This question was based on a sales system in a theme park. Candidates were expected to use information in the scenario for all sections of the answer apart from section (a).

Candidates were required to list and explain the main sections of an audit strategy document and then provide an example of that section from the scenario provided in the question.

The question was worth 8 marks. A significant number of candidates did not appear to be aware of what an audit strategy is. Many candidates did not even attempt the question. Of those candidates attempting the question, answers tended to fall into two main categories:

• Firstly, setting out sections of the strategy, and providing clear examples. Answers in this category included candidates who were not clear of the actual headings of the strategy, but even so attempted to think “big picture” about the audit and make comments accordingly. For example, candidates were aware that setting out audit procedures were important for planning and attempted to explain the approach to sales testing even if the reason for this was not specifically mentioned. These answers were usually satisfactory.

• Secondly, focusing on the detail of the audit. Answers in this category listed income, expenditure, asset and liability headings and then attempted to show the detailed testing required for each section. While comments made were normally correct, the lack of focus on the overall audit approach limited the marks that could be awarded. This type of answer was unsatisfactory. 
Most candidates provided a list of controls, although a minority did provide significant explanation of the controls; detail that was not needed for this answer.

Other common errors included:

• Not linking points made to the scenario. For example, mentioning the need to determine risk and materiality but then not mentioning key risk areas such as cash sales. 
• Lack of breadth of points made. For example, mentioning scope and direction of the audit but not risk, materiality, assessment of control systems, etc.

A minority of candidates performed satisfactorily, with a significant minority not attempting the question at all. The overall standard was therefore inadequate.