Which of the three categories of attestation engagements (examinations, reviews, and agreed upon procedures) is used in the Academy Awards engagement (Oscar)?

"There are almost no limits on what other nonfinancial information a public accountant can provide assurance services for. For instance, in Auditing in Action 1-3, we refer to PricewaterhouseCoopers, which since 1935 has attested to the ballot accuracy, secrecy, and integrity of the voting process of the Academy Awards, now called The Oscars. " "PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) has been responsible for providing assurance over the integrity of the voting process for the Academy Awards since the 1935 awards ceremony. It would seem PwC performed its role well until the 2017 Academy Awards, when the firm was suddenly at the centre of one of the most sensational stories in Oscars' history. So what went wrong? To ensure that no errors are made in announcing the awards, PwC uses two complete sets of the envelopes entrusted with two PwC partners who are on each side of the stage. Up until the last award of the evening, for best picture, everything was running smoothly. At that point, a PwC partner handed Warren Beatty, the award presenter, the wrong envelope. Instead of the envelope containing the winner for best picture, the partner accidentally handed Mr. Beatty a duplicate of the envelope for best actress an award Emma Stone had accepted for her role in La La Land just moments before. Faye Dunaway, presenting the award with Mr. Beatty, erroneously announced that La La Land had won the Oscar for best picture. Moments later, the two PwC partners came onstage and the La La Land producers announced that Moonlight was, in fact, the winner. Many are now questioning why is it necessary to have an accounting firm at the Oscars. In fact, for the first six Academy Award ceremonies, there were no accountants involved. However, people continually questioned the integrity of the voting process and the legitimacy of the outcomes. For instance, in the first few years, a disproportionate number of winners were among the Academy's36 founders. In 1934, the new Academy president announced that he had retained the services of PwC to oversee the voting for the 1935 Oscars. As the Academy president noted in 2010, trust and integrity have been the foundation of their relationship with PwC. Yet after the snafu in 2017, some speculate that the relationship has soured. PwC released a statement early the next day apologizing and taking responsibility for the mistake. Immediately after the mistake, the president of the Academy announced that the two PwC partners responsible for the snafu had been permanently removed from all Academy activities and that AMPAS's relationship with PwC was under review. However, despite the negative publicity, AMPAS decided to continue its longstanding relationship with PwC. AMPAS and PwC have developed new controls, including a ban of cellphones (apparently the partner who had handed out the wrong envelope was tweeting a picture of Emma Stone at the time) and the addition of a third balloting partner.