Rating of Audit Findings
|Rating||Seriousness of Finding*||Management Level Resolution||Communication to Board|
|Major||Highest||Deans, Vice Presidents, and the President should be personally involved.||Communicated to the Board in a timely manner given the nature of the finding.
If a conflict of interest in reporting exists, the internal auditor may directly report to the Board.
|Significant||High||Deans, Vice Presidents, and the President may be personally involved.||Communicated in the internal auditor's regular reports to the Board.|
|Notable||Average||Department or director level should resolve.||Communicated in the internal auditor's regular reports to the Board.|
|Nominal||Low||Department level staff should address.||Not communicated to the Board,|
*Some Factors Considered in Judging "Seriousness of Finding":
- Level of financial impact.
- Extent of violation of external laws, regulations and restrictions.
- Lack of a University policy or noncompliance with a policy in an important matter.
- Lack of internal controls or ineffective controls and procedures.
- Fraud, theft, inappropriate conflicts of interest or serious waste of University resources.
- Significant opportunity exists for real gains in processing efficiency.
- Poor cost controls or potential for significant savings and/or revenue generation.
- Condition places the University's reputation at risk.
- Ineffective reporting and/or communication structure results in financial risks and/or inefficient operations.
- Post audit implementation review reveals little or no effort to implement an action plan in response to a previous audit finding.
NOTE: The rating system for audit findings ranks the seriousness of the finding and indicates the level of management who should be personally involved in the problem resolution.