When to Schedule Follow-Up Audits for Corrective Actions?
Short answer
C Wait until sufficient time has elapsed since implementation to gather reliable evidence of control operation.
Question
Key Takeaways
Tests understanding of control validation timing versus project completion milestones, trapping candidates who prioritize administrative progress over actual control effectiveness.
This question addresses the optimal timing for auditing implemented corrective actions. The page establishes that waiting for sufficient operational evidence is superior to merely tracking completion status.
Common mistake: Option B is frequently chosen because progress updates sound proactive, but they only confirm execution plans rather than proving sustained control performance.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Selecting option C aligns with ISACA’s fundamental principle that controls must operate over a meaningful period before their effectiveness can be reliably evaluated. An auditor cannot validate whether a newly implemented fix actually mitigates risk without observing its performance across multiple cycles or business periods. Waiting for sufficient elapsed time ensures the audit evidence reflects real-world operating conditions rather than temporary adjustments or initial configuration states.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A focuses solely on administrative completion, which does not guarantee the control functions correctly once deployed. Option B tracks project momentum but fails to address whether the remediation actually sustains its intended security posture over time. Option D introduces an external regulatory deadline that may force premature testing before the organization has had adequate opportunity to stabilize the new control environment.
Community Comment Notes
Multiple learners emphasize that implementation completion does not equal operational readiness, noting that tangible evidence requires time to accumulate. One participant rephrased the scenario to highlight that passing time allows auditors to verify long-term effectiveness rather than just initial setup. Another user warned against prioritizing administrative milestones over actual control validation, reinforcing the need to observe sustained performance.
Exam Strategy
Always distinguish between project completion metrics and control effectiveness validation when scheduling audit activities. Prioritize observation periods that allow risks to be tested under normal operating conditions rather than chasing administrative deadlines.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is option B insufficient for scheduling follow-ups?
Does management completion guarantee audit readiness?
Community Votes
75% of anonymous learners picked answer C. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Discussion 4 contributions
Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.
From public community threads 4
-
Swallows 👍 1 Answered BProgress updates indicating that the implementation of agreed actions is on track (option B) would best guide an IS auditor when determining an appropriate time to schedule the follow-up of agreed corrective actions for reported audit issues. This option suggests that the corrective actions are being implemented as planned and that there is evidence of progress toward addressing the identified audit issues. By ensuring that the implementation is on track, the auditor can schedule follow-up at a suitable time to verify completion and effectiveness. While other options may also provide relevant information, such as sufficient time elapsed since implementation to provide evidence of control operation (option C), progress updates indicating implementation progress offer more specific guidance on the timing of follow-up activities. Option C focuses on the passage of time rather than active progress toward resolution.
-
46080f2 👍 1 Answered CThe best guidance for an IS auditor is C. Sufficient time has elapsed since implementation to provide evidence of control operation. This ensures the auditor can review tangible evidence of how the controls perform over time, which is essential for validating their effectiveness. Completion (Option A) and progress updates (Option B) are preliminary steps, but they don’t guarantee operational success. Similarly, regulatory timelines (Option D) are secondary to the auditor’s need for evidence-based assurance. Therefore, Option C provides the strongest foundation for scheduling a follow-up audit.
-
choboanon 👍 1 Answered CA etter way to word it would be: A) We've completed the controls, are we ready for review? B)We're on track to completethe controls and sent a progress update, are we ready for review? C) We've completed the controls, and time has passed for us to have ample evidence whether or not they are operating effectively D) A Deadline was set for the review. Are they ready?
-
choboanon 👍 1 Answered CAnswer is C. Be critical of anything wallows comments..
Reader comments & corrections
No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Related Analysis
Practice All CISA Questions
Access 400 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full CISA Practice Test →