Response says
Partially disagrees: accepts an unmitigated threat in appearance under IIA but rejects a GAGAS impairment because IAD does not conduct GAGAS audits.
What should residents consider about Finding AC2602-F4: F4: The Internal Operation Committee’s (IOC) failure to exercise charter approval, audit plan pre-approval, and direct report receipt as required by IIA Standards 6.1, 6.2, 8.1, 9.4, 11.3 and Principle 8 leaves this organizational independence threat unmitigated, constituting an independence impairment in fact and appearance under GAGAS §3.56., and the County’s response?
Audit context
Response says
Partially disagrees: accepts an unmitigated threat in appearance under IIA but rejects a GAGAS impairment because IAD does not conduct GAGAS audits.
Audit analysis
Clearly distinguishes accepted and disputed scope and explains its standards interpretation using the Policies and Procedures Manual.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
4/4
Statutory elements
6/6
Public usefulness
Clearly distinguishes accepted and disputed scope and explains its standards interpretation using the Policies and Procedures Manual.
Scoring confidence: high
Source pages
Public participation
Use Pol.is to discuss both the Grand Jury finding and the County’s response, see where participants agree, and add a perspective for others to consider. Participant statements do not alter this audit or verify factual claims made by any participant or source document.