STAGE 2 AUDIT Clause Samples

The 'STAGE 2 AUDIT' clause defines the requirements and procedures for conducting the second phase of an audit process. Typically, this stage involves a detailed on-site assessment of the organization's systems, processes, and compliance with relevant standards, often following a successful Stage 1 audit. It may specify the scope of the audit, the documentation to be reviewed, and the criteria for evaluation. The core function of this clause is to ensure a thorough and systematic evaluation before certification or approval, thereby reducing the risk of non-compliance and ensuring that all necessary standards are met.
STAGE 2 AUDIT. (a) Keyn Certification will provide an audit programme prior to the commencement of the audit. (b) The Keyn Certification audit team will meet with the Client’s management to discuss the details of the audit process and consider possible issues relating to the performance of the audit. The Keyn Certification audit team will discuss any nonconformities, observations and opportunities for improvement if and when they are identified during the audit. (c) The Keyn Certification audit team will prepare and present to the Client’s management a Report of the audit, which will include the audit findings, the non-conformities identified and the scope of certification.
View SourceView Similar (3)
STAGE 2 AUDIT. JICS audit team shall visit the client’s premises, as per an agreed plan, to verify effectiveness of the client’s management system in meeting the requirements of the applicable ISO standard. JICS shall submit a formal report to the client.
View Source

Related to STAGE 2 AUDIT

  • SAO AUDIT A. The state auditor may conduct an audit or investigation of any entity receiving funds from the state directly under the Contract or indirectly through a subcontract under the Contract. The acceptance of funds directly under the Contract or indirectly through a subcontract under the Contract acts as acceptance of the authority of the state auditor, under the direction of the legislative audit committee, to conduct an audit or investigation in connection with those funds. Under the direction of the legislative audit committee, an entity that is the subject of an audit or investigation by the state auditor must provide the state auditor with access to any information the state auditor considers relevant to the investigation or audit. B. Grantee shall comply with any rules and procedures of the state auditor in the implementation and enforcement of Section 2262.154 of the Texas Government Code.

  • Annual Audit If Subrecipient expends Federal funds in a fiscal year which equal or exceed $750,000 (seven hundred fifty thousand dollars) as specified in OMB Circular A-133-Revised, 2 CFR Part 200.500- Subpart F-Audit Requirements Subrecipient shall cause an audit to be prepared by a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) who is a member in good standing with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) of the California Society of CPA’s. The audit must be performed annually in accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS) authorized by the AICPA and Federal laws and regulations governing the programs in which it participates. Furthermore, County retains the authority to require Subrecipient to submit similarly prepared audit at Subrecipient’s expense even in instances when Subrecipient’s expenditure is less than $750,000. Subrecipient will be required to identify corrective action taken in response to any findings identified by CPA related to their funded activity or program. Subrecipient will ensure an annual financial audit is performed in compliance with the Federal Single Audit Act and will submit two (2) copies of such audit report, including a copy of the management letter, to County within six (6) months of the end of each Contract year in which Subrecipient has received federal funding (i.e., July 1 – June 30). Failure to meet this requirement may result in County denying reimbursement of funds to Subrecipient, as well as future funding qualification. Subrecipients, which are exempt from statutory audit requirements, shall maintain records, which are available for review by County or Federal officials. Subrecipient acknowledges that any and all “Financial Statements” submitted to County pursuant to this County become Public Records and are subject to public inspection pursuant to Sec. 6250 et seq. of the California Government.

  • Design Development Phase 1.3.1 Based on the approved Schematic Design Documents, model(s) and any adjustments to the Program of Requirements, BIM Execution Plan or Amount Available for the Construction Contract authorized by the Owner, the Architect/Engineer shall prepare, for approval by the Owner and review by the Construction Manager, Design Development Documents derived from the model(s) in accordance with Owner’s written requirements to further define and finalize the size and character of the Project in accordance with the BIM Execution Plan, “Facility Design Guidelines” and any additional requirements set forth in Article 15. The Architect/Engineer shall review the Design Development documents as they are being modeled at intervals appropriate to the progress of the Project with the Owner and Construction Manager at the Project site or other location specified by Owner in the State of Texas. The Architect/Engineer shall utilize the model(s) to support the review process during Design Development. The Architect/Engineer shall allow the Construction Manager to utilize the information uploaded into Owner’s PMIS to assist the Construction Manager in fulfilling its responsibilities to the Owner. 1.3.2 As a part of Design Development Phase, Architect/Engineer shall accomplish model coordination, aggregation and “clash detection” to remove conflicts in design between systems, structures and components. Architect/Engineer shall utilize Owner’s PMIS to accomplish model coordination and collaborate with Construction Manager in the resolution of critical clashes identified by the Construction Manager. Architect/Engineer shall demonstrate and provide written assurance to Owner that conflicts/collisions between models have been resolved. 1.3.3 The Architect/Engineer shall review the Estimated Construction Cost prepared by the Construction Manager, and shall provide written comments. 1.3.4 Before proceeding into the Construction Document Phase, the Architect/Engineer shall obtain Owner’s written acceptance of the Design Development documents and approval of the mutually established Amount Available for the Construction Contract and schedule. 1.3.5 The Architect/Engineer shall prepare presentation materials including an animation derived from the model(s) as defined in “Facility Design Guidelines” at completion of Design Development and if so requested shall present same to the Board of Regents at a regular meeting where scheduled within the state. 1.3.6 The Architect/Engineer shall prepare preliminary recommended furniture layouts for all spaces where it is deemed important to substantiate the fulfillment of program space requirements, or to coordinate with specific architectural, mechanical and electrical elements. 1.3.7 Architect/Engineer shall assist the Owner, if requested, with seeking approval of the Project by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB). Such assistance shall include (i) the preparation of a listing of the rooms and square footages in the Project, and (ii) the preparation of project cost information, in accordance with THECB Guidelines. This information shall be provided at the completion of the Design Development Phase when requested by the Owner. The listing of rooms and square footages shall then be updated to reflect any changes occurring during construction and provided to the Owner at Substantial Completion. 1.3.8 At the completion of the Design Development Phase, or such other time as Owner may specify to Architect/Engineer, at Owner’s sole option and discretion, Owner will furnish Architect/Engineer with a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal prepared by Construction Manager based upon the Design Development documents prepared by the Architect/Engineer and approved by the Owner. The Architect/Engineer shall assist the Owner and endeavor to further and advocate the Owner’s interests in Owner’s communications with the Construction Manager in an effort to develop a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal acceptable to Owner, in Owner’s sole option and discretion. If the Owner does not accept the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal, the Architect/Engineer shall participate with the Owner and Construction Manager in constructability reviews and shall revise the documents as necessary in order to reach an agreement. If the Construction Manager’s Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal exceeds the Schematic Design Phase Estimated Construction Cost prepared by, or otherwise accepted by the Construction Manager due to an increase in the scope of the Project caused by further development of the design documents by the Architect/Engineer to the extent that such could not be reasonably inferred by the Construction Manager from the Schematic Design documents, and Owner directs Architect/Engineer to revise the documents, the Architect/Engineer shall revise the documents at its own expense so that the Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal for constructing the Project shall not exceed the Owner’s Amount Available for the Construction Contract and any previously approved Estimated Construction Costs. If it is determined to be in the Owner’s best interest, instead of requiring the Architect/Engineer to revise the Drawings and Specifications, the Owner reserves the right to accept a Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal that exceeds the stipulated Amount Available for the Construction Contract. The Architect/Engineer shall analyze the final Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal document, together with its supporting assumptions, clarifications, and contingencies, and shall submit a detailed written analysis of the document to the Owner. Such analysis shall include, without limitation, reference to and explanation of any inaccurate or improper assumptions and clarifications. The A/E will not be required to make revisions to the documents at its own expense under the provisions of this paragraph if the Owner’s rejection of the Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal is not due to a failure of the A/E to provide the services otherwise required herein. 1.3.9 After the Guaranteed Maximum Price has been accepted, the Architect/Engineer shall incorporate necessary revisions into the Design Development documents. The A/E will not be required to make revisions to the documents at its own expense under the provisions of this paragraph if the revisions are required as the result of inaccurate assumptions and clarifications made in the development of the Guaranteed Maximum Price proposal that are not due to a failure of the A/E to provide the services otherwise required herein.

  • Development Phase contractual phase initiated with the approval of ANP for the Development Plan and which is extended during the Production Phase while investments in ▇▇▇▇▇, equipment, and facilities for the Production of Oil and Gas according to the Best Practices of the Oil Industry are required.

  • Final Audit The Commission will perform a final audit of project costs. The United States Government shall reimburse the City, through the Commission, any monies due. The City shall refund any overpayments as determined by the final audit.