CISA Question 122

Community Discussion

Written by other learners. Comments can disagree with the marked answer — check the official documentation when in doubt.

• Chose B2

  When gaps in evidence are found in the work of external experts, and those gaps may impact the audit conclusions, the BEST course of action for the internal audit team is to report a scope limitation in the audit conclusions. This: Maintains transparency and audit integrity, Acknowledges that some areas could not be fully evaluated, Alerts stakeholders that conclusions may be incomplete or qualified. This is a standard and professional approach when audit evidence is insufficient or incomplete. Why not the others? A. Engage another expert to conduct the same testing ➤ Costly and time-consuming; may not be feasible within the original engagement. C. Recommend the external experts conduct additional testing ➤ Could help, but not guaranteed to resolve the issue within audit timelines; not an immediate resolution. D. Escalate to senior management ➤ May be necessary after reporting the scope limitation, but not the best first step in response to audit evidence gaps.

• Chose C1

  A scope limitation should only be reported if the gaps cannot be resolved after exhausting all corrective measures. The first step is to try and obtain the missing evidence before concluding there is a limitation.

• Chose B2

  Option B emphasizes transparency, which is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the audit process. By reporting a scope limitation, the internal audit team ensures that stakeholders are aware of any uncertainties or deficiencies in the evidence provided by external experts. This aligns with professional standards and ethical practices in auditing, reinforcing the credibility of their conclusions and fostering trust in the audit process. Prioritizing transparency is essential for effective risk management and informed decision-making