AASHTO Peer Review of the

(State) Department of Transportation

Office ______

DRAFT

Review Period

(month)(day), 20XX through (month)(day), 20XX

Peer Review Team Members

, Team Lead

Team member

Team member

Team member

(month)(day), 20XX

(Office head’s name)

(Formal title)

Department of Transportation

Street Address

(City), (state) Zip code

DRAFT

Objective

The primary objective was to perform a peer review of the quality control systemin effect for the (state) Department of Transportation, Office of ______for 20XX. Our review was conducted inconformity with the Peer Review Bylaws and other guidelines of the AmericanAssociation of State Highway and Transportation Officials Standing Committeeon Finance and Administration, Administrative Subcommittee on Internal and External Audit,along with those set forth under the U. S. Government Accountability Office'sGovernment Auditing Standards (2011 Revision).

Scope

The scope of the review included:

  • Questionnaires completed by various individuals in the (state)Department ofTransportation
  • Solicitation of comments from management of the areas audited, reviewed,or examined during the period under review concerning the scope, nature,and quality of services received.
  • Interviews, as necessary, held with members of the senior managementand auditingstaff of the (state)Department of Transportation.
  • A review of the Office of ______internal control system and the qualitycontrol policies, procedures, practices, and information used for managingthe audit group.
  • An examination of a sample of audits, reviews, or examination filescompleted during the review period sufficient to provide a reasonable basisto render an opinion withreasonable assurance of conforming withprofessional standards in the conduct of its work.
  • Fieldwork conducted at the (state)Department of Transportation from(month, day), through (month), (day), 20XX.

Opinion

Because there are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any system ofquality control,departures from the system may occur and not be detected. Also,projection of any evaluation of a system of quality control to future periods issubject to the risk that the system of quality control may become inadequatebecause of changes in conditions, or because the degree of compliance with thepolicies or procedures may deteriorate.

Based on our review, it is the opinion of the Peer Review Team that the(state) Department of TransportationOffice of ______receives a Rating of Pass based upon the PeerReview Bylaws and other guidelines of the American Association of StateHighway and Transportation Officials Standing Committee on Administration,Administrative Subcommittee on Internal and External Audit and those of the U.S. Government Accountability Office's Government Auditing Standards (2011 Revision).

The expressed opinion implies that the organization’s system of quality control has been suitably designed and complied with to provide the audit organization with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting conformity with applicable professional standards in all material respects.

As is customary in a peer review, we have issued a letter under this date that setsforth acomment that was not considered to be of sufficient significance to affectthe opinion expressed in this report.

DRAFT

______

(name), Team Leader

______

(name), for the Peer Review Panel

(month)(day), 20XX

(office head name)

(formal title)

Department of Transportation

(street address)

(city), (state) zip code

Mx. (last name),

During our peer review we noted that the (state)/DOT Office of ______failed to have an externalpeer review performed by reviewers independent of the audit organization at least once in theprevious three years as required by GAS 3.96.

We recommend the (State)/DOTOffice of ______establishespolicies and procedures to ensure thatan external peer review is performed in a timely manner. This concern does not affect theOpinion expressed in the Peer Review Report dated (month)(day), 20XX.

Onbehalf of the Peer Review Team, I wish to express our appreciation for the cooperation

and assistance that was received from (state)/DOT Office of ______management and staff duringthis review.

DRAFT

______

, Team Leader

______

, for the Peer Review Panel

Summary of Findings

Page 1 – Objectives of the Summary of Findings

Name of the AuditeeState:

Period Reviewed:

OBJECTIVES:

The Peer Review Team brings to the attention of the Peer Review Panel, all significant matters relating to the peer review engagement. Each item must be recorded along with its disposition.

It is NOT necessary to repeat in this "Summary of Findings (SOF)" the full details of Items clearly described in the working papers. A brief summary and a reference to the details and where they can be found is sufficient and should be entered in the Matters forConsiderationColumn (note: attach a copy of any working paper referred to when doing so would be helpful and practicable). Each item should be numbered sequentially. The disposition of each matter will be entered by the Team Leader after having considered it. The SOF should be used to document, rather than discover, problems.

Routine planning decisions should not be included in the SOF whenthey are adequately covered in the engagement planning and auditstrategy documentation.

It is very important in relation to both efficient conduct of the peerreview and tomaintenance of good relations with the AuditeeState,that matters of principle be raised and resolved at the earliest possiblestage. The SOF should be reviewed with the Peer Review Panel atvarious interim periods during the review, when deemed necessary.

In general, the SOF should cover, at a minimum, those items suggested

(Auditee Name)

AASHTO Peer Review

Summary of Findings and Recommendations

DRAFT

Reportable Findings:

NONE

Letter of Comments:

General Standards – Audit Quality Control (External Peer Review)

The (state)/DOTOffice of ______failed to have an external peer review performed by reviewers independent of the audit organization at least once in the previous three years as required by GAS 3.96.

Recommendation – The (state)/DOT & PF Office of ______establishes policies and procedures to ensure that an external peer review is performed in a timely manner.

Other Items for Consideration:

Item #1