Audit system and method

• US 7,072,895 B2
• Filed: 10/12/2001
• Issued: 07/04/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 10/13/2000
• Status: Expired due to Fees

• Current Assignee: Fiduciary Audit Services Trust
• Original Assignee: Fiduciary Audit Services Trust
• Inventors: Mamorsky, Jeffrey
• Primary Examiner(s): Pardo, Thuy N.
• Application Number:
  US10/466,831
• Publication Number:
  US 20050131784A1
• Time in Patent Office: 1,726 Days
• Field of Search: 707/10, 707/1, 707/6, 707/101, 707/102, 707/103.R, 707/104.1, 705/38, 709/224, 717/168, 126/22
• US Class Current: 1/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/02 Marketing; Price estimation or determination; Fundraising
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/00 Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/02 Banking, e.g. interest calculation or account maintenance credit or loans G06Q40/03
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99936 Pattern matching access
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99942 Manipulating data structure, e.g. compression, compaction, compilation
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99943 Generating database or data structure, e.g. via user interface
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99944 Object-oriented database structure
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99945 Object-oriented database structure processing
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99952 Coherency, e.g. same view to multiple users

Abstract

The invention provides a system and method for reducing and potentially eliminating the review of source documents by auditors to determine whether there is compliance of an audited subject area with a predetermined set of rules. The inventive system and method provides one or more questions directed to personnel that are familiar with the subject area being audited. It may be accompanied by cross-checking question and/or verification of the responses. The responses and cross-checks or verifications, if any, are compared for consistency and rule compliance. Where non-compliance is determined to exist, or where there is a question whether non-compliance exists, an audit alert is generated. This may be followed by evaluating the audit alert through a review of source documents, thereby eliminating the need for a review of source documents unless an audit alert is determined to exist, and limiting the review of source documents to documents relevant to the audit alert.

Claims

1. A method for auditing a subject area, the audit being adapted to ascertain whether the audited subject area is being administered in compliance with a set of rules without the need to review source documents, the methods comprising the steps of:

a) identifying an element of the set of rules that is relevant to the subject area to be audited;

b) creating a first question designed to elicit an answer relevant to the subject area to be audited;

c) obtaining a response to the first question from a first person;

d) obtaining a verification of the response to the first question from a second person; and

e) flagging an audit alert if the response to the first question reveals tat the audited subject area is not being administered in compliance with the set of rules;

f) flagging the audit alert if the verification of the response to the first question is negative; and

g) if the audit alert has been flagged, providing notice of the flagged audit alert.

2. The method claimed in claim 1, wherein the step of obtaining a response to the first question comprises:

a) electronically delivering the first question to the first person; and

b) electronically receiving the response to the first question from the first person.

3. A method for auditing a subject area, the audit being adapted to provide notification of an audit alert if audited subject area is not being administered in compliance with a set of rules, the audit being conducted without review source documents, the methods comprising the steps of:

a) identifying an element of the set of rules that is relevant to the subject area to be audited;

b) creating a first multiple-choice question having a first response;

c) creating a second multiple-choice question having a second response, the second response being adapted such tat the selection of the second response to the second multiple-choice question and the selection of the first response to the first multiple-choice question would reveal that the audited subject area is not being administered in compliance with the set of rules;

d) obtaining a response to the first question;

e) obtaining a response to the second question;

f) providing notification of an audit alert if the response obtained to the first question is the first response and the response obtained to the second question is the second response.

4. The method claimed in claim 3, wherein the step of obtaining a response to the first question comprises:

a) electronically delivering the first question to a first person; and

b) electronically receiving the response to a first question from the first person.

5. The method claimed in claim 4, wherein the step of obtaining a response to the second question comprises:

a) electronically delivering the second question to the first person; and

b) electronically receiving the response to the second question from the first person.

6. The method claimed in claim 4, wherein the step of obtaining a response to the second question comprises:

a) electronically delivering the second question to a second person; and

b) electronically receiving the response to the second question from a second person.

7. A method of performing an audit to determine non-compliance with a set of rules without the need for review of source documents, the method comprising the steps of:

a) creating a first and a second audit question;

b) determining a logical relationship between at least one response to the first audit question and at least one response to the second audit question, the logical relationship being adapted to reflect the existence of non-compliance with the set of rules;

c) obtaining responses to each of the first and second audit questions;

d) determining whether an audit alert exists due to the satisfaction of the logical relationship between the at least one response to the first audit question and the at least one response to the second audit question; and

e) providing a report of the audit alert determined to exist.

8. The method claimed in claim 7, wherein the step of obtaining a response to each of the first and second audit questions comprises the steps of:

a) electronically delivering the first question to a first person;

b) obtaining a response to the first question from the first person;

c) electronically delivering the second question to a second person; and

d) obtaining a response from the second person to the second question.

9. The method claimed in claim 7, wherein the step of obtaining a response to each of the first and second audit questions comprises the steps of:

a) electronically delivering the first question to a first person;

b) obtaining a response to the first question from the first person;

c) electronically delivering the second question to the first person; and

d) obtaining a response to the second question from the first person.

10. A method of performing an audit to determine non-compliance with a set of rules without the need for review of source documents, the method comprising the steps of:

a) creating a first and a second audit question;

b) determining a logical relationship between at least one response to the first audit question and at least one response to the second audit question, the logical relationship being adapted to reflect the existence of an internal inconsistency between one of the at least one response to the first audit question and one of the at least one response to the second audit question;

c) obtaining responses to each of the first and second audit questions;

d) generating an audit alert in the event that the responses to the first and second audit questions reflect the existence of an internal inconsistency; and

e) providing a report of the generated audit alert.

11. The method claimed in claim 10, wherein the step of obtaining a response to each of the first and second audit questions comprises the steps of:

a) electronically delivering the first question to a first person;

b) obtaining a response to the first question from the first person;

c) electronically delivering the second question to a second person; and

d) obtaining a response to the second question from the second person.

12. The method claimed in claim 10, wherein the step of obtaining a response to each of the first and second audit questions comprises the steps of:

a) electronically delivering the first question to a first person;

b) obtaining a response to the first question from the first person;

c) electronically delivering the second question to the first person; and

d) obtaining a response to the second question from the first person.

13. A method of performing an audit to determine non-compliance with a set of rules the method comprising the steps of:

a) creating a first and a second audit question;

b) determining a logical relationship between a first audit question and a second audit question, the logical relationship being adapted to reflect the existence of non-compliance with the set of rules;

c) obtaining a response to each of the first and second audit questions;

d) determining whether an audit alert exists due to the satisfaction of the logical relationship between at least the first answer and the second answer;

e) providing a report of the audit alert determined to exist; and

f) evaluating the audit alert by a review of source documents, thereby eliminating the need for a review of source documents unless an audit alert is determined to exist, and limiting the review of source documents to documents relevant to the audit alert.