How we work
The engagement path for a remediation follow-up audit — from finding register to committee-ready status report.
A follow-up audit should feel predictable for finance and internal audit teams. This page outlines the path we use most often. Timings flex with finding volume and evidence access.
Share the register
Send the prior report extract, management letter, or tracker. Note board, lender, or regulator dates. We confirm whether a follow-up, gap assessment, or wording review fits first.
Scoping and engagement letter
We agree the population of items, sites, reporting audience, and fee. The letter names what is in and out of scope so fieldwork does not silently expand into a full re-audit.
Planning memo and document request
You receive a short plan: sampling approach, interviewees, and the evidence list. Owners get advance notice so reconciliations and approvals are ready when we arrive.
Fieldwork
Walkthroughs, sample tests, and evidence logging. We raise factual queries early rather than storing surprises for the draft. Hybrid days are common when owners sit across Hong Kong.
Clearance and final status report
Management reviews the draft status map for factual accuracy. The final report states closed, partially closed, and open items with residual risk notes for the committee pack.
What we need from you
Named owners for each open item, access to sample evidence, and a single coordinator who can unlock calendars. Missing evidence is the usual cause of slipped committee dates — not the testing itself.
After the report
Some clients book a narrow second visit for items left partially closed. Others move into a control gap assessment where design was the real issue. Either path starts from the same status map.
Request dates
Schedule a follow-up audit or browse all engagements.