Bell a consultant within the engagement team, is checking all the parameters for quality of deliverables. She observes that the deliverable is issued in electronic format. What is the compliance requirement to ensure quality of deliverables in the given case? Presence of issuing party's verification should be checked by her Template format for attestation process should be checked and verified by her thoroughly A similar electronic insertion of the quality stamp should be made on the office copy and the same should be signed-off by her No other requirements would be there if it is issued in an electronic format A similar electronic insertion of the quality stamp should be made on the office copy and the same should be signed-off by a senior personnel (manager and above) What are the key elements to be included in the EL before execution? Liability cap should be mentioned in the EL Draft invoice and deliverables should be issued Third parties involved should be clearly stated Intellectual property rights shypuld be protected Details of insurance policies should be provided to the client What are the key factors to consider in an Engagement Acceptance Form? Operating Territory Policy Nature of work Service line taxonomy Estimated fees and recovery rate All of the above What are the mandatory points to keep in mind for the engagement team while filling up the EAF's? Primary service taxonomy GP and Recovery Rate Percentage Resolver Comments/Conflict Check Signed Engagement Letter Contract Used Which of the below statements about EQCRP is true? An EQCRP is mandatorily required in all medium and high risk engagements An EQCRP would be required as an already working partner in the same engagement already An EQCRP is required on all high risk engagements, unless exempted by FRP An EQCRP could be anybody who has the knowledge of that particular engagement only An EQCRP mandatorily should have all the appropriate technical expertise and experience Which out of the following identifies potential conflict of interest and independence requirement? Engagement Letter Conflicts Check Sentinel Client Background Check Pitches and Proposals Justin a manager with the ITA team was suggested a few changes in the GTB by one of his clients. Whose approval should Justin take on the modified terms? Conflicts Check team Global Resolver Contracts compliance team Contracts Review team Advisory FRP Under the third party evaluation process, which is the first step to be followed? Initiate CBC and obtain Sentinel Functional Risk Partner critically assesses the need for Third Party business case Invoice by Third Party and payment by Finance team Engagement team presents the Third Party business case to the HoD and FRP Update SAN as "Lost" or "Won" for Third Party as the case maybe Shreekant, a manager in the forensic team is approached by an SEC restricted audit client to engage as a loan staff. Can Shreekant initiate risk formalities for the proposed engagement? Yes, without a thought Maybe, under certain pre-conditions Yes, only with an approval This engagement is strictly prohibited under any given circumstances, hence, Shreekant should refuse the client Select some of the common mistakes done by the engagement teams, noted during QPR? More time was charged by the Engagement Partner on an engagement For an ongoing engagement changes were made in the EL regarding the Engagement Manager fo that particular project, and documentation for it through ToR was not done Some documents in paper form were presented for the review and were not available in the Q-Box Deliverables were issued without Transmittal Letter Working papers were not compiled properly as an evidence 'Engaging' and 'Other' Parties' were identified correctly SAN fee range was updated GUP was not linked with the entity Mini completed all pre-engagement risk management procedures (SAN, CAF, EAF) except executing the contract, for a high risk client. She commenced the work on the engagement without the signed EL after obtaining approval from the FRP. The EL was signed after 23 days and the work was carried out as usual. Was the risk formality in place in the given situation? Yes, because only FRP's approval was required and Mini ensured that the approval was in place No, because RMP's approval was required instead of FRP's approval No, because approvals from both FRP and RMP should have been obtained before commencing the work No, because FRP's approval was to be taken before commencement of the engagement and if EL was not executed within 21 days, RMP's approval should have been obtained No, because FRP's and RMP's approval should have been obtained after the completion of 21 days from the date of commencement of work on the engagement Bell a consultant within the engagement team, is checking all the parameters for quality of deliverables. She observes that the deliverable is issued in electronic format. What is the compliance requirement to ensure quality of deliverables in the given case? Presence of issuing party's verification should be checked by her Template format for attestation process should be checked and verified by her thoroughly A similar electronic insertion of the quality stamp should be made on the office copy and the same should be signed-off by her No other requirements would be there if it is issued in an electronic format A similar electronic insertion of the quality stamp should be made on the office copy and the same should be signed-off by a senior personnel (manager and above) What are the key elements to be included in the EL before execution? Liability cap should be mentioned in the EL Draft invoice and deliverables should be issued Third parties involved should be clearly stated Intellectual property rights shypuld be protected Details of insurance policies should be provided to the client What are the key factors to consider in an Engagement Acceptance Form? Operating Territory Policy Nature of work Service line taxonomy Estimated fees and recovery rate All of the above What are the mandatory points to keep in mind for the engagement team while filling up the EAF's? Primary service taxonomy GP and Recovery Rate Percentage Resolver Comments/Conflict Check Signed Engagement Letter Contract Used Which of the below statements about EQCRP is true? An EQCRP is mandatorily required in all medium and high risk engagements An EQCRP would be required as an already working partner in the same engagement already An EQCRP is required on all high risk engagements, unless exempted by FRP An EQCRP could be anybody who has the knowledge of that particular engagement only An EQCRP mandatorily should have all the appropriate technical expertise and experience Which out of the following identifies potential conflict of interest and independence requirement? Engagement Letter Conflicts Check Sentinel Client Background Check Pitches and Proposals Justin a manager with the ITA team was suggested a few changes in the GTB by one of his clients. Whose approval should Justin take on the modified terms? Conflicts Check team Global Resolver Contracts compliance team Contracts Review team Advisory FRP Under the third party evaluation process, which is the first step to be followed? Initiate CBC and obtain Sentinel Functional Risk Partner critically assesses the need for Third Party business case Invoice by Third Party and payment by Finance team Engagement team presents the Third Party business case to the HoD and FRP Update SAN as "Lost" or "Won" for Third Party as the case maybe Shreekant, a manager in the forensic team is approached by an SEC restricted audit client to engage as a loan staff. Can Shreekant initiate risk formalities for the proposed engagement? Yes, without a thought Maybe, under certain pre-conditions Yes, only with an approval This engagement is strictly prohibited under any given circumstances, hence, Shreekant should refuse the client Select some of the common mistakes done by the engagement teams, noted during QPR? More time was charged by the Engagement Partner on an engagement For an ongoing engagement changes were made in the EL regarding the Engagement Manager fo that particular project, and documentation for it through ToR was not done Some documents in paper form were presented for the review and were not available in the Q-Box Deliverables were issued without Transmittal Letter Working papers were not compiled properly as an evidence 'Engaging' and 'Other' Parties' were identified correctly SAN fee range was updated GUP was not linked with the entity Mini completed all pre-engagement risk management procedures (SAN, CAF, EAF) except executing the contract, for a high risk client. She commenced the work on the engagement without the signed EL after obtaining approval from the FRP. The EL was signed after 23 days and the work was carried out as usual. Was the risk formality in place in the given situation? Yes, because only FRP's approval was required and Mini ensured that the approval was in place No, because RMP's approval was required instead of FRP's approval No, because approvals from both FRP and RMP should have been obtained before commencing the work No, because FRP's approval was to be taken before commencement of the engagement and if EL was not executed within 21 days, RMP's approval should have been obtained No, because FRP's and RMP's approval should have been obtained after the completion of 21 days from the date of commencement of work on the engagement