What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on A&A-01 Audit and Assurance Policy and Procedures?

Approved audit and assurance policy with version history, owner and approval date; Internal audit charter stating independence, authority and reporting line; Audit procedure manual covering planning, fieldwork, reporting and follow-up; Policy review log showing the yearly review and any change-triggered review; Distribution or acknowledgement records for staff who run or support audits.

What is the most common gap auditors find on A&A-01?

Policy last reviewed more than twelve months ago and no review after a major reorganisation or new service launch

CSA CCM v4.1 · A&A - Audit & Assurance

`A&A-01` Audit and Assurance Policy and Procedures

The organisation keeps written, approved standards, policies and procedures for audit and assurance in force, makes them known to the people they bind, applies them in practice and checks that they work. It revisits and refreshes them every year as a minimum, and again whenever a significant change occurs.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, A&A-01. 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 CSA CCM v4.1 in the compliance library.

Version 4.1 adds 11 controls (among them API security, log sanitisation and a service bill of materials) and renumbers several domains. CSA accepts v4.0.x during its transition; if your STAR assessment is still on v4.0.1, check the numbering against it.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Policy repository / GRC workspace

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

Policy review log showing the yearly review and any change-triggered review · SIEM / log platform

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Distribution or acknowledgement records for staff who run or support audits · HR system / LMS

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Approved audit and assurance policy with version history, owner and approval date · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Internal audit charter stating independence, authority and reporting line · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Audit procedure manual covering planning, fieldwork, reporting and follow-up · Policy repository / GRC workspace

First move

Mostly documents and reviews. Pull the 1 system-held artefact from your SIEM / log platform on a schedule; put the documents under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a dated record with a named reviewer.

Common gaps auditors find

Policy last reviewed more than twelve months ago and no review after a major reorganisation or new service launch
Audit charter silent on independence of the audit function from the areas it examines
Policy adopted but no procedures describing how audits are actually planned and reported

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

A&A-02 Independent Assessments