Audit Proposal Manual New Copy

8/2/2019 Audit Proposal Manual New Copy

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/audit-proposal-manual-new-copy 1/22

Audit Proposal Manual

0

June 2005

Netherlands Court of Audit, Lange Voorhout 8, Postbus 20015, 2500 EA The Hague, The

Netherlands





1Contents

1 Introduction 2 2 Roles and responsibilities 3 3 Framework for audit proposals 4 4 Importance of the audit 5 4.1 Framework 5 4.2 Subject 6 4.3 Relevance 7 4.4 Auditees’ response 7 5 Details of the audit 8 5.1

Objective and problem 8

5.2 Terms and standards 8 5.3 Audit questions 9 5.4 Audit design 9 5.5 Bridges 10 5.6 Impact 10 5.7 Expected results and form of publication 11 5.8 Informing and consulting the Board 11 6 Timetable and cost 13 6.1 Organisation 13 6.2 Cost 13 6.3 Completion 14 7 Risks and quality assurance 15 7.1 Risks 15 7.2 Quality assurance 16 8 Proposal 18 8.1 Positive recommendation 18 8.2 Negative recommendation 18 9 Annexes to the audit proposal 20




21 Introduction

This manual contains guidelines for drawing up audit proposals, and is also a

useful tool for assessing audit proposals. It is intended for use primarily by

project managers and auditors working for the Netherlands Court of Audit.

All audits performed by the Court of Audit begin with the formulation of an

audit proposal, on the basis of which the Board decides whether or not to

perform the audit in question. The main purpose of an audit proposal is

therefore to provide information enabling the following question to be

answered: Should the Court of Audit invest resources in the proposed audit

during the specified period?

The subjects of audit proposals are either described in the Court’s work

programme or, in the case of audit proposals submitted between the publication

of work programmes, adopted during a Board meeting. An audit proposalprovides fairly detailed information on the structure and cost of the audit in

question, its expected results and the potential risks. This manual sets out a

framework for the formulation of audit proposals and lists the type of

information they should contain. In principle, the manual covers all types of

audit.

Please note that the general requirements set out in this manual relate to audit

proposals as submitted to the Board. For managerial or other reasons, directors

may request additional information. As a rule, this information is not included in

the audit proposal.

Audit proposals are not only intended for internal use, but also serve an

external purpose. Once the Board has approved an audit proposal, the auditee

is informed of certain matters referred to in chapters 4 (with the exception of

section 4.4), 5 (Details of the audit) and 6 (Timetable and cost) of this manual.

The manual is divided into the following chapters. Chapter 2 describes the roles

and responsibilities during the formulation of an audit proposal. Chapter 3

presents a framework for audit proposals. Chapters 4 to 9 form the actual

framework for audit proposals. Each section indicates the type of information

required under each heading.




32 Roles and responsibilities

The project manager is responsible for preparing an audit proposal, including

the agreements made with the bureau head on the human and material

resources to be deployed, and on quality assurance. The audit proposal serves

as a contract between the project manager and the director. The bureau heads

are keen to encourage the use of the standards database. The directors are

responsible for checking whether the standards database was used when

preparing the audit proposal.

All audit proposals are first presented to and discussed by the management

team (MT). The director decides whether to incorporate the MT’s

recommendations in the final audit proposal. It is the director who submits the

audit proposal to the Board and enters into a ‘contract’ with the Board. The

Board is responsible for approving the audit proposal.




43 Framework for audit proposals

To decide whether an audit should be performed, the Board requires a general

understanding of:

• the importance of the subject and the expected results;

• the details of the audit and how the quality of the results is to be

assured;

• the audit cost and timetable, including the associated uncertainties;

• specific risks relating to the audit.

These four aspects make up the framework for every audit proposal. In other

words, the core of an audit proposal consists of the following four sections:

1. Importance of the audit

2. Details of the audit

3. Timetable and cost

4. Risks and quality assurance.

The information that these four ‘core sections’ should contain is discussed in

chapters 4 to 7 below. Chapter 8 goes on to describe the final proposal

submitted to the Board (with a recommendation on whether or not to perform

the audit in question). Lastly, chapter 9 lists the annexes that should be

included with an audit proposal.

The basic rule is that audit proposals should be as concise as possible.




54 Importance of the audit

This chapter describes the type of information you should include in the section

of the proposal entitled ‘Importance of the audit’. The sections in this chapter

correspond with the relevant section headings to be included in the audit

proposal.

4.1 Framework

The audit proposal should start with a reference to the relevant part of the

strategy (please indicate which output target is relevant in this connection), the

work programme and any other relevant documents. A copy of the format from

the work programme should be enclosed. If the results the audit is expected to

generate do not correspond with those specified in the work programme, you

should explain why.

A proposal for an annual regularity audit (covering the central government

annual financial report) should refer to the instructions on risk analysis and the

audit proposal published each year at the start of a new annual financial report

cycle.

Objection audits, follow-up audits and new (i.e. unforeseen) audits are subject

to a number of supplementary requirements:

• If the audit in question is an objection audit, the audit proposal should

refer to the collection of reports on the central government annual

financial report, which contains a list of objection audits planned for the

coming year. You should also refer to the decision to perform the

objection audit in question.

• If the audit in question is a follow-up audit, you should specify the

previous audit and list its main conclusions and recommendations.

• If the subject of the audit was not included in the work programme, you

should explain why the proposal is nevertheless being made. Requested

audits are examples of new subjects. You should also comply with the

Regulations on Audits on Request (HANDAR) in this case.




64.2 Subject

In describing the subject, you should discuss the current situation, in so far as

it is relevant. Has new legislation been introduced? Has the ministry recently

published policy documents and/or evaluations? Are there any major social

trends that need to be mentioned? Where necessary, you can also indicate the

relationship with other policy areas (and/or organisations). Please note, though,

that you only need to specify the main points. There is no need to include

detailed background information.

Name the ministers and state secretaries concerned and describe their field of

responsibility (make use, if necessary, of the manual on ministerial

responsibility for this purpose). Depending on the period covered by the audit,

it may also be worth naming their predecessors. You should also specify the

policy departments covered by the audit.

Section 91 of the Government Accounts Act 2001 states that the Netherlands

Court of Audit is entitled to perform audits of certain non-state organisations.

Where relevant, you should specify which non-state organisations are to be

included in the audit, mentioning the relevant subsection of section 91 in doing

so. You should describe the responsibilities of these organisations’ boards. The

relevant manual gives detailed information on the specific powers and

procedures involved in performing a section 91 audit.

You should also indicate whether previous audits of annual government reports

have contained comments about regularity, financial management, the

reliability of policy information or policy accountability in general. You should

take account not just of the previous year’s report, but of past reports over a

period of several years. If necessary, get in touch with the project manager at

the ministry in question responsible for the annual government report. This

type of information should also be included in proposals for audits of outputs

and outcomes.

Proposals for regularity audits should also contain comments previously made

about efficiency and effectiveness. Although such comments may be taken from

audits performed by the Court of Audit, they may also be taken from

evaluations performed by or on behalf of the ministry in question. The Civil

Service Evaluation Review may be consulted for this purpose.

The importance of the audit subject may also be illustrated by referring to

trends in spending (such as the pattern of annual cash spending and end-of-

year spending sprees).




74.3 Relevance

You should summarise the main arguments for carrying out the audit. The

audit’s relevance depends on the degree to which it will help achieve the

Court’s strategic objectives. The section on the audit’s importance should refer

to the Court’s work programme and the objectives set out in it.

Your proposal should contain an explicit discussion of the criteria used in

selecting the audit subject, in accordance with the Court’s strategy (page 23).

These criteria are: the social value of the Court’s activities, complex policy

chains, the existence of risks, unique powers, structural interventions and

financial value. As far as the financial value is concerned, you should also

specify the budget articles that are at issue. If the auditee is a legal person

with statutory tasks that is funded by premiums or tariffs, these money flows

should also be described. You should also state whether there is any link

between your audit proposal and the domain plans and development plans.

In the case of objection audits, you should refer to the arguments put forward

by the Board in deciding to perform an objection audit (see the relevant

minutes).

4.4 Auditees’ response

In this section of the audit proposal, you should briefly describe the auditees’

response to the audit. The points concerned are also mentioned in the Manual

on Tripartite Consultations. You should include a description of the auditees’

response to the audit standards. As the idea is to reach agreement with the

auditees on the standards, any disagreements should be explicitly mentioned in

the audit proposal.




85 Details of the audit

This chapter presents the information you should give in the section entitled

‘Detai ls of the audit’. Again, the sections in this chapter correspond w ith the

relevant section headings to be included in the audit proposal. There are a

number of aspects about which the auditees themselves should be notified;

these are described in sections 5.1 to 5.4.

5.1 Objective and problem

The objective is a statement of the audit’s intended effect. It is based on the

aim of the audit as defined in the work programme, since this information

provided the basis for deciding to invest time in formulating an audit proposal.

Do not hesitate to consult the auditees and other stakeholders when

formulating the objective and the problem to be addressed. Use the tripartiteconsultations to make agreements on whether other stakeholders might be

consulted and, if so, which ones.

The problem to be addressed is defined with reference to the objective; the two

must of course be consistent with each other. Whereas the objective is

described in terms of the desired effect, the problem is defined as the question

that needs to be answered in order to achieve that effect. In other words,

defining the problem is not simply a matter of turning the objective round and

adding a question mark.

The objective and problem form the core of the audit and must therefore be

formulated very carefully.

5.2 Terms and standards

Every objective and problem includes references to certain terms and

standards, e.g. of particular policy instruments (such as a grant) or the ‘orderly

and auditable’ standard.

The audit proposal should clarify the meaning of these terms and standards.

Sources of definitions include HANDAR, parliamentary paper (budgets),




9ministerial documents, past audits performed by the Court of Audit, the

professional literature and the standards database.

You should consult the standards database every time you prepare an audit

proposal. The proposal should include a brief report on the results of this

exercise. The essential point is whether the standards on which the proposed

audit is to be based are consistent with those previously used by the Court of

Audit, or whether the audit standards have since been refined, extended or

otherwise altered.

This section of the audit proposal should also describe the role played by the

context. In other words, you should specify the standards and weighting factors

on which the final judgement is to be based.

Experience shows that specifying standards and determining weighting factors

is a process that can – and should – take up a great deal of time. The more

clearly the standards are formulated, the more smoothly the audit will go.

5.3 Audit questions

Audit questions are the questions that must be answered in order to solve the

problem defined. It is important to formulate a series of audit questions that

will paint a full picture and will provide sufficient information for you to form a

judgement and draw conclusions.

You can make use of an AIQ chart1

to operationalise the problem. Past

experience shows that AIQ charts often help to clarify the s ituation for the

client (i.e. the director or the Board). If you decide to use such a chart, it

should be included in the annexe to the audit proposal.

5.4 Audit design

The audit design (i.e. the audit methods and techniques used) largely

determines the quality of the solution to the problem defined, as well as the

cost of the audit. You should therefore exercise great care in choosing the audit

design.

Data collection

In order to provide information on the quality of the audit design, you should

briefly outline in this section the methods and techniques you intend to use for

collecting and analysing data. You should also explain in general terms why you

1AIQ stands for ‘aspects, indicators and questions’.




10have decided to use these methods. Obviously, you should check in advance

whether the methods are indeed feasible. If, for example, you have opted to

perform a file study, you should ascertain beforehand whether the files are

available and what they contain.

If you are intending to perform a quantitative performance audit,2

you should

consult the checklist for quantitative audits in HANDAR (which is part of the

Performance Audits Manual).

Personal data

You should also indicate in this section whether you intend to compile

databases of personal data during the audit, or whether you will be using third-

party databases. If so, the Court of Audit’s standard regulations on personal

data apply, and you will need to comply with the relevant regulations (see the

Manual on Personal Databases for Audit Purposes).

Multi-step plan for second-pillar audits

If you are intending to perform a second-pillar audit, you should follow the new

multi-step plan (see the Court’s intranet site).

5.5 Bridges

The strategy defines four ‘bridges’, i.e. ministerial responsibility, EU aspects,

enforcement and operational management (i.e. administrative burden, ethical

standards and IT). You should explain in this section whether the bridges have

a bearing on the subject of the audit and, if so, how you intend to deal with

them. The Court’s government-wide bureaus have drawn up a checklist to help

you decide which particular bridges to include in the audit. You should make

use of this checklist in arriving at a decision.

5.6 Impact

Audits are intended not just as a means of assessment, but also as a way of

actually improving matters. In order to achieve our mission, audits must make

an impact. You should indicate under this heading what you intend to do during

the course of the audit to ensure that it has an impact on the auditee. You can

use the ‘Effective Court of Audit’ menu on the intranet for this purpose. The

menu also contains guidelines for ensuring that you adopt the most effective

tools. This involves analysing the policy context, the actors and the interests at

stake.

2 These audits use statistical methods (mainly variants of multivariate regression analysis) and large

databases (over 50 observations) to assess policy efficiency and effectiveness.




11

You should also indicate how you intend to make an impact during the reporting

and follow-up stages.

5.7 Expected results and form of publication

In this section you should describe the message the audit is expected to

generate for the authorities and the intended effect of publication. After all, the

relevance of the message will affect the Board’s decision on whether or not to

approve the audit proposal.

You should also indicate the appropriate form of publication. The form you

choose depends on the expected results and the intended effects. Please note

that this is only an indication, and may therefore be changed in the final report

proposal.

5.8 Informing and consulting the Board

In this section you should indicate how often consultations should be held with

the Board. This should be raised in the tripartite consultations. The following

models should be followed:

Model 1: audits of annual government reports

In addition to the normal tripartite and quadripartite consultations, the Board

should be informed each month how the audit of the annual reports for a

particular year is progressing, beginning in September of the preceding year.

The principle of reporting by exception should preferably be followed; audit

subjects that are scrapped due to time constraints or for substantive reasons

should be mentioned.

Model 2: audits requested by parliament

Audits of this type require intensive coordination. This is often due to serious

time constraints or the politically charged nature of the request. In addition to

the normal tripartite and quadripartite consultations, the Board member acting

as rapporteur, the director and the project manager agree at the start of the

audit how the rapporteur should be kept informed about the audit and how

frequently.




12Model 3: all other audits

The normal tripartite and quadripartite consultations will not always be

sufficient. If more intensive coordination is required, this should be agreed in

the tripartite consultations. For that purpose, an estimate should be made of

the audit’s risk profile. More specifically, this includes:

the political sensitivity of an issue;

the risk of ministers concerning themselves with the audit at too early a

stage;

the time pressure.




136 Timetable and cost


‘Timetable and cost’. Again, the sections in th is chapter correspond with the

relevant section headings to be included in the audit proposal. There are a

number of aspects about which the auditees themselves should be notified;

these are described in sections 6.1 and 6.3.

6.1 Organisation

You should name the project manager or managers who will be in charge of the

audit, as well as the auditors who will be working on it. You should mention the

Artemis project number. You should also say what type of skills are required for

the audit, including both those already available at the Court of Audit and those

to be obtained from third parties. If third parties are to be engaged, you should

explain what arrangements you intend to make with them and state whataspects of the audit these third parties will be working on.

6.2 Cost

Your estimate of the cost should include both the time to be spent on the audit

(in days) and the cost of engaging external experts, for example. Your estimate

should be based on the entire implementation stage (i.e. up to and including

the production of a report of findings and a report proposal). You should include

an itemised list of the number of days to be spent on the audit by:

• the project manager;

• auditors (including senior auditors);

• management assistants;

• staff from other Court of Audit departments (statisticians, communication

experts, lawyers, etc.).

You should contact the staff involved in order to calculate the amount of time

they are likely to be spending on the audit.

Once you have made a timetable for the audit, it can be entered in Artemis as

‘provisional’. After the Board has approved the proposal, and the timetable has




14been adjusted as desired or required, the first version of the timetable may be

‘frozen ’ as version 1.

If you need funding for the audit, you should say so here. You should state the

amount of money you are intending to spend on foreign travel, seminars,

external experts and/or the cost of travel and accommodation in the

Netherlands.

6.3 Completion

The audit proposal should contain a copy of the project timetable as recorded in

Artemis, showing the various stages of the audit and the milestones you have

set.

It is absolutely vital to take account of the commitments of all those involved

when planning the audit. You can solve this problem with the aid of the

‘institut ional calendar ’. When you draw up the timetable section in your audit

proposal, you should get in touch with the chair of the institutional calendar

working group to set a provisional publication date and the relevant circulation

periods. Once the audit proposal has been approved, you should ask your

director to apply to the working group for a definite publication date. He should

use an ‘infringement form’ for this purpose. See the Institutional Calendar

Manual for further information.

Audits of annual government reports are subject to certain fixed time limits,

and you should take these into account when allocating manpower resources in

your own audit proposal.

If you are intending for whatever reason to supply the Board with interim

reports during the course of the audit, you should take these into account when

planning the timetable for the audit.




157 Risks and quality assurance


‘Risks and quality assurance’. Again, the sect ions in this chapter correspond

with the relevant section headings to be included in the audit proposal.

7.1 Risks

Every audit may entail certain risks that can prevent it from achieving its

objectives. You should therefore describe in this section the risks (both internal

and external) associated with the audit’s critical success factors. The latter are:

• usefulness;

• argumentation;

• cost and timetable.

Usefulness

The Court of Audit’s strategy for 2004-2009 sets out its views on influence. The

Court is aware that, whilst it is capable of exerting influence, it is not up to the

Court to initiate and implement changes. Parliament and the government are

responsible for setting the pace in this respect, followed by the ministries and

other executive bodies. It is the Court’s job to disseminate its findings,

conclusions, recommendations, knowledge and information in such a way that

parliament and the government, as well as the ministries and other interested

parties, can make the best possible use of them. This view of the Court’s role

cannot be divorced from the concept of ‘usefulness’.

An audit may be regarded as ‘useful’ if its final results enable one or more of

the target groups to implement certain changes. This is guaranteed if the audit

relates to a subject in which the target groups are interested or clearly ought to

be interested, or if the ‘standards’ are presented in a cogent manner to the

target groups.

Examples of risks in relation to usefulness are subjects where it is difficult to

trace specific ‘errors’ in the auditee’s actions. If there seems to be a lack of

support for the standards, publication and communication will have to be

particularly effective to ensure that the audit leads to action.




16

Argumentation

Audits need to generate data that are valid and reliable. After all, if the target

groups have reason to question the strength of the evidence, all the work may

have been in vain. For example, the quality of the information available (e.g. in

files) must be sufficient to answer the audit questions.

Cost and timetable

The need to control costs and meet deadlines may a lso entail certain risks. If,

for example, certain non-state organisations (as defined in section 91 of the

Government Accounts Act 2001) refuse to cooperate and/or if the only means

of collecting certain information is by using expensive methods, this may make

it difficult to control costs and meet deadlines. As well as being crucial in terms

of cost and completion time, these aspects may also adversely affect the audit’s

external impact (e.g. publication after a crucial meeting of the House of

Representatives).

If you believe that the audit entails certain risks that could adversely affect one

of the above-mentioned factors, you should briefly state this here.

7.2 Quality assurance

The main groups of quality requirements relate to:

• strategic product quality (especially usefulness);

• technical product quality (especially argumentation);

• process quality (especially cost and timetable).

The audit proposal should specify the types of material quality assurance you

intend to use to ensure that both the product and the process meet the quality

requirements. Indicate for each main group of qua lity requirements which

mechanisms you intend to use and what you intend to achieve with them. The

Manual on Quality Assurance should give you a picture of the mechanisms

involved. It gives specific examples of quality assurance mechanisms for each

main group of quality requirements.

At this stage you should consider whether external experts need to be called in.

This may involve experts in a certain policy area or in the field of audit methods

and techniques. It can take various forms, such as a workshop, a permanent

focus group or the hiring of specific expertise (see also the ‘Effective Court of

Audit’ menu on the intranet).




17For each audit, a peer reviewer (of senior auditor rank or above) from outside

the bureau should be invited to assess the audit proposal and the draft report

of findings. The audit proposal indicates who this is. The reviewer and the

project manager should jointly submit the findings together with the audit

proposal or draft report of findings to the relevant director, so that he can take

the findings into account when discussing the products with the audit team.

In the case of an audit proposal, the peer review always looks at:

• the consistency between problem definition and audit questions;

• the audit approach;

• quality assurance;

• the impact strategy.

In the case of a draft report of findings, it looks at:

• the arguments underlying the findings;

• the consistency between findings, conclusions and recommendations.

The audit risks should be taken into account when deciding on the type of

quality assurance you intend to use. For example, more safeguards need to be

built into a complex audit involving major risks than into a more routine audit.

Interim Board briefings and external focus groups can act as safeguards forcomplex audits.

The director has a key role to play in the quality assurance process, and you

should bear this in mind when drawing up a timetable for the audit. Make sure

that he is given enough time to read the audit report; if necessary, make

agreements on this matter.

After the audit has been concluded, you should evaluate the effectiveness of

the quality assurance mechanisms as part of the self-assessment.




188 Proposal

The audit proposal culminates in the submission of a proposal to the Board.

This is the subject matter of the section headed ‘Proposal’.

Although we have assumed that the proposal will include a recommendation

that it should be approved, the preparatory stage may in fact culminate in a

negative recommendation. This chapter presents the information required in

the event of either a positive recommendation (i.e. to implement the proposal)

or a negative recommendation (i.e. to reject the proposal). The information to

be included applies to all audits.

8.1 Positive recommendation

Making a positive recommendation basically means asking the Board to approve

the activities specified in the proposal and the resources required to achievethe intended results.

In the interests of clarity, you should give a brief summary (about half a page)

of the following:

1. the audit subject;

2. the expected results (the message for the authorities the audit is expected

to generate);

3. the cost and duration of the audit;

4. the risks (political and administrative, and in relation to timing).

Under point 1 you should describe the audit as given in the work programme

(including the project number) and the intended results.

8.2 Negative recommendation

Even if you advise against performing the audit in question, the Board must still

take a decision, as the audit is part of the approved work programme. This

means that different information is required, as there is no point spending a

great deal of time describing the details of the audit, for example. A negative

recommendation should therefore contain information on the following aspects:




191. the intended subject;

2. the reasons for not performing the audit;

3. the lessons to be learned;

4. the proposal.

The information given under the first point consists of a description of the audit

as given in the work programme (including the project number) and the results

it was intended to achieve.

You should then briefly state your reasons for not performing the audit despite

its inclusion in the work programme. For instance, the ministry might recently

have carried out an evaluation of its own to which you feel that the Court of

Audit has little to add.

You should then list any lessons that have been learned, before concluding with

your recommendation to the Board not to proceed with the audit.




209 Annexes to the audit proposal

Every audit proposal should include the project format from the work

programme as an annexe. In addition, the proposal should include at least the

following three annexes:

• notification of auditees (see section 9.1);

• report on preparatory stage (see section 9.2);

• report on tripartite consultations (see section 9.3).

The inclusion of all the annexes referred to above is mandatory.

In the case of audits that, according to the work programme, relate to the

second pillar of the strategy, a completed checklist for assessing products

relating to the second pillar of the strategy should be enclosed (see section

9.4). If you have drawn up an AIQ chart, please also enclose this as an annexe.

9.1 Notification of auditees

The first annexe should state when the auditee or auditees are to be notified of

the proposed audit, stating the ranks of the staff who should be informed. The

auditees should in any event be informed of the following elements of the audit

proposal:

• the subject of the audit;

• the problem;

• the relevant standards and weighting factors;

• the data collection method;

• the timetable.

If the Court of Audit will be using its powers under section 91 of the

Government Accounts Act 2001, the relevant details should be included (see

the Manual on Section 91 of the Government Accounts Act 2001).




219.2 Report on preparatory stage

The second annexe should consist of the following items:

• a statement of the amount of time spent on the preparatory stage (in

days) and the total duration;

• a description of the quality assurance mechanisms used during the

preparatory stage;

• the problems encountered and the lessons learned.

The information given under the first point consists of a statement of the

amount of time spent on the preparatory stage, i.e. the number of days

planned and the number of days actually spent. If there is a discrepancy

between the two figures, please explain why. The same applies to the total

duration of the preparatory stage: the information should include both the

estimate made beforehand and the t ime actually taken, with an explanation of

any discrepancy.

The second item is a description of the quality assurance mechanisms used

during the preparatory stage.

As a third point, you should list any problems you may have encountered

during the preparatory stage. Where relevant, you should also make

recommendations for solving these problems. These recommendations should

be as specific as possible.

9.3 Report on tripartite consultations

You should enclose a report on the tripartite consultations with the audit

proposal.

9.4 Checklist for assessing products relating to the second

pillar of the strategy

In the case of audits that, according to the work programme, relate to the

second pillar of the strategy, a completed checklist should be enclosed as an

annexe. It should make clear whether the audit can help to improve the link

between policy and practice, and if so, to what extent. The checklist can be

found on the performance audit intranet site, which also presents detailed

instructions on f illing it in.

Documents

Audit Proposal Manual New Copy