Question

Qestions:

1) a) Using the IT audit report for the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (in the Readings tab), find examples of the items that are supposed to be in IT audit report according to Standard 1401. Indicate item and page number.

b) Comment on additional items you find in the audit report that are not part of the 1401 standard for Audit Reporting. Explain what the benefits are of including it.

Information Technology
Internal Audit Report
Report #2013-03
August 9, 2013
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 2
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary...................................................................................................................................................3
Background Information..........................................................................................................................................4
Background ............................................................................................................................................................4
Audit Objectives....................................................................................................................................................4
Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................5
Testing Approach..................................................................................................................................................5
Statement of Auditing Standards ........................................................................................................................6
Findings, Observations, and Recommendations ..................................................................................................6
IT Policies and Procedures ..................................................................................................................................7
IT Risk Assessment...............................................................................................................................................8
Disaster Recovery Plan & Business Continuity Plan.......................................................................................9
Security Access Reviews.....................................................................................................................................11
Self-Assessment Review.....................................................................................................................................12
Additional Recommendations ...............................................................................................................................13
Appendix A – Texas Administrative Code, Subchapter B, Rule §202.22.......................................................15
Appendix B – Texas Administrative Code, Subchapter B, Rule §202.25 – IT Policies ...............................16
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 3
Executive Summary
In support of the FY2013 Internal Audit Plan, a review of the information technology (IT) process was
conducted in August 2013. The IT department is responsible for setting up and supporting IT operations at
the Agency. The CPRIT offices are located in Austin, TX; however, the Chief Scientific Officer has an
office in downtown Houston, which is also serviced and maintained by the CPRIT IT department. The
department is also responsible for the Agency’s various websites, cloud services operations, video
conference system, data closet, and typical back-office IT operations.
This was the third annual IT audit for the Agency. An internal audit of the IT processes was performed
previously in June 2012 and May 2011. As a result of those audits, Internal Audit provided CPRIT findings
and recommendations to improve overall efficiency and effectiveness within their IT operations. Although
some steps have been made to remediate these findings, CPRIT needs to place importance on establishing a
strong IT governance structure.
CPRIT continues to work towards establishing leading practices within the IT operations. However, during
the FY 2013 IT internal audit, the following improvement opportunities were noted, in descending priority:
· Outdated IT Policies and Procedures – In efforts to remediate the findings in the FY 2012 IT
internal audit, the CPRIT IT department recently began reviewing and creating IT policies required
by Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 202, Subchapter B – Security Standards for State Agencies.
However, many of the developed policies have not yet been reviewed and approved by
management.
· Incomplete IT Risk Assessment – As recommended as part of the FY 2012 IT internal audit
remediation plan, a detailed risk assessment of the IT environment has not been performed.
· Insufficient Disaster Recovery Plan and Business Continuity Plan – As recommended as part
of the FY 2012 IT internal audit remediation plan, a disaster recovery plan and business continuity
plan has not been developed, implemented, or tested.
· Inadequate Review or Evidence of Third-Party Control Environment – the third party grants
management provider, SRA, has not provided adequate evidence of their internal control
environment to provide assurance that CPRIT’s information is secure and recorded accurately
within the application.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 4
Background Information
Background
Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2007 establishing the Cancer Prevention and
Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) and authorized the state to issue $3 billion in bonds to fund
groundbreaking cancer research and prevention programs and services in Texas. To date, CPRIT has
funded almost 500 grants totaling $835,820,450.1
CPRIT’s goals are to:
· Create and expedite innovation in the area of cancer research, thereby enhancing the potential for a
medical or scientific breakthrough in the prevention of cancer and cures for cancer;
· Attract, create, or expand research capabilities of public or private institutions of higher education
and other public or private entities that will promote a substantial increase in cancer research and in
the creation of high-quality new jobs in this State; and
· Continue to develop and implement the Texas Cancer Plan by promoting the development and
coordination of effective and efficient statewide public and private policies, programs, and services
related to cancer and by encouraging cooperative, comprehensive, and complementary planning
among the public, private, and volunteer sectors involved in cancer prevention, detection,
treatment, and research.
Audit Objectives
The main objective of the audit was to verify that the IT infrastructure is appropriately safeguarded and that
data reliability and accuracy are maintained within the environment.
The specific audit objectives were:
· Verify that prior year audit findings had been addressed and corrected
· Validate that the Agency’s IT environment is compliant with the requirements identified in the
Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 202, Subchapter B – Security Standards for State Agencies
· Assess the overall IT function to determine whether sufficient resources and skill sets have been
appropriated to support the technology requirements
· Evaluate whether appropriate access has been granted to the network and selected applications
· Validate whether databases are sufficiently backed-up and whether back-ups are restorable
· Confirm that the Agency follows IT general computer controls
1 Figures provided by the CPRIT website. http://www.cprit.state.tx.us/
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 5
In order to assess the IT department, Internal Audit reviewed the following:
· Compliance with Texas Administrative Code requirements
· Internal policies and procedures
Scope
Although current legislation may potentially change procedural and reporting requirements for CPRIT, the
audit performed was designed to evaluate and test compliance with established policies and procedures as of
July 2013. Internal Audit interviewed staff and completed field work in August 2013.
Our procedures included discussions with the following CPRIT personnel:
Name Title
Heidi McConnell Chief Operating Officer
Alfonso Royal Finance Manager
Lisa Nelson Operations Manager
Therry Simien Information Technology Officer
Testing Approach
During the IT audit, Internal Audit performed procedures that included: inquiry, observation, inspection
and re-performance. See the matrix below for a description listing of each type of test performed.
Type Description
Inquiry Inquired of appropriate personnel. Inquiries seeking relevant information or
representation from CPRIT personnel were performed to obtain among other things:
· Knowledge and additional information regarding the policy or procedure
· Corroborating evidence of the policy or procedure
In conducting this internal audit, we interviewed:
· Therry Simien, Information Technology Officer
· Alfonso Royal, Finance Manager
· Lisa Nelson, Operations Manager
Observation Observed the application or existence of specific controls as represented.
Inspection Inspected documents and records indicating performance of the controls, including:
· Examination of documents or records for evidence of performance, such as
existence of required documentation and approvals.
· Inspection of CPRIT systems documentation, such as policies and procedures,
network diagrams, flowcharts and job descriptions.
Re-performance Re-performed the control activity performed by CPRIT to gain additional evidence
regarding the effective operation of the control activity.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 6
Statement of Auditing Standards
This internal audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards
(GAGAS). The internal audit also follows the guidelines set forth by the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA)
and conforms to the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, the code of ethics
contained in the Professional Practices Framework as promulgated by the IIA.
Although due professional care in the performance of this audit was exercised, this should not be construed
to imply that unreported irregularities do not exist. The deterrence of fraud is the responsibility of
management. Audit procedures alone, even when executed with professional care, do not guarantee that
fraud will be detected. Specific areas for improvement are addressed later in this report.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 7
Findings, Observations, and Recommendations
Summary of Findings and Related Recommendations
The section below provides details regarding the audit findings and corresponding reference to the Texas
Administrative Code rule.
Statement on FY 2012 Information Technology Audit Remediation
Following the fiscal year 2012 internal audit, the remediation of IT findings was significantly delayed. IT
staff priorities were shifted to support the agency’s 2012 annual conference logistics, electronic conference
registration system and electronic scientific abstract collection system; to assist legal counsel with highpriority
data requests related to investigations; to relocate the remote office IT infrastructure from Dallas to
Houston; and to support communication projects. As a result, longer-term, non-user related projects (e.g.,
documentation updates) were effectively placed on hold. Management has made completion of all
outstanding IT infrastructure and operational compliance projects a high priority during the current year
within staffing constraints.
IT Policies and Procedures
Rule §202.25 lists suggested policies that should be created and implemented by the information security
officer. Per the results of the FY 2012 IT audit, policies and procedures were scheduled to be completed
and/or up-to-date by March 2013. As of July 2013, all policies and procedures have not been finalized.
CPRIT has 11 out of 26 recommended IT policies documented. While some policies have been developed,
none of them have been approved by management. Please see Appendix B for details around testing of IT
recommended policies.
Recommendation: To ensure CPRIT has established proper IT governance and protocols, CPRIT needs
to finalize its IT security policies and procedures as recommended by Texas Administrative Code §202.25.
The agency should update all existing policies to reflect the actual processes taking place. The policies
should also be approved by the state agency head or another designated representative.
Management’s Response:
During this audit cycle, significant progress has been made in the review, updating and creation of IT
policies. As shown in Appendix B of the report, nearly half of the recommended policies have been
submitted to agency senior management for final approval. IT staff is now in the process of revising those
policies to incorporate management’s recommendations with the expectation to have this process
completed within the next 30 days. The remaining policies and procedures will continue to be updated
and/or created over the next several months.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 8
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Revised Target Date for Implementation: May 31, 2014
Prior Year (FY 2012) Audit Management’s Response:
CPRIT’s policies and procedures are still being updated to reflect the many changes to agency
infrastructure, systems and additional deployed services that have occurred since the new base IT
infrastructure was deployed. Over the next several months, CPRIT will continue to document currently
deployed critical agency infrastructure systems and services as well as systems and services that will be
deployed over this same time span. CPRIT will also develop or update any relevant agency policy or
procedure.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Revised Target Date for Implementation: March 31, 2012
IT Risk Assessment
Rule §202.22 states that a “risk assessment of information resources shall be performed and documented”
that ranks the risks as high, medium, or low. Per the results of the FY 2012 audit, an IT risk assessment was
scheduled to be performed by December 2012. As of July 2013, a formal IT risk assessment has not yet
been performed.
Recommendation: Based on the guidelines set forth in Rule §202.22, it was determined that CPRIT
appears to be classified as “low-risk” and therefore should consider completing a biennial assessment. By
completing a risk assessment periodically, CPRIT will be able to reassess changes that affect the IT
environment. Please see Appendix A, for more detail around the risk classification levels in Texas
Administrative Code, Subchapter B, Rule §202.22.
Management’s Response:
The tool CPRIT previously used to perform its initial risk assessment (Information Security Awareness,
Assessment, and Compliance) ISAAC program was discontinued on August 1, 2013. After a new Chief
Compliance Officer is on staff, that person will help define and implement new formal assessment
guidelines. Once these guidelines have been established, CPRIT IT will work to implement them as quickly
as possible.
CPRIT has contracted with the Department of Information Resources (DIR) to provide quarterly
controlled penetration testing of infrastructure systems and services. After each testing cycle, a report will
be created detailing vulnerabilities found and remediation recommendations. Once DIR has received
confirmation that remediation processes have been established, a new cycle will be implemented to test
again. An initial penetration test occurred at the end of September 2013. No exploits were found in the IT
systems but some system vulnerabilities were noted. IT staff is addressing those items. The remediation of
those items will be tested during the next penetration test DIR conducts.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 9
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson / Chief Compliance Officer
Revised Target Date for Implementation: May 31, 2014
Prior Year (FY 2012) Management’s Response:
While the initial risk assessment was not completed by the time the internal audit field work was being
conducted as originally anticipated due to resource needs for other IT projects, it was performed in June
2012 utilizing the ISAAC (Information, Security Awareness, Assessment, and Compliance) tool created and
maintained by Texas A&M University (TAMU) and licensed by DIR for state agencies. Based on the results
of the initial assessment, a timeline of required actions to address deficient areas has been incorporated into
the current IT plan. Assessment results combined with existing agency policies and TAC §202 is planned to
be used to develop a controls matrix for the necessary testing of procedural processes and scheduling of
identified compliance activities.
CPRIT will ensure newly implemented technical controls comply with existing agency policies and amend
agency policies to comply with TAC §202. Once compliance in key areas has been addressed, a follow-up
assessment will be performed in six months and reviewed. Risk assessments will be scheduled to occur
annually.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Revised Target Date for Implementation: December 31, 2012
Disaster Recovery Plan & Business Continuity Plan
Rule §202.24 states "agencies shall maintain written Business Continuity Plans that address information
resources so that the effects of a disaster will be minimized, and the state agency will be able either to
maintain or quickly resume mission-critical functions. The state agency head or his or her designated
representative(s) shall approve the plan."
Per the results of the FY 2012 audit, a Disaster Recovery Plan and Business Continuity Plan were scheduled
to be updated by December 2013. Additionally, an electronic records retention schedule was scheduled to
be written and implemented by December 2013. As of July 2013, neither of these documents had been
finalized.
In response to the FY 2012 internal audit, the DuPont FM 200 fire suppression system in its server room is
now fully active. The system will alert specified personnel as well as the authorities in the instance of smoke,
fire, or drastic change in room temperature. These alerts include a phone call and text and email alerts.
In an effort to decrease the risk of system unavailability and data recovery, the CPRIT IT group is looking
into cloud services to store all public facing data and limiting data stored on servers to confidential data.
This transition will protect data in the instance of a disaster as well as increase the available capacity on
CPRIT servers.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 10
Recommendation: Since IT systems are critical to CPRIT’s operations, Management should update their
disaster recovery plan to ensure the continued operation of the IT systems, or rapid recovery of the systems
in case of a natural disaster.
Likewise, CPRIT should also ensure that a business continuity plan is kept updated to guarantee that all
aspects of a business remain functioning in the midst of a disruptive event. These plans should include a
business impact analysis, a risk assessment, and evidence of implementation, testing, and maintenance.
Management’s Response:
CPRIT has worked to reduce overall business impact on agency operations of the most common disasters
by implementing a server room environmental monitoring and alert system and performing the relocation
of several agency public facing resources to cloud provider systems that are geographically separated from
the agency. This work continues and will focus on internal services that can be relocated off-site for
redundancy or efficiency purposes.
CPRIT will update the agency’s existing business continuity plan to reflect these infrastructure changes and
will design and implement an effective routine testing schedule.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Revised Target Date for Implementation: December 31, 2014
Prior Year (FY2012) Management’s Response:
Assessments have been completed for all key agency public facing resources, such as CPRIT’s primary
website, to determine if they could be co-located or relocated to off-site service providers. The
implementation of relocating and co-locating these resources off-site is currently underway.
CPRIT is continuing to develop an electronic records retention schedule to be used for planning and testing
to ensure that access to critical electronic information can be maintained in the event of a primary site
disaster.
CPRIT will update the agency’s existing business continuity plan, establishing current controls-based testing
protocols for that plan and the scheduling of routine testing.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson / Laurie Baker
Revised Target Date for Implementation: December 31, 2013
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 11
Security Access Reviews
Rule §202.21 states that the agency should "review access lists based on documented risk management
decisions." Per the results of the FY 2012 audit, CPRIT was scheduled to perform quarterly reviews of
systems and network access lists, badge access lists, 3rd party agency sponsored system access (e.g. USAS,
GMS), and user accounts. As of July 2013, a quarterly review has not been performed.
Recommendation: To prevent unauthorized use of proprietary information or programmatic information
that could result in undesirable financial, reputational, regulatory, or operational impacts, CPRIT should
consider conducting a semi-annual review of all network users, all badge access holders, and all users with
access to USAS. Any exceptions should be noted and remediated immediately.
Management’s Response:
While informal security audits have been performed when staffing changes occurred, security access reviews
have not been performed regularly. CPRIT will complete a second, formal review of user accounts, thirdparty
agency sponsored accounts and physical access system lists. Final assessment report guidelines will be
defined and documented, and quarterly reviews will be scheduled.
Person Responsible: Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Target Date for Implementation: March 31, 2014
Prior Year (FY2012) Management’s Response:
CPRIT completed a review of systems and network access lists in June 2012 after the internal audit
fieldwork was completed. CPRIT audited system user accounts, including third-party agency sponsored
accounts (e.g. USAS, GMS), network access, facility system access keys, and badge access lists. A formal
assessment report will be created and quarterly reviews will be implemented.
Person Responsible: Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Target Date for Implementation: June 30, 2012
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 12
Self-Assessment Review
The State Auditor’s Office website provides a self-assessment document to help state agencies determine
their compliance with TAC §202. Per the results of the FY 2012 audit, a TAC 202 self-assessment was
scheduled to be completed by June 2013. As of July 2013, CPRIT has not yet performed a TAC 202 selfassessment.
Recommendation: CPRIT management should complete the self-assessment for state agencies annually.
By performing the self-assessment, the IT department can help ensure compliance with TAC 202.
Management’s Response:
CPRIT is continuing to address areas of noncompliance with requirements in TAC §202 and working to
establish an annual self-assessment review schedule.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Target Date for Implementation: December 31, 2013
Prior Year (FY2012) Management’s Response:
Management agrees that a regular self-assessment be performed. While the self-assessment was not
completed as originally anticipated due to resource needs for other IT, CPRIT performed an initial selfassessment
in June 2012 to determine compliance with TAC §202. CPRIT is addressing areas of
noncompliance specified in TAC §202 and will establish an annual assessment schedule.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Target Date for Implementation: June 30, 2013
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 13
Additional Recommendations
The following was noted in 2011 and 2012 to improve IT operations and to align with leading practices.
Grants Management System Third Party Provider Review
The grants management application is hosted by a third party service provider, SRA International, Inc.
CPRIT does not currently require SRA to provide any evidence of review of SRA processes or control
environment.
Recommendation: Because safeguarding the information contained within the grants management
application is crucial to CPRIT's reputation, CPRIT should ensure that the information contained in the
SRA application is appropriately safeguarded from unauthorized external users. If SRA has had a third-party
perform an independent controls attestation report for the current period, CPRIT should obtain a copy the
report and review the report to ensure that SRA's controls are operating effectively. One of the common
reports obtained by service providers is the SOC 2 (Service Organization Controls) Report.
A SOC 2 Report is a report on controls at a service organization relevant to security, availability, processing
integrity, confidentiality or privacy. This type of report is applicable when an entity outsources a business
task or function to another entity (usually one that specializes in that task or function). One way a user
auditor may obtain evidence about the quality and accuracy of the data provided to a user entity by a service
organization is to obtain a service auditor’s report on controls at the service organization that affect data
provided to the user entities. The rationale for this approach is that controls are designed to prevent, or
detect and correct, errors or misstatements. If controls at a service organization are operating effectively,
errors in data provided to the user entities will be prevented, or detected and corrected, and misstatements
in the user entities’ financial statements will be avoided.
Management’s Response:
SRA has been providing the annual and quarterly SSAE 16 reports, also called Service Organization
Controls (SOC) 1 Reports for assurance of the suitability of design and operating effectiveness of controls.
CPRIT will work with SRA to obtain a SOC 2 Report to provide the assurances of security, availability,
processing integrity, confidentiality and privacy at the service organization.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Target Date for Implementation: June 30, 2014
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 14
Prior Year (FY2012) Management’s Response:
Management agrees with the recommendation that CPRIT complete a formal written assessment of the
SSAE 16 annual and quarterly reports to verify that CPRIT understands the management controls over
logical controls, physical controls, and change management in place at Savvis, where SRA-managed systems
for CPRIT are housed. CPRIT will use these assessments to have SRA rectify any findings identified in
these reports. The SSAE 16 annual report is available in December of each year, so the written assessment
will be completed by the end of January and assessments of quarterly reports will be completed within 30
days after they are received by CPRIT.
Person Responsible: Heidi McConnell / Therry Simien / Lisa Nelson
Target Date for Implementation: January 31, 2013
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 15
Appendix A – Texas Administrative Code,
Subchapter B, Rule §202.22
(a) A risk assessment of information resources shall be performed and documented. The risk assessment
shall be updated based on the inherent risk. The inherent risk and frequency of the risk assessment will be
ranked, at a minimum, as either "High," "Medium," or "Low," based primarily on the following criteria:
(1) High Risk-annual assessment--Information resources that:
(A) Involve large dollar amounts or significantly important transactions, such that business
or government processes would be hindered or an impact on public health or safety
would occur if the transactions were not processed timely and accurately, or
(B) Contain confidential or other data such that unauthorized disclosure would cause real
damage to the parties involved, or
(C) Impact a large number of people or interconnected systems.
(2) Medium Risk-biennial assessment--Information resources that:
(A) Transact or control a moderate or low dollar value, or
(B) Data items that could potentially embarrass or create problems for the parties involved
if released, or
(C) Impact a moderate proportion of the customer base.
(3) Low Risk-biennial assessment--Information resources that:
(A) Publish generally available public information, or
(B) Result in a relatively small impact on the population.
(b) A system change could cause the overall classification to move to another risk level.
Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT)
Information Technology Internal Audit Report – FINAL Page 16
Appendix B – Texas Administrative Code,
Subchapter B, Rule §202.25 – IT Policies
The following IT policies have been created and/or updated at the Agency:
Rule §202.25 Recommended IT Policy Area Policy Created?
Acceptable Use 
Account Management 
Administrator/Special Access 
Application Security 
Backup/Recovery 
Change or Configuration Management 
Encryption 
Firewall 
Incident Management 
Identification/Authentication 
Internet/Intranet Use 
Intrusion Detection 
Network Access 
Network Configuration 
Physical Access 
Portable Computing 
Privacy 
Security Monitoring 
Security Awareness and Training 
Platform Management 
Authorized Software 
System Development and Acquisition 
Third Party Access 
Malicious Code 
Wireless Access 
Vulnerability Assessment 
Total 11 / 26

Answer 1

When planning an engagement, the IT auditor should consider:

• The objectives and performance controls of the activity
• Significant risks to the activity and means of keeping the risk level acceptable.
• Adequacy and effectiveness of the activity’s risk management and control systems compared with a relevant model.
• Opportunities to improve the activity’s risk management and controls

Objectives should be developed for each engagement and the scope should be sufficient to satisfy the objectives.

Types of recommendations

The IT auditor can make four types of recommendations:

1. Make no changes. If the audit determines that the activities investigated do not represent any significant problems such as noncompliance with regulations, failure to safeguard the assets, insufficient control of transactions and so on and the auditor will recommend no change. It is also possible that recommending change is not the most effective way to achieve a desired goal in the organization. In such cases, the auditor may seek an exception to the standard and instead submit an analysis to management.
2. Modify internal control policies and procedures. If the auditor uncovers the problems, the audit report should recommend changes in the areas of risk of poor performance.
3. Add insurance for potential risks discovered during the audit. Rather than suggesting new procedures or policies to address a potential risk, the auditor may suggest insuring against the liability involved. The auditor must be certain that insurance is an appropriate as well as cost-effective measure. Whether to eliminate a potential liability or insure against its occurrence may involve ethical as well as practical considerations, depending on the nature of the risk.
4. Adjust the required rate of return on an activity to match the associated risk. In assessing the nature of potential risk in light of the organization’s attitudes and risk appetite, the auditor may report that one of the organization’s activities involves more potential risk than is justified by its current projected return.