Explorer

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed certain of these areas and identified the deficiencies below in the related areas reviewed. The firm did not perform any procedures to test or identify and test controls over as discussed above the accuracy and completeness of a report used by the firm to test certain deferred revenue. (AS 1105.10)

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed certain of these areas and identified the deficiencies below in the related areas reviewed. The firm selected a sample of invoices to test accounts receivable. The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to test certain invoices because the firm limited its procedures to reviewing the invoice and inquiry of management. (AS 2301.08)

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed certain of these areas and identified the deficiencies below in the related areas reviewed. The firm did not perform any procedures to test or identify and test controls over the accuracy and completeness of certain reports it used to test the allowance for doubtful accounts. (AS 1105.10)

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed certain of these areas and identified the deficiencies below in the related areas reviewed. During the year the issuer acquired a business and engaged an external specialist to assist in determining the fair value of the consideration and intangible assets. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not test the existence completeness accuracy and fair value of the tangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of the acquisition date. (AS 2301.08; AS 2501.07)

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed certain of these areas and identified the deficiencies below in the related areas reviewed. During the year the issuer acquired a business and engaged an external specialist to assist in determining the fair value of the consideration and intangible assets. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test the fair value of the intangible assets and certain of the paid consideration beyond obtaining the draft report from the company's specialist. Further the firm did not perform procedures with respect to its use of the work of the company's specialist as audit evidence beyond testing certain terms related to the paid consideration and performing certain recalculations. (AS 1105.A1 - .A10; AS 2501.07)

The firm's internal inspection program had inspected this audit and reviewed certain of these areas and identified the deficiencies below in the related areas reviewed. During the year the issuer acquired a business and engaged an external specialist to assist in determining the fair value of the consideration and intangible assets. The following deficiency was identified: · The firm did not identify and evaluate a departure from GAAP related to the issuer's omission of a disclosure related to this business combination required by FASB ASC Topic 805 Business Combinations. (AS 2810.30 and .31)

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 identify and select journal entries and other adjustments for testing to address the potential for material misstatement due to fraud. (AS 2401.58)

The issuer performed an impairment assessment of certain intangible assets. The firm did not perform procedures beyond obtaining and reading the issuer's sensitivity analysis to evaluate the reasonableness of the significant assumptions the issuer used in the impairment assessment. (AS 2501.16)

The firm did not identify and select journal entries and other adjustments for testing to address the potential for material misstatement due to fraud. (AS 2401.58)

The issuer used a service organization to invoice customers when services were rendered. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm selected for testing a complementary user control over the review of sales orders. The firm did not test certain attributes of this control intended to validate both the accuracy of rates charged to customers and the timing of services rendered. In addition the firm did not identify and test any other complementary user controls designed to ensure that the services were rendered as scheduled in the service organization's system. (AS 2201.B22)

The issuer used a service organization to invoice customers when services were rendered. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm selected for testing a complementary user control over the review of a comparison of a system-generated discrepancy report to a manually prepared service log. 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.B22)

The issuer estimated its allowance for doubtful accounts based on reserve percentages used by other companies in the issuer's industry ('peer companies'). The firm's approach for substantively testing the allowance for doubtful accounts was to review and test management's process. The firm did not sufficiently evaluate the reasonableness of the allowance because the firm did not perform procedures to determine whether the peer companies' reserve percentages were relevant to determining the issuer's reserve percentage. (AS 2501.09 .10 and .11)

The issuer recognized certain revenue based on an arrangement with an external party. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate whether the issuer's arrangement represented a contract with an identifiable customer in conformity with FASB ASC Topic 606 Revenue from Contracts with Customers. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

With respect to a second IT system the firm did not identify and test any controls over the accuracy and completeness of data received from external sources that was processed by this IT system. (AS 2201.39)

A third IT system was hosted by a service organization. The firm did not perform any procedures to test the design and operating effectiveness of complementary user controls the issuer implemented to address a stated control objective in the service auditor's report. (AS 2201.42 .44 and .B22)

The issuer recognized certain revenue based on an arrangement with an external party. The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate the reliability of data the issuer used to record this revenue. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The firm did not perform any procedures to test certain data used to recognize certain other revenue. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

During the year the issuer completed an asset acquisition. The firm did not perform procedures beyond reading issuer-prepared documentation and inquiries of management to evaluate the reasonableness of certain significant assumptions the issuer used to determine the fair value of contingent consideration. (AS 2501.16)

The issuer used multiple information-technology (IT) systems to record transactions related to revenue. In its testing of controls over revenue the firm tested an IT-dependent manual control that used data generated by these IT systems. As a result of the deficiencies in the firm's testing of the controls over these IT systems the firm's testing of the IT-dependent manual control was not sufficient. (AS 2201.46)

The issuer used multiple information-technology (IT) systems to record transactions related to revenue. In its testing of controls over revenue the firm tested an IT-dependent manual control that used data generated by these IT systems. With respect to one of these IT systems: · The firm did not perform procedures beyond inquiry and reading the issuer's policies to test certain logical user access controls. (AS 2201.42 and .44)

The issuer used multiple information-technology (IT) systems to record transactions related to revenue. In its testing of controls over revenue the firm tested an IT-dependent manual control that used data generated by these IT systems. With respect to one of these IT systems: · The firm did not identify and test any controls related to IT operations. (AS 2201.39)

The issuer used multiple information-technology (IT) systems to record transactions related to revenue. In its testing of controls over revenue the firm tested an IT-dependent manual control that used data generated by these IT systems. With respect to one of these IT systems: · The firm did not identify and test controls over program change management except for one control over the final approval of program changes. For this control 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 2201.39 .42 and .44)

The issuer used multiple information-technology (IT) systems to record transactions related to revenue. In its testing of controls over revenue the firm tested an IT-dependent manual control that used data generated by these IT systems. With respect to one of these IT systems: · The firm selected for testing a control over a review of an annual IT general controls assessment performed by the issuer's internal auditor. 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 firm did not perform procedures to evaluate the reliability of certain information it obtained from external sources that it used in its substantive procedures for certain revenue. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The firm did not perform any procedures to evaluate whether the issuer's recognition of certain revenue was in conformity with FASB ASC Topic 606 Revenue from Contracts with Customers. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm did not evaluate the appropriateness of the issuer's revenue recognition policy for certain revenue. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test activity reported in the statement of cash flows related to these assets beyond tracing amounts to summarized account activity in the issuer's general ledger. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not evaluate whether the method used by the issuer to develop an estimate of certain of these assets was in conformity with certain applicable GAAP requirements. (AS 2501.10)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not identify and evaluate the issuer's omission of certain disclosures required by FASB ASC Topic 820 Fair Value Measurement. (AS 2810.30 and .31)

The firm did not identify and select journal entries and other adjustments for testing to address the potential for material misstatement due to fraud. (AS 2401.58)

The firm did not perform sufficient procedures to evaluate whether the issuer satisfied its performance obligations prior to the recognition of revenue because it limited its procedures to testing cash receipts. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm did not perform procedures to test sales discounts. (AS 2301.08 and .13)

The firm also did not perform procedures to test or test any controls over the completeness of certain information it used to test revenue. (AS 1105.10)

The firm did not identify and evaluate that certain of the issuer's disclosures related to revenue were inaccurate. (AS 2810.30 and .31)

The firm did not identify and evaluate the issuer's omission of certain disclosures required by FASB ASC Topic 606 Revenue from Contracts with Customers. (AS 2810.30 and .31)

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 perform sufficient procedures to test a subset of this revenue because it limited its procedures to tracing certain transactions to cash receipts. (AS 2301.08)

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 firm did not perform any procedures to test certain information reported in the statement of cash flows including an evaluation of evidence that indicated that the information reported was potentially inaccurate. (AS 2301.08 and .11; AS 2810.03)

The firm did not identify and select journal entries and other adjustments for testing to address the potential for material misstatement due to fraud. (AS 2401.58)

The firm did not perform procedures to test another subset of revenue beyond reviewing a sales listing obtained from an external source. (AS 2301.08)

The firm did not identify and evaluate the issuer's omission of certain disclosures required by FASB ASC Topic 606 Revenue from Contracts with Customers. (AS 2810.30 and .31)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform procedures to test the rights and obligations of these assets. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not evaluate the relevance and reliability of information it obtained from external sources and used to test these assets. (AS 1105.04 and .06)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not perform any procedures to test the existence of certain of these assets. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not evaluate whether the issuer's (1) accounting for certain of these assets and (2) presentation of certain other of these assets were appropriate. (AS 2301.08)

The issuer reported several types of certain assets. The following deficiencies were identified: · The firm did not sufficiently evaluate the issuer's determination that there were no indicators of impairment for certain of these assets at certain dates because it did not evaluate whether the issuer had appropriately applied GAAP in identifying indicators of impairment. (AS 2301.08)