as a foundation in establishing a QAIP, the internal audit activity
should consider all mandatory and recommended guidance elements of the IPPF that support:
18
• Conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics. It is further under-
stood that through conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics,
the internal audit activity also achieves alignment with other mandatory
elements of the IPPF.
T h e QA IP F r a m e w o r k
Standard 1300 – Quality Assurance and Improvement Program states that the CAE must
develop and maintain a QAIP that covers all aspects of the internal audit activity.
A framework is oftentimes used to describe the complete environment for developing and imple-
menting the QAIP. An example of such a framework, consisting of Governance, Professional
Practice, and Communication, is shown in figure 2-1. This framework is intended as guid-
ance only. CAEs may develop their own QAIP structure in conformance with the Standards.
Improvement of QAIP
Professional Practice
Continuous
External Assessment
Ongoing Monitoring
Communication
Self-Assessment
Governance
Periodic
Quality Assessments
To construct a QAIP framework, the internal audit activity universe must be considered.
This universe must include the IPPF, and may include the legal requirements of the specific
country and/or industry where the activity is operating, stakeholder expectations, use of
third-party subject matter experts, co-source partners for internal audit services, and the size
and structure of the overall organization. Implementation Guides for the 1300 series of the
Standards provide more detail and insight.
Internal Assessments
Two key elements of the quality assessment process comprise the internal assessment portion
of the internal audit activity’s QAIP: ongoing monitoring and periodic self-assessments.
The Deming Cycle (or Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle) provides a possible structure in establishing the
QAIP. Applying the Deming Cycle to the ongoing monitoring portion of the QAIP might look
like figure 2-2 (Ongoing Monitoring). The steps in the Deming Cycle are as follows:
2. Do means executing the process and collecting data for analysis and follow-up
in the Check and Act steps of the cycle.
3. Check is the step where actual results are compared to expected outcomes and
21
differences are analyzed.
Act Do
●● Provide coaching and take corrective action. ●● Plan, perform, and report engagements.
●● Reinforce standards through communication and ●● Use checklists, templates, tools, and formats.
training. ●● Collect data on engagement process performance.
●● Revise checklists, templates, tools, and formats as
needed.
Check
22 ●● Verify department standards are met or
exceeded.
●● Confirm use of checklists, templates, tools,
and formats.
●● Document supervisory review.
●● Record, report, and analyze metrics.
Note: Examples are for discussion purposes; they are not intended as a comprehensive or complete
list of activities.
The ongoing monitoring element of the QAIP would primarily address conformance with
the following Standards since they are intended to address quality on an audit-by-audit basis
and relate primarily to engagement activities:
• Feedback from internal audit clients and other stakeholders regarding the effi-
ciency and effectiveness of the internal audit team. Feedback may be solicited 23
immediately following the engagement or on a periodic basis (e.g., semian-
nually or annually) via survey tools or conversations between the CAE and
management.
• Staff and engagement key performance indicators (KPIs), such as the number
of certified internal auditors (CIAs) on staff, their years of experience in internal
auditing, the number of continuing professional development hours they
earned during the year, timeliness of engagements, and stakeholder satisfaction.
Periodic Self-Assessments
Implementation Guide 1311 – Internal Assessments states, “Periodic self-assessments have
a different focus than ongoing monitoring in that they generally provide a more holistic,
comprehensive review of the Standards and the internal audit activity. In contrast, ongoing
monitoring is generally focused on reviews conducted at the engagement level. Additionally,
periodic self-assessments address conformance with every standard, whereas ongoing moni-
toring frequently is more focused on the performance standards at the engagement level.”
The internal audit activity conducts periodic self-assessments to validate its continued confor-
mance with the Standards and Code of Ethics. Through conformance with the Standards and
Code of Ethics, the internal audit activity also achieves alignment with the Definition of
Internal Auditing and the Core Principles. In addition, periodic self-assessments may evaluate:
24
• The quality and supervision of work performed.
The QAIP should document and define a systematic and disciplined approach to the peri-
odic self-assessment process, which may incorporate programs provided in the appendices
of this manual.
Successful internal audit practice is for periodic self-assessment to be performed at least annu-
ally. This provides an annual basis for assurance that the internal audit activity continues to
operate in a manner consistent with requirements of the Standards and the Code of Ethics.
This is especially important during periods of change in the Standards or in the organization.
The periodic self-assessment element of the QAIP would primarily address conformance with
the following series of Standards:
The periodic self-assessment should also assess results of ongoing monitoring. Applying
the Deming Cycle to these additional elements of the QAIP might look like figure 2-3.
Act Do
●● Assess and report on conformance with IPPF ●● Perform annual audit planning.
mandatory guidance. ●● Schedule engagements and assign staff.
●● Identify gaps in conformance and develop road maps ●● Hire, train, and develop staff.
to close gaps. ●● Perform ongoing monitoring of engagements.
●● Revise internal audit activity structure, policies, and ●● Communicate and meet with stakeholders.
procedures as needed.
Check
●● Conduct surveys and interviews with
stakeholders to confirm value is delivered.
26
●● Review a sample of engagement to assure
ongoing monitoring is effective.
●● Record, report, and analyze metrics.
●● Assess internal audit activity structure,
policies, and procedures conformance with
IPPF mandatory guidance.
Note: Examples are for discussion purposes; they are not intended as a comprehensive or complete list
of activities.
A s s e s s m e n t , E va l u a t i o n , and
R e p o rt i n g
Establishing an internal assessment process, both ongoing monitoring and periodic self-
assessments, coupled with the reporting of KPIs, culminates in an evaluation of the internal
audit activity’s QAIP, with results reported to appropriate stakeholders.
• What rating scale will be used to support a conclusion regarding the QAIP
and the internal audit activity’s conformance with the Standards and the Code
of Ethics?
Answering the first question will depend on the design of the internal audit activity’s QAIP
and the level of resources devoted to the internal assessment process. As noted previously, a
successful internal audit practice is to perform annual self-assessments; the Standards do not
specifically state a frequency. Some CAEs may view internal self-assessments as action taken
during years when an external assessment is not performed. Certain parts of the QAIP may
be evaluated every year, while other portions may be evaluated less frequently. The planning
guides described in appendix A and the programs described in appendix D can be used to plan
and perform an internal assessment and evaluation of the QAIP and the internal audit activity.
The second question is not specifically addressed in the Standards, as they do not prescribe 27
an assessment scale; however, the Standards do require the degree of conformance with the
Standards and the Code of Ethics be assessed. Appendix E has an evaluation summary frame-
work that contains conformance criteria linked with the Standards and the Code of Ethics,
which CAEs can use to assess the conformance with these mandatory elements of the IPPF.
Appendix E describes an assessment scale of Generally Conforms, Partially Conforms, and
Does Not Conform.
This discussion of rating scales leads back to the concept of a maturity model, which was
introduced in chapter 1. Internal audit activities in the early stages of establishing their QAIP
might use a maturity model to help them achieve general conformance with the Standards
and the Code of Ethics—confirmed by their internal self-assessment process and eventually
assessed by a qualified, independent assessor or assessment team from outside the organization.
Internal audit activities with mature QAIPs, where multiple internal and external assessments
have been completed, might use a maturity model as a way to demonstrate different levels
of quality to their stakeholders.
Continuous Improvement
While the primary focus of the QAIP must be on evaluating conformance with the Standards
and the Code of Ethics, real value for the internal audit activity is derived from a focus on
continuous improvement. Internal audit activities that have embedded the concept of contin-
uous improvement into their operating culture and QAIP go beyond conformance with the
Standards and the Code of Ethics and realize many additional benefits, including:
• Positioning the internal audit activity for success within the organization.
28
• Becoming more forward-looking in approach and experiencing greater align-
ment with the organization’s strategies and objectives.
• Improved internal audit staff morale resulting from a focus on process improve-
ments where all ideas are welcome.
The concept of continuous improvement highlights the dynamic nature of establishing and
maintaining an effective QAIP. Changing stakeholder priorities, shifting organizational strat-
egies, and fluctuating environmental factors all contribute to this dynamic. CAEs should not
expect “perfect” or “absolute” conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics, partic-
ularly for internal audit activities that are just beginning to establish their QAIP. Conscientious
periodic self-assessments will highlight areas where the internal audit activity can get stronger.
External Assessments
So far, this chapter has outlined steps to building an effective QAIP, focusing on the internal
assessment process—ongoing monitoring and periodic self-assessment. External assessments 29
are also an element of the QAIP as prescribed by the Standards; however, the Standards only
require an external assessment to occur at least once every five years. Internal assessment
components of the QAIP should be continuously active between external assessments, estab-
lishing the foundation of a successful internal audit activity.
The primary link between a QAIP and an external assessment is the reporting process orig-
inating from the QAIP. For a QAIP to be deemed effective, CAEs should expect external
assessors to affirm what the CAE is measuring in regard to conformance with the Standards
and the Code of Ethics through the periodic self-assessment process and reporting of results
to key stakeholders. The CAE’s report of the periodic self-assessment may be used as a basis
for assessment by an external assessor.
A secondary link between a QAIP and an external assessment is the documentation main-
tained by the CAE as evidence of an effective QAIP. This includes charters, policies, procedures,
metrics, audit reports, annual audit plans, engagement workpapers, audit committee minutes,
staff training records, etc. External assessors will want to examine relevant documentation
The decision to schedule an external assessment often results from the CAE’s requirement to
perform an external assessment every five years. The CAE might consider other factors when
determining specific timing and scope for this review:
• Does the CAE believe that the internal audit activity generally conforms with
the Standards and the Code of Ethics?
• Has feedback from key stakeholders been incorporated into the QAIP?
As noted in Standard 1312 – External Assessments, CAEs can choose from two method-
ologies for external assessments. The first approach is a full external assessment, and the
30 second approach is an independent, external validation of the CAE’s self-assessment of the
internal audit activity. Both approaches—full external assessment and independent, external
validation—require that they be conducted by a qualified, independent assessor or assessment
team from outside the organization. The qualified, independent assessor or assessment team
must demonstrate competence in two areas: the professional practice of internal auditing and
the external assessment process.
Several factors may influence the CAE’s decision in selecting an appropriate external assess-
ment method to review the internal audit activity’s QAIP. This is an area where the board
might take an active role in oversight of the QAIP as suggested in the Standards.
This manual reviews tools, techniques, and methods used to perform internal assessments
(see chapter 3), a full external assessment (see chapter 4), or an independent validation of the
CAE’s self-assessment of the internal audit activity (see chapter 5).
The IIA is constantly producing new supplemental guidance and modifying implementation
guidance as warranted. Readers of this manual should check the Standards and Guidance
section of The IIA’s website for relevant guidance not listed here, and for updates to the guid-
ance noted above.
31
Internal Assessments
O v e rv i e w
Chapter 3 outlines the requirements for performing internal assessments. Processes and
procedures used to support external assessments might also be used for internal assess-
ment purposes. For example, appendix D-4, “Internal Audit Process,” might be used
to evaluate conformance with Standards 2200, 2300, 2400, and 2500 for periodic self-
assessment purposes. They also might be used to evaluate quality for individual engagements
as a component of ongoing monitoring.
33
Interpretation
“Ongoing monitoring is an integral part of the day-to-day supervision, review, and measurement
of the internal audit activity. Ongoing monitoring is incorporated into the routine policies and
practices used to manage the internal audit activity and uses processes, tools, and information
considered necessary to evaluate conformance with the Code of Ethics and the Standards.
Periodic assessments are conducted to evaluate conformance with the Code of Ethics and the
Standards.
Sufficient knowledge of internal audit practices requires at least an understanding of all elements
of the International Professional Practices Framework.”
Internal Assessments
Implementation Guide 1311 – Internal Assessments states, “Ongoing monitoring is achieved
primarily through continuous activities such as engagement planning and supervision, stan-
dardized working practices, workpaper procedures and signoffs, report reviews, as well as
34
identification of any weaknesses or areas in need of improvement and action plans to address
them.” These processes support quality on an audit-by-audit basis.
Self-assessments serve internal audit by evaluating conformance with the internal audit
charter and the mandatory elements of the IPPF, the quality and supervision of audit work
being done, internal audit’s policies and procedures, how internal audit adds value, and the
achievement of KPIs. These processes provide insight into the level of conformance with the
Standards and the Code of Ethics and the quality of the internal audit activity as a whole.
Implementation Guide 1300 – Quality Assurance and Improvement Program states, “Through
conformance with the Standards and Code of Ethics, the internal audit activity also achieves
alignment with the Definition of Internal Auditing and the Core Principles for the Professional
Practice of Internal Auditing.”
Adequate supervision is the most fundamental and important aspect of quality in an internal
audit activity. Supervision that takes place at the appropriate times during annual audit plan-
ning and for engagement planning, fieldwork, and reporting, and is properly documented,
demonstrates due professional care. It also promotes consistency, quality, and sustainability
of internal audit processes and infrastructure.
Using checklists and templates embedded within an electronic workpaper tool further
supports quality. These items provide the structure to ensure work is performed consistently
between engagements. The use of checklists and templates allows internal auditors to focus
35
on content as opposed to being concerned with form. This is viewed by many stakeholders
as adding value within the internal audit process. Conducting surveys of key stakeholders at
the conclusion of an engagement is another way to gain insight into the quality and value of
the internal audit process from the perspective of the audit customer. These can also help to
identify opportunities for continuous improvement in the internal audit process.
KPIs that are developed in collaboration with stakeholders and the board can provide valuable
insight into the internal audit activity and can be used to promote enhanced efficiency, effec-
tiveness, and quality. The use of a balanced scorecard is a particularly effective way to monitor
and report results. Standard 1320 – Reporting on the Quality Assurance and Improvement
Program requires that the results of ongoing monitoring be reported to senior management
and the board at least annually. Incorporating a balanced scorecard into the periodic reports
to the board is an excellent way to meet this communication requirement.
Appendix E provides a mechanism to summarize work performed using this manual for peri-
odic self-assessment, and can provide a snapshot of conformance with the Standards and the
Code of Ethics. The results of a periodic self-assessment, together with the conclusions drawn,
must be communicated to senior management and the board upon completion of the assess-
ment. At a minimum, the report should include the objectives, scope, and frequency of the
periodic self-assessment; the qualifications and independence of the assessors or assessment
team; the conclusions of the assessors; and any corrective action plans that have been created
from the assessments to address areas that were not in conformance with the Standards or
the Code of Ethics.
In all situations, the assessor or assessment team should be independent from the areas they
review (they should not assess engagements for which they were primarily responsible) and
competent in the practice of internal auditing. Many organizations try to have self-assessment
team members who are CIAs. Team members might also include other qualified individuals
from within the organization or a co-source provider of internal audit services familiar with
the internal audit activity.
Vertical and horizontal reviews are the two generally accepted methods of performing quality
reviews of completed audit projects. A vertical review provides an evaluation of conformance
with the Standards or the Code of Ethics, and examines a specific project from a top-down
approach (e.g., an assessment of individual audit steps performed for a specific project work
plan, such as planning steps, fieldwork steps, and reporting steps).
A horizontal review allows for an evaluation across all project engagements (e.g., use of the
risk assessment matrix, the supervisory review and approval process, or consistency in applying
report ratings) from an efficiency and effectiveness perspective. Horizontal reviews can also
be used to evaluate other infrastructure and processes such as annual risk assessment and
audit planning or continuing professional development processes. A combination of these
two methods is consistent with successful internal audit practice and contributes to contin-
uous improvement of internal audit processes.
O v e rv i e w
Standard 1312 – External Assessments requires that an external assessment of an internal
audit activity be conducted at least once every five years by a qualified, independent assessor
or assessment team from outside the organization. The objective of the external assessment is
to evaluate an internal audit activity’s conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics.
Implementation Guide 1300 states, “Through conformance with the Standards and Code
of Ethics, the internal audit activity also achieves alignment with the Definition of Internal
Auditing and the Core Principles for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing.” External
assessments may also focus on identifying opportunities to enhance internal audit processes,
offer suggestions to improve the effectiveness of the internal audit activity, promote ideas
to enhance the activity’s image and credibility, and offer operational or strategic comments.
This approach embraces the successful practices of the profession and emphasizes governance,
risk management, and control processes as important areas for internal auditors’ attention.
External assessment recommendations focus on opportunities for continuous improvement
and add value to the organization.
39
As noted in Standard 1312 – External Assessments, “External assessments may be accom-
plished through a full external assessment, or a self-assessment with independent external
validation.” The full external assessment is conducted by a qualified, independent assessor
or assessment team from outside the organization. The team approach involves an outside
team of competent professionals under the leadership of an experienced, professional project
manager or team leader. The team, on a collective basis, must demonstrate competence in the
professional practice of internal auditing and the external assessment process. This chapter
outlines how to conduct a full external assessment. Chapter 5 outlines how to conduct a
self-assessment with independent validation.
Before the onset of the external assessment, several communications must take place between
the CAE and the board. The CAE must discuss with the board the form and frequency of the
external assessment. He or she must also discuss the qualifications and independence of the
external assessor or assessment team, including any potential conflicts of interest. Involvement
of the board is encouraged because it reduces perceived conflicts of interest between the CAE
and the external assessment provider. Further guidance on qualifications and independence
of the external assessment provider can be found in Implementation Guide 1312 – External
Assessments.
40
The remainder of chapter 4 describes performing the external assessment from the perspec-
tive of the external assessment provider. The external assessment process, including planning,
fieldwork, and reporting activities, are described to facilitate the execution of a full external
assessment. Where appropriate, references are made to guides and programs used to docu-
ment the assessment. These guides and programs are found in the appendices to this manual.
Process
QAIP ●● Set scope and ●● Review planning ●● Interview clients, ●● Evaluate against
objectives. docs. IA staff, and IPPF recourses
●● Select and prepare ●● Review all other docs stakeholders. for conformance
Surveys & Interviews team. received per docs ●● Review workpapers. and areas for
●● Request planning request list. ●● Review all other improvement.
Review of process, reports, docs. ●● Summarize survey documents only ●● Summarize issues.
and risk assessment ●● Arrange preliminary responses. available on site. ●● Make
visit. ●● Determine staffing recommendations.
Review of workpapers, ●● Distribute surveys. knowledge. ●● Close conference.
reports, and technology plan ●● Conduct team ●● Issue draft report for
discussions. comment.
●● Issue final report to
Report files
CAE.
Reporting/Communications
41
Figure 4-1: Full External Assessment Process
Planning
The five points of the planning process, if followed by the external assessment team leader,
enhance the customer’s involvement in and satisfaction with a value-added experience:
• Set scope and objectives—agree on the scope, objectives, and timing of the
full external assessment.
• Select and prepare the team—select and train (as needed) the full external
assessment team.
• The internal audit activity charter that documents the purpose, authority, and
responsibility of the internal audit activity and is approved by the board.
• The expectations of the internal audit activity expressed by the oversight group,
executive management, and any other stakeholders.
42 • The entity’s control environment and the CAE’s audit practice environment.
• The IPPF and any other legal requirements laid down for the internal audit
activity within the specific organization and/or country.
• Consider the internal audit activity’s current needs and objectives, as well as the
future direction and goals of the organization. Appraise the risk to the organiza-
tion if the results indicate that the internal audit activity is performing at a less
than effective level or is not in conformance with one or more of the Standards.
• If applicable, identify opportunities and offer ideas to the CAE and staff for
improving the effectiveness of the internal audit activity, thereby raising the
value added to management and the audit committee.
The objectives listed can be modified and others can be added to satisfy the needs of customer
organizations.
43
• Standard 1312 – External Assessments specifies that the full external assess-
ment must be conducted by a qualified, independent assessor or assessment
team from outside the organization.
• Qualified individuals are persons with the technical proficiency, internal audit
experience, business experience, and educational background appropriate for
Following is a list of the possible qualifications and criteria by which the CAE can assess the
competence of a full external assessment team. Specific engagements may require additional
unique qualifications.
{{ The team leader should have experience that is comparable to that of the
CAE of the internal audit activity being assessed.
44
{{ The full external assessment team should possess or have ready access to
all of the necessary technical expertise (e.g., governance, IT, risk manage-
ment, internal audit attributes, management consulting, and internal
audit management).
{{ The full external assessment team should objectively consider the expec-
tations of the audit committee, executive management, and the CAE; the
audit structure; and the policies and procedures of the organization and
the internal audit activity.
{{ To ensure freedom from bias in the full external assessment, there should
not be any relationship, either directly or indirectly, between the organi-
zation and the full external assessment team that is, or appears to be, a
conflict of interest. Such relationships could significantly negate the bene-
fits of the full external assessment.
• Meet the CAE and other staff that may be assisting the team during the
on-site visit.
• Ensure that all documents requested per the checklist can be provided (see
appendix A).
• Ensure that there are no misunderstandings regarding the time, venue, scope,
and objectives of the full external assessment.
• Agree on the list of participants for the surveys: executive leadership, operating
management, and internal audit activity staff (see appendix B).
The full external assessment team leader should keep minutes (or a summary) of the meeting
for later attention and impressions of the organization.
46
Distribute Surveys
Distribute the Executive Leadership and Operating Management and Internal Audit Staff
surveys to participants. (The purpose and use of the surveys are fully discussed in appendix B.)
O ff - S i t e W o r k ( t o b e c o m p l e t e d
prior to on-site visit)
• The full external assessment team leader should review the planning docu-
mentation and all planning guides and documents noted on the document
request list provided by the CAE before visiting the organization. This will
help to plan the work outlined in the programs that will be performed on site
(see appendices A and D).
• The CAE should complete the two surveys and provide his or her best assess-
ment of how executive leadership, operating management, and the internal
Summarize the survey results for feedback to the CAE. Areas of significant
divergence between CAE responses and those of survey participants should
be investigated by the full external assessment team during their interviews,
adjusting interview guides where necessary as discussed in appendix C. The
full external assessment team (perhaps with input from the CAE during the
on-site visit) will need to interpret whether survey information has identified
positive or negative ratings or trends. The CAE should be encouraged to use
this information during training sessions with internal audit activity staff to
emphasize positive results and highlight areas that need improvement.
On-Site Work 47
Review appendix D to become familiar with descriptions and instructions for completing the
four program segments that follow the same sections that were used in the planning guides,
survey guides, and interview guides: Internal Audit Governance (D-1), Internal Audit Staff
(D-2), Internal Audit Management (D-3), and Internal Audit Process (D-4).
On-site work is the most comprehensive element of a quality assessment and includes:
• Determine if the staffing knowledge and skills, especially in IT, risk assessment,
controls monitoring, interaction with governance participants, successful prac-
tices, and other areas, will pinpoint evidence of continuous improvement.
{{ Review reports and communicate with management and the board (audit
committee) to assess the extent that the internal audit activity meets objec-
tives and adds value.
48
{{ Review and assess the coordination of the internal audit activity with the
work of the independent auditors.
{{ Evaluate the internal audit activity’s conformance with the Standards and
Code of Ethics and other relevant policies and procedures,
• The on-site process is a cumulative experience for the team. Therefore, frequent
discussions are held and information is assessed to offer practical suggestions
reflecting the current thinking of the profession.
The time spent for on-site work should be determined by such factors as the size of the internal
audit activity, workpaper reviews, and interview schedules. On-site work typically lasts for
one to two weeks, depending on the scope of work and the objectives of the full external
assessment, and the size, geographic dispersion, and structure of the internal audit activity.
• As appropriate, the full external assessment team will provide the CAE with
recommendations for the internal audit activity to enhance conformance with
the Standards and the Code of Ethics, add value for clients, and be a catalyst
for positive change in the organization. Finally, the full external assessment 49
team will exercise its professional judgment to render an opinion as to the level
of conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics by the internal
audit activity.
• Issues should be brought to the attention of the CAE and discussed as appro-
priate as they come up throughout the full external assessment. The closing
• The CAE, with advice from the full external assessment team leader, will
decide who will attend the closing conference. Since the individual observa-
tions should have been discussed with internal audit management throughout
the full external assessment, the closing conference should hold no surprises.
It should be an orderly discussion of the significant issues, conclusions, and
recommendations. It also provides the CAE with an opportunity to comment
on the observations and recommendations.
50 Reporting
• A draft report is prepared either before or after the closing conference (see
appendix F). When the full external assessment team leader completes the
draft, copies are sent to the team for comment within a specific time frame.
Comments are considered and, as appropriate, incorporated into the draft
report before it is sent to the CAE. The CAE is asked to respond to the recom-
mendations and provide an action plan.
• The final report, in conjunction with the CAE’s response or action plan, will
typically be addressed to the CAE with the expectation that copies will be
distributed to representatives of the board (the chair of the audit committee or
other internal audit oversight body of the board) and the executives to whom
the CAE reports. Copies of the full external assessment report should also be
addressed to the individuals or groups initiating the full external assessment.
Q ua l i t y A s s e s s m e n t P r o c e s s M a p
The Quality Assessment Process Map for a full external assessment, indicating the division of
work between the internal audit activity and the independent external assessor or assessment
team, is shown on page 52. Note that conducting surveys and scheduling interviews require
close coordination between the internal audit activity and the independent external assessor.
C-3 IA Staff
Self-Assessment with
Independent Validation
O v e rv i e w
Standard 1312 – External Assessments requires that an external assessment of an internal
audit activity be conducted at least once every five years by a qualified, independent assessor
or assessment team from outside the organization. The objective of the external assessment
is to evaluate an internal audit activity’s conformance with the Standards and Code of Ethics.
Implementation Guide 1300 states, “Through conformance with the Standards and Code
of Ethics, the internal audit activity also achieves alignment with the Definition of Internal
Auditing and the Core Principles for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing.”
External assessments may also focus on identifying opportunities to enhance internal audit
processes, offer suggestions to improve the effectiveness of the internal audit activity, promote
ideas to enhance the activity’s image and credibility, and offer operational or strategic comments.
This approach embraces the successful practices of the profession and emphasizes governance,
risk management, and control processes as important areas for auditors’ attention. External
assessment recommendations focus on opportunities for continuous improvement and are
53
offered to enhance conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics and the internal
audit activity’s ability to add value to the organization.
The same basic body of work needs to be performed and documented for a self-assessment
with independent validation as for a full external assessment (see chapter 4). The self-
assessment should be performed with the same level of due professional care found in
performing other internal audit engagements and should be structured in a manner that fully
documents and supports planning, fieldwork, and reporting activities.
54
The independent external assessor or assessment team validates the work of the internal assess-
ment team through review of assessment planning documentation, re-performing a sample of
assessment work program steps, conducting interviews with key stakeholders (board members,
executive leadership, operating management, and internal audit management and staff), and
assessing the conformance conclusions reported by the internal assessment team.
The internal assessment team should expect to submit all of its documentation related to
assessment planning, assessment work programs, and its final assessment report to the inde-
pendent external assessor or assessment team well in advance of any on-site visit by the external
assessor to perform the validation activities.
Planning
A well-established QAIP provides a solid framework for achieving a successful self-assessment
with independent validation. The documentation, assessments, metrics, and reporting that
comprise an internal audit activity’s QAIP should be useful in preparing much of the mate-
rial required to perform the assessment.
Planning, scheduling, and staffing the self-assessment should follow the same process the
internal audit activity uses to execute and control any assurance or consulting engagement.
Assigning resources necessary to complete the self-assessment should be part of the annual
plan for the internal audit activity for the year in which the self-assessment with indepen-
dent validation is to be performed. Progress updates regarding the self-assessment should be
55
included with status reporting for all other engagements in the process as a component of
periodic reporting to senior management and the board.
Many internal audit activities that utilize electronic workpapers for internal audit engagements
find it helpful to document the self-assessment component as a separate audit in their work-
paper system. This allows for documentation of planning, fieldwork, and reporting activities
consistent with their prescribed framework, using guides, programs, tools, and templates as
found in this manual.
Key considerations for determining resource requirements and preparing a schedule of activ-
ities for the self-assessment with independent validation include:
• An estimate of time required for the internal assessment team to complete the
assessment programs (see appendix D). A critical assumption for this estimate
is the number of engagement files to be reviewed as part of the internal audit
process program.
• A discussion with the independent external assessor regarding how much time
they need for their on-site work, and how far in advance of the on-site work
they want to receive documentation prepared by the internal audit activity’s
56 internal assessment team.
Upon completion of the on-site work by the independent external assessor, the self-assessment
with independent validation’s schedule should allow time for the external assessor to complete
the Independent Validation Statement (see appendix F-4).
“An independent assessor or assessment team means not having either an actual or a perceived
conflict of interest and not being a part of, or under the control of, the organization to which the
internal audit activity belongs.”
The CAE should consult with the board and senior leadership regarding selection of the
external assessor or assessment team based on a thorough review of their qualifications and
experience. The CAE should also obtain a signed statement from the external assessor or
assessment team confirming their independence as defined in the Standards. This is typically
done during the contracting process.
C o m m u n i ca t i o n a n d C o o r d i n a t i o n
w i t h t h e E x t e r n a l V a l i d at i o n
Assessor 57
As indicated on the Quality Assessment Process Map appearing at the end of this chapter,
most of the work in performing a self-assessment with independent validation is completed
by the internal audit activity’s internal assessment team. However, the external assessor will
perform some work during the on-site visit, and coordination with the internal assessment
team will facilitate completion of the external assessor’s work.
One area requiring coordination is the completion of surveys (see appendix B). The internal
assessment team (or CAE) and the external assessor should agree on who will be asked to
participate in the surveys and on the schedule for completing the surveys. The internal assess-
ment team would be responsible for sending out the surveys, and survey participants will
normally send their responses directly to the external assessor for collation and evaluation of
results. The external assessor will review results of the surveys with the CAE and the internal
assessment team during the on-site visit. The external assessor will also use information gained
from the surveys in completing interviews with key stakeholders.
During the on-site visit, the external assessor will review tests of audit engagement files
prepared by the internal assessment team. The external assessor may also want to review other
audit engagement files not reviewed by the internal assessment team. To enable the external
assessor to complete this review, the internal assessment team should provide the external
assessor with appropriate access to any relevant software.
58
Work to Be Completed Before
the On-Site Visit
The CAE should oversee completion of the self-assessment of the internal audit activity, which
uses the same tools completed during a full external assessment (see appendices A, B, and
D–F). Key elements of the self-assessment to be performed and documented by the internal
audit activity’s internal assessment team include:
• Completing the planning guides (see appendix A), which include an analysis of
the internal audit activity’s operations and answers to a series of questions that
provide insight into the CAE’s views regarding specific conformance criteria
related to the Standards or the Code of Ethics.
• Conducting surveys using the survey guides (see appendix B) that collect infor-
mation from senior leadership, operating management, and internal audit
management and staff regarding various aspects of the internal audit activity.
Use of the surveys should be coordinated with the external assessor or assess-
ment team as described above.
All of the above materials should be made available to the external assessor for use in completing
the review and validation of the self-assessment. The internal audit activity should coordinate
with the external assessor or assessment team as to which documents will be supplied to the
external assessor before the on-site visit. The external assessor will also schedule interviews to
be conducted during the on-site visit.
During the on-site visit, the external assessor will review documentation prepared by the
internal assessment team and perform sufficient tests of the self-assessment to validate results
and express an opinion regarding conformance with the Standards and the Code of Ethics
to include:
As nearly all of the work performed during a self-assessment with independent validation
is completed by the internal audit activity’s internal assessment team, the amount of time
required on site by the external assessor is normally much less than that required by an external
assessment team performing a full external assessment.
The final report of the self-assessment with independent validation should be signed by the
internal audit activity’s internal assessment team and the independent external assessor, and
issued by the CAE to senior management and the board (see appendix F).
2. Question: I’ve heard the term “point-in-time assessment.” What does that
mean and what are the implications for a self-assessment with independent
validation?
Q ua l i t y A s s e s s m e n t P r o c e s s M a p
The Quality Assessment Process Map for a self-assessment with independent validation indi-
61
cating the division of work between the internal audit activity and the independent external
assessor or assessment team is shown on page 62. Note that conducting surveys and sched-
uling interviews requires close coordination between the internal audit activity and the
external independent assessor.
C-3 IA Staff