What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on CPS 230 para 30 Remediate material weaknesses and keep them in the risk profile until fixed?

Remediation program or issue register with accountable executive per item and target dates; Root cause analysis records for material weaknesses; Independent validation or assurance of closure before items are closed; Risk profile extract showing open weaknesses still reflected.

What is the most common gap auditors find on CPS 230 para 30?

Issues closed on management say-so without assurance

APRA CPS 230 · Operational risk management, controls and incidents (paras 23 to 32)

`CPS 230 para 30` Remediate material weaknesses and keep them in the risk profile until fixed

The entity must fix material weaknesses in operational risk management, including gaps, weaknesses and failures in controls. Remediation needs clear accountability and assurance, has to tackle root causes promptly, and identified control gaps, weaknesses and failures stay recorded in the operational risk profile until remediation is complete.

Source: APRA CPS 230, CPS 230 para 30. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open APRA CPS 230 in the compliance library.

Applies to APRA-regulated entities.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

moderate

to go live

Document repository

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

Risk profile extract showing open weaknesses still reflected · Document repository

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Root cause analysis records for material weaknesses · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Remediation program or issue register with accountable executive per item and target dates · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Independent validation or assurance of closure before items are closed · Document repository

First move

Start with the 1 of 4 artefacts that already live in a system (Document repository); keep the periodic reviews but log each one as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Issues closed on management say-so without assurance
Open weaknesses dropped from the risk profile before remediation is validated

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

CPS 230 para 29 Monitor, review and test controls; report results; rectify gaps promptly · CPS 230 para 31 Identify, escalate, record and address incidents and near misses