Which sampled records support the check?
You are an audit trainee reviewing a fixed sample from the fictional Alder Supply Co.
The question
The case workpaper rule requires the current invoice and accepted receiving record to match the transaction ID, customer and amount. The sample contains 12 distinct IDs. The engagement lead decides what the reviewed evidence supports.
| Transaction IDs | Count | |
|---|---|---|
| Directly checked against the rule | 01–08 | 8 |
| AI-cited packet awaiting review | 09 and 10 | 2 |
| No packet | 11 and 12 | 2 |
The AI summary calls 10 complete.
“Say which records the evidence supports and which items need follow-up.”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: What can you support now?
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Report 10 supported because the AI found citations
Tempting, but it misses something. A citation tells you where to check. The two records still need review.
Report 8 supported and classify all four open IDs
The strong move. This keeps unchecked citations separate from missing records.
Report no supported items until all 12 are complete
Tempting, but it misses something. Eight distinct IDs already meet the case rule.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I can support 8 of 12, or 66.7% of this sample. I would list 09 and 10 as awaiting a source check, and 11 and 12 as missing packets.”
Why it works: The opening source check supports IDs 01 through 08. The summary counts two additional items you have not verified.
Step 2: Which AI reference checks out?
The current records for 09 match. The packet cited for 10 has the same amount but belongs to a different transaction and customer.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Accept both cited packets because both amounts match
Tempting, but it misses something. The second packet belongs to a different transaction and customer.
Reject both cited packets because the AI suggested them
Tempting, but it misses something. The direct source check confirms 09 meets the rule.
Accept 09 and leave 10 open
The strong move. The source for 09 meets the case rule. The source for 10 fails two checks.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I would accept 09 and leave 10 open. The amount alone cannot establish the match. That gives 9 of 12 supported, with 10, 11 and 12 outstanding.”
Why it works: The case rule requires the transaction ID, customer and amount to agree.
Step 3: Which item must you reopen?
The current receiving record for 07 replaces the earlier version and shows an amount that differs from the invoice. The difference is unresolved.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Reopen 07 and update the count to 8
The strong move. The current pair has an unresolved difference.
Keep 9 supported because the older record matched
Tempting, but it misses something. The older record no longer supplies the current evidence required by the case.
Drop 07 from the sample and report 8 of 11
Tempting, but it misses something. The sample contains 12 fixed IDs. An open item stays in the denominator.
See how a strong candidate says it
“I would reopen 07 and keep the earlier version in the workpaper history. There are now 8 of 12 supported. IDs 07, 10, 11 and 12 are open.”
Why it works: The corrected record is the current version. The workpaper needs support for the mismatch before 07 counts again.
Step 4: What do you report to the engagement lead?
The source owner supplies an accepted current record for 07 and both current records for 11. The records for 07 and 11 now match the case rule.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Report 12 supported because every change has been reviewed
Tempting, but it misses something. IDs 10 and 12 still lack matching current evidence.
Report 10 supported and name 10 and 12 as open
The strong move. This gives the lead the current count and the precise gaps.
Use 83.3% to estimate the rate for all transactions
Tempting, but it misses something. The exercise gives only a reviewed sample and no basis to project to a larger group.
See how a strong candidate says it
“There are 10 of 12 supported, or 83.3% of the sample. IDs 10 and 12 remain open. I would send the current record references and let the engagement lead decide the follow-up.”
Why it works: The new evidence resolves 07 and 11. Each is a single sample ID.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Report 10 supported and two outstanding items to the engagement lead.
- Because
- The current records support each counted ID under the case rule. The same sample remains in scope at each step.
- What would change it
- A matching current packet for 10 or 12 would change the count.
Common traps
- Check transaction ID and customer even when the amounts agree.
- Keep open IDs in the fixed sample.
Check your answer
- I counted only directly supported IDs.
- I checked both cited packets.
- I reopened the superseded match and kept its history.
- I reported the remaining gaps to the engagement lead.
Last reviewed Nov 11, 2026