What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on HRS-05 Asset returns?

Offboarding procedure listing the asset return step and who confirms it; Leaver checklists for a sample of departed employees and contractors showing each issued asset returned or written off; Asset register entries reconciled against the leaver list; Contract clauses requiring third parties to return equipment and media at engagement end; Records of follow-up or cost recovery for assets not returned.

What is the most common gap auditors find on HRS-05?

Procedure covers employees but not contractors or supplier staff

CSA CCM v4.1 · HRS - Human Resources

`HRS-05` Asset returns

Write down and set up the steps by which departing employees, contractors and third parties give back the assets the organisation owns.

Source: CSA CCM v4.1, HRS-05. 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

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Records of follow-up or cost recovery for assets not returned · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Offboarding procedure listing the asset return step and who confirms it · HR system / LMS
Leaver checklists for a sample of departed employees and contractors showing each issued asset returned or written off · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Asset register entries reconciled against the leaver list · Policy repository / GRC workspace
Contract clauses requiring third parties to return equipment and media at engagement end · Vendor register / contract repository

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Procedure covers employees but not contractors or supplier staff
No reconciliation between issued assets and returns, so losses go unnoticed
Tokens, badges and removable media left off the return list

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

HRS-04 Remote and Home Working Policy and Procedures · HRS-06 Employment Termination