{"schema_version":"ICEQC_NEWS_ARTICLE_V1","id":"iceqc-news-13396e1d242ec9ef","slug":"2017-08-23-using-internal-evidence-to-strengthen-internal-audit","language":"en","publication_status":"READY_FOR_IMPORT","publication_date":"2017-08-23","last_modified_date":"2017-08-23","title":"Using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit","summary":"Sets out a controlled approach to using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit, linking diagnosis, accountable action, outcome measures and verification of sustained.","category":{"code":"QUALITY_IMPROVEMENT_METHODS","label":"Quality Improvement Methods"},"article_type":"Quality improvement method","publisher":"International Council for Education Quality Certification (ICEQC)","jurisdictional_scope":"International","historical_reference_basis":"Independent assurance within education providers","reference_authority":"Relevant public authorities and official international sources","sections":[{"heading":null,"paragraphs":["A reasoned conclusion on using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit should reconcile the governing expectation, evidence of operation, learner outcomes and unresolved risk. A selected successful case is not sufficient. A decision concerning the intervention should recognise that the method set out here treats improvement as a controlled cycle of diagnosis, action, measurement and review. Arrangements for the corrective programme should provide accurate information, timely support and an accessible route for correction or review without adverse treatment."]},{"heading":"Improvement objective and baseline","paragraphs":["The historical reference basis is the independent assurance within education providers. Data used for using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit should be interpreted against stable definitions and an identifiable population. Reporting should identify a break in comparability before describing movement over time. Intervention in the issue under review should be proportionate to the identified condition and tested where risk permits. Wider implementation should follow evidence of benefit and acceptable unintended effects.","The quality significance of using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit under review follows from a basic distinction between availability and effective provision. Risk assessment for the corrective programme should consider severity, reach, duration, recurrence and detectability, with escalation where learner impact may be material.","In practical terms, the practice should be reviewed against a stated method rather than general assurance. For the improvement objective, the subject should be examined as a connected system of policy, people, resources, decisions and evidence. Assurance should not overlook failures arising at the boundary between otherwise adequate controls. The record for the improvement objective should identify the responsible function, decision authority and escalation route.","Implementation of the corrective programme should be organised around a decision that can be tested. Review of the corrective programme should give particular attention to adverse cases, unequal effects and errors that learners may be unable to identify or remedy after the event. Governance of the improvement objective requires a clear allocation of authority, information and follow-through. Escalation should place material evidence before the authority capable of an effective response.","Improvement work on the issue under review should begin with a verified problem, defined baseline and measurable outcome. Completion should depend on evidence of effect rather than completion of planned activity. Material concerns include governing bodies receiving activity data instead of outcome evidence, management assurance accepted without testing, material risks omitted from reporting, and conflicts not identified. In relation to using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit, materiality depends on the consequence and extent of an exception, not only on how often it appears in sampled records.","Reporting on the improvement objective should distinguish established fact, analytical judgement and planned action. Material revisions should retain their reason and effective date. At the publication date, Independent assurance within education providers provides the relevant international context for the corrective programme. Any consequential application still requires evidence from the affected jurisdiction or institution. In relation to using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit, independent records should be reconciled, with disagreement and uncertainty reported alongside the finding."]},{"heading":"Controls and accountable action","paragraphs":["Implementation of internal evidence to strengthen internal audit can be tested without imposing unnecessary reporting. Review of the intervention should map the complete process, identify the intended result and responsible authority at each stage, and test normal cases together with exceptions. Corrective action concerning using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit should address the identified cause, assign responsibility and set a review period. Residual risk should remain open until sustained improvement is demonstrated.","The record for the issue under review should identify the responsible function, decision authority and escalation route.","The analysis of the intervention should remain within the limits of the evidence. Oversight of the improvement objective should reflect the principle that correcting an individual record does not establish that the process which produced the error has been corrected. For the improvement objective, governance structures do not provide assurance merely because committees exist. Membership, information quality, challenge, decisions and follow-through determine whether oversight is effective. If uncertainty could change a consequential decision, additional evidence or a narrower conclusion is required.","The assurance record for the practice should retain the date of the evidence, the source responsible for it, the scope examined and the version of any instrument or definition applied. Corrective action concerning the improvement objective should address the identified cause, assign responsibility and set a review period. Revision should not remove an earlier conclusion from the record where reliance has occurred.","Public reporting on the practice should distinguish established fact, analytical judgement and planned action.","Neither one indicator nor one control can establish the complete position on the issue under review. The principal risks associated with the issue under review should be assessed as connected conditions."]}],"word_count":771,"content_hash":"sha256-390b4cd3490ca863d488a65c6b1c2121380b71fd058b727947493d8a7a123731","seo_keywords":["using internal evidence to strengthen internal audit","education quality improvement","education quality","ICEQC"],"schema_type":"TechArticle"}