Explorer

The firm did not perform several procedures to test whether the issuer appropriately recorded this significant account. (AS 2301.08)

The firm did not evaluate whether the issuer's determination of the fair value of a significant account was consistent with the valuation method. (AS 2503.35)

The firm confirmed a significant account but did not perform procedures to evaluate the reliability of the confirmation including whether additional evidence was needed. Further the firm did not evaluate whether the issuer appropriately recorded the account. (AS 2301.08; AS 2310.33)

The firm did not test the presentation and disclosure of certain significant accounts beyond testing the mathematical accuracy of the issuer's calculations. (AS 2502.43)

The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of the significant assumptions used to determine an estimate related to a significant account. (AS 2501.16)

The firm did not perform procedures beyond inquiry to evaluate the reasonableness of certain significant assumptions the issuer used to develop its valuation of certain significant accounts. (AS 2501.16)

The firm did not evaluate whether the method used by the issuer to develop its estimate related to one of these significant accounts was in conformity with GAAP. (AS 2501.10)

The firm did not perform any procedures to test the valuation of another significant account. (AS 2501.07)

The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate and test certain aspects of this significant account. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer engaged specialists to estimate certain portions of a significant account. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test the accuracy of certain issuer-produced data that the company's specialist used in developing certain individual estimates beyond testing the accuracy of the data in the aggregate. (AS 1105.10)

The issuer engaged specialists to estimate certain portions of a significant account. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of significant assumptions the company's specialist developed and used in developing one of the estimates. (AS 1105.A8b)

The issuer engaged specialists to estimate certain portions of a significant account. The following deficiencies were identified: · For one of the estimates the firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate whether the methods used by the company's specialist were appropriate under the circumstances taking into account the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework. (AS 1105.A8c)

The firm did not evaluate whether the issuer appropriately presented a significant account in conformity with GAAP. (AS 2810.30)

The firm's approach for substantively testing the fair value of the significant account was to review and test management's process. The firm did not evaluate the reasonableness of certain assumptions used to determine the fair value. (AS 2502.26 and .28)

The firm's approach for substantively testing the fair value of the significant account was to review and test management's process. The firm not perform any substantive procedures to test or in the alternative identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of the internal data and did not evaluate the relevance and reliability of the external data the issuer used to develop certain assumptions. (AS 2502.26 .28 and .39)

The firm's approach for substantively testing the fair value of the significant account was to review and test management's process. The firm did not test whether the fair value measurement was accurately calculated from the data and the issuer's assumptions. (AS 2502.39)

The issuer used a valuation model to determine the fair value of a significant account. The firm selected for testing certain controls that consisted of management's review of the reasonableness of the assumptions used in the valuation model and the output from the valuation model. The firm did not evaluate the review procedures that the control owners performed including the procedures to identify items for follow up and the procedures to determine whether those items were appropriately resolved. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The issuer used a valuation model to determine the fair value of a significant account. The firm selected for testing certain controls that consisted of management's review of the reasonableness of the assumptions used in the valuation model and the output from the valuation model. The firm did not identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of the data used in the operation of the controls. (AS 2201.39)

The firm did not identify and test the necessary complementary user controls to place reliance on or identify and test any other controls over the accuracy and completeness of certain assumptions and reports from a service organization used in the operation of controls. (AS 2201.39 and .B22)

The firm used the work of an external party engaged by management to test certain controls that addressed this significant account. The firm did not assess the competence and objectivity of the external party. (AS 2201.18)

The firm used the work of an external party engaged by management to test certain controls that addressed this significant account. The firm did not evaluate the quality and effectiveness of the external party's work. (AS 2605.24)

The firm did not identify and test any relevant controls that addressed the risks of material misstatement related to a significant account. (AS 2201.39)

The firm performed substantive analytical procedures to test this significant account. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm used certain system-generated data to develop its expectations but did not perform any procedures to test or identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of this data. (AS 2305.16)

The firm performed substantive analytical procedures to test this significant account. The following deficiency was identified: • The firm performed these analytical procedures using established thresholds for investigating differences based on a level of control reliance that was not supported. As a result the thresholds that the firm used did not provide the desired level of assurance that misstatements that could have been material would be identified. (AS 2301.16 .18 and .37; AS 2305.20)

The firm selected for testing certain controls over a significant account. For one control the firm did not evaluate the specific procedures that the control owner performed to determine that the significant account was appropriately recognized. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The firm selected for testing certain controls over a significant account. For another control the firm did not identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of the system-generated reports used in the operation of the control. (AS 2201.39)

The firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the reasonableness of a significant assumption the issuer developed to estimate a significant account beyond comparing the amount to a contract executed in the prior year. (AS 2501.16)

The firm did not perform procedures beyond inquiry to test the appropriateness of a disclosure related to this significant account. (AS 2301.08)