Audit & Controls Analytics
Standard workpapers, review workflow, and full-population analytics feeding the exceptions - for internal audit, controls and finance teams.
Why it matters
The business challenge
Audit and controls files differ by whoever assembled them: programmes, evidence structure and review notes vary from engagement to engagement, so consolidated quality is an average, not a standard. Meanwhile boards, banks, investors and quality reviews expect documented controls, traceable evidence and demonstrable independence of review.
You might recognise this
- Workpapers are structured differently on every engagement or review cycle.
- Review notes age without owners and reopen after closure.
- Evidence is complete, but proving completeness takes days.
- Sampling starts from judgement alone, not from the full population.
- Engagement status is a phone call, not a view.
- Preparing for an external review means weeks of reconstructing files.
The solution
How PASDACS helps
PASDACS standardises the audit and controls file - digital programmes, evidence structure, naming and indexing, review workflow with maker-checker gates and note ageing - and adds analytics over the full population: journal analysis, duplicates, gaps, unusual entries and trend exceptions feeding sampling and the exception dashboard. The file becomes evidence any review can walk through. It serves internal audit and controllership teams as well as the audit firms we work with.
Services included
- Digital programmes and standard evidence structure
- Review workflow - maker-checker gates, note ageing and closure
- Engagement tracking across the portfolio
- Full-population journal and transaction analysis
- Duplicates, gaps, unusual entries and trend exceptions
- Sampling support and exception dashboards
How we deliver
Delivery approach
Standards & baseline
Current file variance reviewed, then one programme, evidence and naming standard designed with your team. Milestone: the standard approved by the people who sign the work.
Wire the workflow
Review gates, note ageing and engagement tracking configured on the standard file. Milestone: maker-checker and closure rules working as documented.
Prove on a closed cycle
The standard file and full-population analytics tested on a completed engagement or review cycle. Milestone: the rebuilt file passes your own internal review.
First live cycles
Pilot engagements run on the standard with support alongside the team. Milestone: cycles completed on the new file, on schedule.
Measure quality & effort
Review-note ageing, evidence completeness and file-assembly effort compared with the baseline. Benefit: quality that is demonstrable, not asserted.
Roll out & evidence
Portfolio-wide adoption with training and a named owner. Benefit: a file any review can walk through, engagement by engagement.
Measurement
What we measure
The numbers a pilot on this workflow is judged against - baselined before we start and tracked against your own data, so success is a measurement, not a claim.
- Review-note ageing and closure
- Evidence completeness
- File-assembly effort
- Cycles on the standard file
Tooling
Technology ecosystem
- Working-paper and document platforms
- Analytics over accounting data - full population, not samples
- Engagement tracking and review workflow tools
Outcomes
What you can expect
- Workpapers structured the same way on every engagement
- Review notes with owners, ageing and closure
- Evidence completeness that can be demonstrated, not asserted
- Sampling informed by full-population analytics
- Engagement status visible without a phone call
Related
Explore further
Related capabilities
Process
Map how the work actually runs, remove the waste, then standardise it into SOPs, checklists and review controls people actually follow.
Explore capabilityData & Analytics
Pipelines that consolidate and validate the numbers, feeding management, operational and customer dashboards.
Explore capabilityArtificial Intelligence
Document intelligence, a knowledge assistant over approved company sources, and agent-assisted workflows - always under human review.
Explore capabilityInsights
The firm that outgrew its partners: one operating process, not more supervision
Past a certain size, the constraint is no longer effort - it is that GST, audit and accounting each run their own way, and every decision routes through a partner. The fix is an operating model, not overtime.
Read insightRecognise this in your organisation?
Talk to us about where you are today - a pilot on this workflow has a defined scope, a measured baseline and success criteria you agree to before we start.