CIA IIA-CIA-Part1 Updated Exam

By accepting a role as an engagement supervisor on a highly specialized and technical engagement for which she did not have the expertise, the internal auditor violated the fundamental principle of competency as outlined in The IIA's Code of Ethics. The principle of competency requires internal auditors to perform audit services with the necessary knowledge, skills, and experience. Accepting an assignment without the required expertise undermines the quality and reliability of the audit work.

References:

The IIA Code of Ethics: "Internal auditors shall engage only in those services for which they have the necessary knowledge, skills, and experience."

The IIA Standards: Standard 1210 – Proficiency: "Internal auditors must possess the knowledge, skills, and other competencies needed to perform their individual responsibilities."

According to IIA standards, assigning an auditor to review an area where they previously had responsibilities may compromise objectivity. The best approach is for the auditor to abstain from participation in the audit of the collections unit to avoid any perceived conflicts​​.

According to IIA guidance, it is a best practice for the internal audit charter to be reviewed and resubmitted for board approval annually, along with the audit plan. This annual review ensures that the charter remains relevant and aligned with the organization’s objectives and governance structure. It also provides an opportunity to update the charter to reflect any changes in the internal audit activity's role, responsibilities, or scope of work. This process helps maintain the charter as a living document that accurately defines the purpose, authority, and responsibility of the internal audit function.

References:

The IIA Standards: Standard 1000 – Purpose, Authority, and Responsibility: "The chief audit executive must periodically review the internal audit charter and present it to senior management and the board for approval."

The IIA Practice Guide: "Internal Audit Charter: Understanding

When an internal auditor suspects fraud during an assurance engagement, the first step should be to determine whether any additional audit work needs to be performed. This involves assessing the potential scope and impact of the suspected fraud and deciding on the appropriate audit procedures to confirm or refute the suspicion. This step is crucial to gather sufficient information before taking further actions.

Option A: Recommending sanctions is premature without confirming the fraud.

Option C: Launching an investigation is a subsequent step that may require coordination with fraud experts.

Option D: Requesting immediate remediation is also premature without confirming the fraud.

References:

IIA Standard 1220: Due Professional Care.

IIA Practice Guide: Internal Auditing and Fraud.