Assignment 1: Madoff Securities

Due Week 3 and worth 280 point

Review the Madoff Securities case, located in Chapter 6 of your textbook.

Write a four to five (4-5) page paper in which you:

1. Determine the regulatory oversight that was in place while the Ponzi scheme was operating, and speculate on the main reasons why they did not discover the scheme.
2. Assume you are an auditor for a firm that had $10 million dollars invested in Madoff Securities.
3. Determine the fundamental audit procedures that you should have applied to this investment.
4. Predict the way in which a peer review of Friehling and Horowitz would have uncovered the scheme related to Madoff Securities.
5. Pretend you are Harry Markopolos and suggest one (1) strategy, different from that of the case study, to expose the potential fraud. Provide a rationale to support the suggestion.
6. Analyze the role of the audit committee for Madoff Securities in regard to the discovery of Ponzi scheme, and suggest one (1) action the audit committee could have taken in order to prevent or detect the fraud. Provide a rationale to support the suggestion.
7. Use at least two (2) quality academic resources in this assignment. Note: Wikipedia and similar type Websites do not qualify as academic resources.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

• Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
• Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student's name, the professors name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

• Analyze the requirement for the profession of auditing and the integral role that independence assurance plays within the economy.
• Examine the corporate governance of audits including the professional, regulatory, and corporate managerial requirements.
• Use technology and information resources to research issues in auditing.
• Write clearly and concisely about auditing using proper writing mechanics.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic/organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric found here.

Grading for this assignment will be based on answer quality, logic / organization of the paper, and language and writing skills, using the following rubric. Points: 280 Assignment 1: Madoff Securities Unacceptable Fair Proficient Exemplary Below 70% F 70-79% C 80-89% B 90-100% A Did not submit or incompletely determined the regulatory oversight that was in place while the Ponzi scheme was operating; did not submit or incompletely speculated on the main reasons why they did not discover the scheme. Partially determined the regulatory oversight that was in place while the Ponzi scheme was operating; partially speculated on the main reasons why they did not discover the scheme. Satisfactorily determined the regulatory oversight that was in place while the Ponzi scheme was operating; satisfactorily speculated on the main reasons why they did not discover the scheme. Thoroughly determined the regulatory oversight that was in place while the Ponzi scheme was operating; thoroughly speculated on the main reasons why they did not discover the scheme. Did not submit or incompletely assumed you are an auditor for a firm that had $10 million dollars invested in Madoff Securities. Did not submit or incompletely determined the fundamental audit procedures that you should have applied to this investment. Partially assumed you are an auditor for a firm that had $10 million dollars invested in Madoff Securities. Partially determined the fundamental audit procedures that you should have applied to this investment. Satisfactorily assumed you are an auditor for a firm that had $10 million dollars invested in Madoff Securities. Satisfactorily determined the fundamental audit procedures that you should have applied to this investment. Thoroughly assumed you are an auditor for a firm that had $10 million dollars invested in Madoff Securities. Thoroughly determined the fundamental audit procedures that you should have applied to this investment. Criteria 1. Determine the regulatory oversight that was in place while the Ponzi scheme was operating, and speculate on the main reasons why they did not discover the scheme. Weight: 15% 2. Assume you are an auditor for a firm that had $10 million dollars invested in Madoff Securities. Determine the fundamental audit procedures that you should have applied to this investment. Weight: 15% 3. Predict the way in which a peer review of Friehling and Horowitz would have uncovered the scheme related to Madoff Securities. Weight: 15% 4. Pretend you are Harry Markopolos and suggest one (1) strategy, different from that of the case study, to expose the potential fraud. Provide a rationale to support the suggestion. Weight: 15% 5. Analyze the role of the audit committee for Madoff Securities in regard to the discovery of Ponzi scheme, and suggest one (1) action the audit committee could have taken in order to prevent or detect the fraud. Provide a rationale to support the suggestion. Weight: 15% 6. 2 references (or number in the assignment) Weight: 5% Did not submit or incompletely predicted the way in which a peer review of Friehling and Horowitz would have uncovered the scheme related to Madoff Securities. Partially predicted the way in which a peer review of Friehling and Horowitz would have uncovered the scheme related to Madoff Securities. Satisfactorily predicted the way in which a peer review of Friehling and Horowitz would have uncovered the scheme related to Madoff Securities. Thoroughly predicted the way in which a peer review of Friehling and Horowitz would have uncovered the scheme related to Madoff Securities. Did not submit or incompletely suggested one (1) strategy, different from that of the case study, to expose the potential fraud. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Partially suggested one (1) strategy, different from that of the case study, to expose the potential fraud. Partially provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Satisfactorily suggested one (1) strategy, different from that of the case study, to expose the potential fraud. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Thoroughly suggested one (1) strategy, different from that of the case study, to expose the potential fraud. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Did not submit or incompletely analyzed the role of the audit committee for Madoff Securities in regard to the discovery of Ponzi scheme; did not submit or incompletely suggested one (1) action the audit committee could have taken in order to prevent or detect the fraud. Did not submit or incompletely provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Partially analyzed the role of the audit committee for Madoff Securities in regard to the discovery of Ponzi scheme; partially suggested one (1) action the audit committee could have taken in order to prevent or detect the fraud. Partially provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Satisfactorily analyzed the role of the audit committee for Madoff Securities in regard to the discovery of Ponzi scheme; satisfactorily suggested one (1) action the audit committee could have taken in order to prevent or detect the fraud. Satisfactorily provided a rationale to support the suggestion. Thoroughly analyzed the role of the audit committee for Madoff Securities in regard to the discovery of Ponzi scheme; thoroughly suggested one (1) action the audit committee could have taken in order to prevent or detect the fraud. Thoroughly provided a rationale to support the suggestion. No references provided Does not meet the required number of references; some or all references poor quality choices. Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices. Exceeds number of required references; all references high quality choices. 7. Writing Mechanics, Grammar, and Formatting Weight: 5% 8. Appropriate use of APA in-text citations and reference section Serious and persistent errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Partially free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Mostly free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Error free or almost error free grammar, spelling, punctuation, or formatting. Lack of in-text citations and / or lack of reference section. In-text citations and references are provided, but they are only partially formatted correctly in APA style. Most in-text citations and references are provided, and they are generally formatted correctly in APA style. In-text citations and references are error free or almost error free and consistently formatted correctly in APA style. Serious errors in the integration of sources, such as intentional or accidental plagiarism, or failure to use intext citations. Sources are partially integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing. Sources are mostly integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing. Sources are consistently integrated using effective techniques of quoting, paraphrasing, and summarizing. Information is confusing to the reader and fails to include reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Information is partially clear with minimal reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Information is mostly clear and generally supported with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Information is provided in a clear, coherent, and consistent manner with reasons and evidence that logically support ideas. Weight: 5% 9. Information Literacy/Integration of Sources Weight: 5% 10. Clarity and Coherence of Writing Weight: 5%