Audit Checklist
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Audit Checklist






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Audit Checklist Audit Checklist Document Transcript

  • To be completed by the Reviewer AUDIT ENGAGEMENTS CHECKLIST MEMBER CODE: _____________________________ REVIEWER: _____________________________ DATE OF REVIEW: This checklist is for use at Quality Assurance Reviews of NIA Members in Public Practice. Reviewers should also use the Supplementary checklist if the review is of a listed entity, or if directed to it by the answers they give in this questionnaire. Note there is a separate checklist for Audits of Self Managed Superannuation Funds. There is a separate column for each file you review. Where more than one NIA Public Practice Member is engaged in the practice, use a separate copy of the checklist for each Member. SUMMARY Audit engagements are designed to provide a level of confidence in the validity of the reporting or other representation of matters audited. Unlike compilation engagements, audit engagements do include checking the accuracy or validity of the information and forming a judgement. The Australian Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (AuASB) issues Australian Auditing Standards (ASA), which form the main basis for this checklist, and Auditing Guidance Statements (AGS). APES 410 Conforming With Audit and Assurance Standards sets out the requirements that members must comply with Australian Auditing Standards when conducting audit or assurance engagements, and that Auditing Guidance Statements may be a useful guide. Pronouncement Number 3 Conformity with Accounting Standards and Urgent Issues Group Consensus Views includes requirements for audit, as well as preparation, of financial reports, so is relevant for this checklist. It includes definitions of Special & General Purpose Financial Reports etc. Type Of Entity File Code Type Of Entity File Code F Company F Superannuation fund s public A s public offer fund M s large proprietary company B s limited by guarantee entities C s non-self-managed super fund O s small proprietary company D s other P Trusts E Membership Organisations, Charities, Trust accounts Schools etc* Q s accountant F s incorporated associations R s solicitor G s unincorporated associations S s registered training organisation H Grants, acquittal audits T s real estate J Honorary Audit U s travel agent K Other ________________(specify) Z_____ s other L *See Guidance document for explanation of this category Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 1 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 (enter file identification/ code eg file number – abbreviate here & list elsewhere if necessary) 1. ACCEPTANCE OF ENGAGEMENT 1.1 Has the engagement partner confirmed that appropriate engagement acceptance / continuance procedures have been followed, concluded on and documented, including considering ethical compliance and engagement terms at the beginning of the audit consistent with the auditor’s policy? (ASA 220.17, ASA 300.9) 1.2 Did the procedures include consideration of: (a) client integrity; (b) competence, time and resources of the engagement team; (c) capacity of firm and team to comply with ethical requirements; (d) capacity of the engagement team to perform the audit in accordance with Auditing Standards, regulatory and legal requirements, including identification of: • the entity type; • the entity’s reporting obligations; • any externally imposed audit mandate; and • any auditor eligibility requirements (eg registered co auditor, public practice certificate, mandatory training on trust accounts etc) (e) ability to issue an audit report appropriate to the circumstances. (ASA 220.19, 220.23, 300.9) 1.3 For an initial audit involving change of auditor, has the auditor completed and documented ethical communications with the previous auditor? (ASA 300.31) 1.4 For an initial audit, has the auditor obtained sufficient appropriate evidence on opening balances, such as from review of previous auditor’s workpapers (eg evidence about prior periods and internal controls), or auditing opening balances directly, or qualified the audit report? (ASA 300.31) 1.5 For a recurring engagement, has the auditor documented the decision to continue, and considered the need to revise the terms of engagement? (SQC 28, ASA 210.18, 220.17) If the terms of engagement have been changed in the period reviewed, complete supplementary questions at section 12. 1.6 Is there any evidence that the engagement partner has information that, if received earlier, would have caused the firm to decline the engagement? If so, has appropriate action been taken? (SQC 34, ASA 220.22) 2. TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT 2.1 Does the file show the auditor recorded the agreed terms of engagement and forwarded them to the client? (ASA 210.5, ASA 300.9) 2.2 If the engagement is required by legislation, are the terms at least those required by the legislation? (ASA 210.5, 210.10) 2.3 Is the engagement a review, performance review or agreed- upon procedures engagement? If yes, complete relevant supplementary questions at sections 15-17. Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 2 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 2.4 Do the terms for an audit of a financial report clearly identify the applicable reporting framework (eg general purpose / special purpose / other?) (ASA 210.17) Is it clear from documentation that the client accepts responsibility for the selection of the framework? (Pronouncement 3, ASA 200.5) 3. INDEPENDENCE 3.1 Is the engagement team identified in the workpapers? (ASA 220.5) 3.2 Is there any evidence of threats to independence which were clearly not insignificant? Examples include: • provision of non-assurance services to the client; • long association of senior engagement personnel with the client; • client fees being a significant proportion of total firm fees; • close business, family or personal relationships with the client, its directors, owners or other key personnel; • audit firm personnel or their related parties serving as a director or officer of the client; • former personnel of the audit firm employed by the client, or vice-versa; and • financial interests in, or loans or guarantees to or from, the client. (Pronouncement 1.290) 3.3 If the firm has provided any financial statement preparation or bookkeeping services to the client, how was the self-review threat reduced to an acceptable level? (Pronouncement 1 290.177-179) 3.4 Is there evidence that evaluation of any threats to independence: (a) has been based on relevant information from the firm / network firm; (b) has considered identified breaches (if any) of the firm’s independence policies and procedures; (c) has been followed by appropriate actions to eliminate the threats or reduce them to an acceptable level, or promptly reported by the engagement partner to the firm; and (d) has a documented conclusion? (ASA 220.15(a)-(c)) 3.5 If the audit is conducted under Part 2M.3 of the Corporations Act 2001, have all relevant personnel documented their independence on the audit file and has the auditor forwarded a complying independence declaration to those charged with governance? (ASA 260.20) 4. PLANNING AND INTERNAL CONTROLS 4.1 Is there a documented audit plan showing how work will be performed effectively and so as to reduce audit risk to an acceptable level? (ASA 300.5, 300.12, 300.13, 300.18, 300.27) 4.2 Did the plan: • identify those charged with governance and to whom governance matters are to be reported (ASA 260.9) • document the auditor’s understanding of the business; (ASA 315.5) • identify specifically applicable legislation that may have a material effect on the financial report? • document the internal control environment and structure, including IT controls and controls over financial reporting (ASA 315.52, 315.79, 315.89, 315.95, 315.103, 315.105, 315.113) Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 3 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 • show how the audit team will be directed, supervised and their work reviewed (ASA 300.23) • assess the risk of material misstatement at both financial report level and assertion level for classes of transactions, account balances and disclosures, including misstatement due to fraud (ASA 240.6, 240.52, 240.61, 315.117, 315.143(c)) • show the overall audit responses to address identified risks (ASA 330.6, 330.8, 330.12); and • record discussion of the plan with the client, including any audit committee? 4.3 Did planning include enquiries of management about their processes and consequent assessments of risk of material financial misstatement, including due to fraud? (ASA 240.38) 4.4 Has the auditor documented an understanding of how those charged with governance exercise oversight of management’s processes for identifying and responding to the risks of fraud in the entity and the internal control that management has established to mitigate these risks? (ASA 240.47). 4.5 Did the plan, or audit program linked to the plan, describe the nature, timing and extent of planned further audit procedures at the assertion level for each material class of transactions, account balance and disclosure, reflecting the auditor’s decision whether to test the operating effectiveness of controls? (ASA 300.20, ASA 330) 4.6 Did the member determine and document materiality: • by making a preliminary materiality assessment (ASA 315.12); • considering quantitative and qualitative factors (ASA 320.21); • reviewing the appropriateness of materiality levels at the conclusion of the audit; and • assessing whether uncorrected misstatements are material individually or in aggregate? (ASA 300.13, 320.5, 320.9, 320.27) 4.7 Has the auditor obtained an understanding of the selection and application of accounting policies and considered whether they are: • appropriate for the business / entity; • consistent with the applicable financial reporting framework; and • consistent with policies used in the relevant industry? (ASA 315.36) 4.8 Were audit procedures (including inspecting correspondence with relevant licensing or regulatory authorities) identified that would help identify instances of non-compliance with the identified laws and regulations, and were they performed? (ASA 250.23) 4.9 Did the auditor document whether any update or change to the overall audit strategy and the audit plan was necessary during the course of the audit, and if so, the details? (ASA 300.21, 300.27) 5. WORKING PAPERS 5.1 Are the working papers sufficiently complete and detailed to be understood by an experienced auditor with no prior knowledge of the engagement? (ASA 230.11) Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 4 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 5.2 Do the workpapers identify: • appropriate cross-references and indexing, including references that link the audit file to the final financial statements; • the meaning of audit ticks and marks • characteristics of specific items or matters that were tested (e.g. invoice numbers, sample sources, dates and names of client personnel interviewed)? (ASA 230.14) • nature and outcomes of discussions with management, staff, those charged with governance, professional advisors etc? (ASA 230.18) 5.3 Do the workpapers identify: • who performed the work and on what date; • who reviewed the work and when; and • the extent of review? (ASA 230.26) (NB: Not every work paper has to show evidence of review) 5.4 Do the workpapers reflect an attitude of professional scepticism? (ASA 200.21, 240.27, 250.5, 250.18, 250.27)? 5.5 Record the format and location of the workpapers, e.g.: • physical file(s) in fire safe cabinets • electronic files on network • archived electronic files etc 5.6 Has a retention period been identified for this engagement’s workpapers consistent with the auditor’s policies and procedures for maintaining confidentiality, safe custody, integrity, accessibility, and retrievability of the documentation? Do prior year workpapers appear to have been kept for the retention period? (ASA 230.31, 230.37, SQC 94) 6. AUDIT EVIDENCE – GENERAL 6.1 Has the auditor documented the response to the assessed risks of material misstatement by including the results of the audit procedures designed to address them, including the risk of management override of controls? (ASA 240,117(b)). 6.2 Has the auditor made enquiries of management, internal audit, those charged with governance of the entity, and others within the entity as appropriate, to determine whether they know of any actual or suspected fraud affecting the entity? (ASA 240.42, 240.50) 6.3 Has the auditor: • tested the appropriateness of general ledger journal entries and other adjustments made in the preparation of the financial report; • reviewed accounting estimates for biases that could result in material misstatement due to fraud; and • understood the business rationale of significant transactions that are outside the normal course of business or are otherwise unusual? (ASA 240.80) 6.4 Was sufficient appropriate audit evidence obtained to confirm material receivables balances? If done by other than direct confirmation, was this justified in writing? (ASA 505.5) 6.5 If inventory was material, did the auditor observe the stock take? If not, was the reason documented and adequate alternative procedures applied? (ASA 501.11, 13, 14, 19) 6.6 Was a bank audit certificate obtained before the audit report was signed? If not, was sufficient appropriate audit evidence in relation to bank balances and charges obtained? (AGS 1002.03) Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 5 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 6.6 Was sufficient appropriate audit evidence obtained regarding litigation and claims and the impact of these? (ASA 508.5, 11, 33, 35) 6.7 Has the auditor documented audit procedures that consider all material events that may have occurred between reporting date and the date of issue of the audit report? (ASA 560.8, 12) 6.8 Did the auditor become aware of possible non-compliance with a law or regulation with material financial report impact? Has appropriate audit evidence been obtained, findings documented and discussed with management? (ASA 250.24, 250.34) If there is such possible non-compliance, complete supplementary questions in Section 13 6.9 Did the auditor obtain sufficient appropriate evidence that fair value measurements and disclosures are in accordance with the entity’s applicable financial reporting framework? (ASA 545.7) 6.10 Was sufficient appropriate audit evidence obtained regarding the identification of related parties and the effect of related party transactions, including lists supplied by the client? (ASA 550.5, 7, 18) 6.11 If the work of another external professional is used, for example an actuary, another auditor or an internal auditor, can the member demonstrate that the scope and content of the work is adequate to be relied upon? (ASA 600.14, 620.17, 19, 610.20) 6.12 Has there been consultation with anyone outside the audit team? If so: (a) have the conclusions reached been documented and agreed by the consulted party? (ASA 220.34(c)); and (b) has the partner determined that the conclusions from the consultation have been implemented? (ASA 220.34(d)) 6.13 Were written representations obtained from management: (a) on specific material matters when other sufficient appropriate audit evidence could not reasonably be expected to exist; (ASA 580.09) (b) acknowledging its responsibilities for the design and implementation of internal control to prevent and detect fraud (ASA 580.12); (c) disclosing management’s fraud risk assessment results and its knowledge of suspected, alleged or known fraud; (ASA 240.96) (d) disclosing all known actual or possible non- compliance with laws and regulations whose effects shall be considered when preparing the financial report; (ASA 250.29) (e) that uncorrected misstatements have been brought to their attention by the auditor and management consider them to be immaterial individually and in aggregate? (ASA 320.35, 580.12) Has a summary of those misstatements been received in writing as part of those representations? 7. AUDIT EVIDENCE –AREA REVIEWED IN DETAIL 7.1 Name one area critical to the audit for which you will review the related planning, performance and reporting workpapers. Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 6 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 7.2 Has the auditor documented: • the risks identified that could lead to material misstatement due to fraud or error; • a description of the accounting system and evaluation of the related internal controls and control activities; and • whether the controls have been implemented? (ASA 240.61, 315.132, 315.135, 315.143(d)) Has the auditor identified which identified risks are significant and therefore require special audit consideration? (ASA 315.126, 315.132) 7.3 Were the type and extent of audit procedures performed consistent with this evaluation? 7.4 Was the quality of evidence obtained appropriate to meet the audit objectives? 7.5 Were identified computer systems adequately tested, including by IT experts if required? 7.6 Do the workpapers adequately document the work undertaken and the conclusions reached? 7.7 Were any issues identified incorporated into audit assessments and adequately addressed (eg by additional testing, reporting to management, aggregated into uncorrected misstatements)?) 8. REVIEW OF ENGAGEMENT AND CONCLUSIONS 8.1 Does the engagement partner appear to have taken responsibility for the direction, supervision and performance of the audit? (ASA 220.25) 8.2 Have audit team members discussed the susceptibility of the financial report to material misstatement, identifying and assessing risks due to error or fraud at both the financial statement level and the assertion level? Are significant decisions reached documented? (ASA 240.30, 240.116, 315.20, 315.143(a)) If that discussion did not include all team members, has the engagement partner considered which matters should be communicated to the other audit team members? (ASA 240.32) 8.3 Is there any evidence of a difference of opinion within the engagement team, with those consulted or between the engagement partner and engagement quality control reviewer? If so, have the firm’s policy and procedures for resolving differences been followed? (ASA 220.94, 220.38) 8.4 Were analytical procedures applied when concluding whether the financial report as a whole is consistent with the member’s knowledge of the business (ASA 520.25), and address any significant fluctuations identified? (ASA 520.27) 8.5 Did the member consider whether these analytical procedures indicate a previously unrecognised risk of material misstatement due to fraud? (ASA 240.89) 8.6 Were identified misstatements considered as indicators of a fraud? If there was such indication, were the implications for other aspects of the audit considered, particularly the reliability of management representations? (ASA 240.91, 580.16) 8.7 If there has been fraud or financial report misstatement, has the auditor adequately considered and documented the implications for the audit, including withdrawal from the engagement, where allowed? (ASA 240.111) Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 7 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 8.8 Did the member conclude on the solvency of the client and the appropriateness of the going concern basis? (ASA 570.5, 39) 8.9 If the auditor has concluded that the presumption of risk of material misstatement due to fraud related to revenue recognition is not applicable to the circumstances of the engagement, have the reasons for that conclusion been documented? (ASA 240.119) Eg trust account audit 8.10 If the file records uncorrected misstatements found during the audit, has the auditor: • aggregated them with any reported by management to see if the overall effect was material (ASA 320.27) • informed management of those misstatements other than clearly trivial ones, seeking correction before evaluating the effect of the remaining uncorrected misstatements (ASA 320.24) • informed those charged with governance of the individual and aggregate amounts determined by management to be immaterial to the financial report as a whole? (ASA 260.17) 8.11 Is there any information, contradicting or inconsistent with the auditor’s final conclusion, for which the auditor has not documented how the contradiction or inconsistency has been addressed? (ASA 230.20) 8.12 Has the engagement partner concluded whether the audit team complied with ethical requirements relating to audit engagements (ASA 220.11)? 8.13 Has the engagement partner concluded that sufficient appropriate audit evidence has been obtained to support the conclusions reached and the audit report? (ASA 220.30) 8.14 What was the date the audit opinion was formed? Does the sufficient audit evidence appear to have been obtained before the audit report was signed? (ASA 700.54) Does the final file appear to have been assembled on a timely basis? (ordinarily within 60 days after issue of the audit report) Does there appear to have been any modification to workpapers after the assembly of the final audit file, and if so, have the details and effect, if any, on the opinion, been documented? (ASA 230.5, 230.28, 230.34, 230.35) 8.15 Overall, is there a sufficient and appropriate record of the basis of the audit report; and evidence that the audit was performed in accordance with Auditing Standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements? (ASA 230.5) 9. AUDIT REPORT 9.1 Record the type of audit opinion the member issued: - unmodified (UM) - emphasis of matter (EOM) – qualified [except for] (E) - adverse (A) - disclaimer of opinion (D) 9.2 Does that type of opinion seem appropriate given the evidence obtained? 9.3 Were there any significant matters that might result in an emphasis of matter opinion (eg going concern or other significant uncertainty)? If so, did the auditor adequately document the conclusion leading to the final report? (ASA 701.11) Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 8 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 9.4 Has a modified opinion been expressed if those charged with governance refused to adjust the financial report for material misstatements and the results of extended audit procedures do not enable the auditor to conclude that the aggregate of uncorrected misstatements is not material? (ASA 320.34) 9.5 Is the audit report format compliant, and contain: • the title, including the word “independent” (ASA 700.23) • the addressee (ASA 700.25) • introductory paragraph, including identification of the entity, identification of the financial statements and declarations audited, and date and period covered by the financial report (ASA 700.27) • statement about the responsibility of those charged with governance for the financial report (ASA 700.33) • statement that the auditor’s responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial report based on the audit, and description of the audit (ASA 700.37, 700.39, 700.42, 700.43) • a section addressing any emphasis of matter accompanying the opinion (ASA 701.9, 11, 15, 17, 19) • an opinion in a paragraph headed Auditor’s Opinion, Qualified Auditor’s Opinion, Disclaimer of Audit Opinion or Adverse Audit Opinion (ASA 700.45, ASA 701.22-24) • any auditor’s opinion on other matters (if applicable) ASA 700.51) • auditor’s signature (name of audit firm, audit company or personal name, consistent with the engagement) (ASA 700.53) • date of signing the audit report (ASA 700.54) • auditor’s practice location (address) (ASA 700.58) 9.6 Is there evidence on file that the client has signed the financial report before the auditor has signed the audit report? (ASA 700.54, ASA 580.7) General Purpose Financial Report 9.10 Does the file document the assessment of whether, in all material respects, the financial report is presented fairly in accordance with Accounting Standards and other mandatory reporting requirements? If the member concludes that the report is not prepared in accordance with Accounting Standards and Interpretations did the member issue a qualified audit report? (ASA 700.44-46, ASA 701.34-36) Special Purpose Financial Report 9.11 Did the member ensure that the SPFR and the audit report clearly state: (a) that it is a special purpose financial report; (b) the specific purpose for which the special purpose financial report has been prepared; and (c) the extent to which Accounting Standards and Interpretations have, or have not, been adopted in its preparation and presentation. (Pronouncement 3) 10. COMMUNICATION WITH CLIENT AND THIRD PARTIES Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 9 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • Reviewer's Comments Document/Records Seen File 1 File 2 File 3 File 4 File 5 File 6 10.1 If the auditor has identified a fraud, or information that one may exist, has the auditor communicated this to management as soon as practicable, (ASA 240.99), or if it involves management, employees with a significant role in internal control, or others where the fraud results in material financial report misstatement, to those charged with governance? (ASA 240.101). Is the communication documented? (ASA 240.118) 10.2 Is there evidence that the auditor has communicated as soon as practicable, material weaknesses in internal control to those charged with governance and to management with appropriate levels of responsibility? (ASA 240.106, 315.141) 10.3 Has the auditor communicated on a timely basis any identified matters of governance interest arising from the audit to those charged with governance? (e.g. in a management letter) (ASA 260.5, 260.15, 260.22) 10.4 If the communications with those charged with governance were made orally, was this appropriate for the nature of the communication and has the auditor kept minutes or file notes to record the communication? (ASA 260.26) 10.5 If the auditor has concerns that a written report may not reach all intended recipients, has the auditor implemented an approach to make all relevant persons informed of the contents of the report? (ASA 260.28) 10.6 Has the auditor considered whether to communicate again on matters of governance interest previously communicated? (ASA 260.32) Have matters previously reported but not corrected been considered in the audit plan? 10.7 If the engagement is an audit required under the Corporations Act, were any suspected contraventions of the Act reported on a timely basis in a Section 311 notice to ASIC? (s. 311, ASIC Practice Note 34) 10.8 If the auditor has withdrawn from an engagement, has the auditor responded to an ethical enquiry from a proposed superceding auditor? If the client has denied permission for the auditor to discuss its affairs with the proposed auditor, has the auditor disclosed that fact? (ASA 250.56, 250.58) 11. REVIEWER’S ASSESSMENT 11.1 Does the auditor appear to have applied all essential procedures required by auditing standards? If there are rare and exceptional circumstances that prevent this, has the member performed alternative appropriate procedures and / or documented the circumstances? (ASA 200.15, 230.23) Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 10 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc
  • The Reviewer should now complete the following sections and discuss them with the Member(s) before leaving. (Include here also the outcomes of the review of the Self-Evaluation Checklist unless you have already included them on another checklist, eg tax, management consulting, compilation) Outcomes: Positive feedback: ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ Non-compliances with mandatory requirements identified: ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ Minor deficiencies and suggestions for improvement: ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ To be completed by the Member at the conclusion of the review Member(s) comments: The above statements are a true and fair description of the review outcomes ________________________________ (Signature) __________________ (Date) OR I disagree with one or more of the above statements, because:___________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________ The Reviewer should now complete the Review Report (FP 452 B) and supply copies to the National Manager of Member Integrity within 2 weeks of the date of the review. Review of Audit Engagements April 2007 Page 11 of 11 /home/pptfactory/temp/20100513132426/audit-checklist4877.doc