Internal Audit Services

Our internal audit services can be tailored to provide assurance over the areas that present the greatest risk to your organisation. This may include reviews of governance, financial controls, operational processes, procurement, contract management, cyber security, technology, data handling, fraud prevention, regulatory compliance, project delivery and business continuity.

This makes the service suitable for organisations that need assurance tailored to their priorities rather than a generic audit programme.

Support can range from a single focused review to a complete annual programme. SCC can act as your outsourced internal audit function, provide additional specialist skills through a co-sourced model or support an existing team. We agree the scope, timing, reporting format and key stakeholders before work begins.

The purpose is not simply to identify control failures. We assess whether controls are appropriately designed, consistently followed and capable of managing the relevant risk. Our reports explain what we found, why it matters and what practical steps management should take. Recommendations are prioritised to help your organisation allocate time and resources effectively.

Internal audit and external audit both provide assurance, but they have different purposes and scopes. External audit is primarily concerned with expressing an independent opinion on whether statutory financial statements give a true and fair view in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework. Its work is normally driven by legal, regulatory and professional requirements.

Internal audit looks more broadly at how the organisation is governed and controlled. It may examine financial controls, but it can also review operational efficiency, risk management, cyber security, procurement, compliance, culture, projects and other non-financial areas. The programme is usually shaped around the organisation’s principal risks and the assurance needs of its board or audit committee.

The two functions can complement one another, but they should not be treated as interchangeable. A strong assurance framework avoids unnecessary duplication while ensuring important risks are not overlooked. SCC can help clarify responsibilities, coordinate information requests where appropriate and maintain the independence required for each engagement.

An outsourced internal audit arrangement can be suitable where an organisation does not have its own internal audit team, needs independent assurance but cannot justify a permanent function, or wants access to a wider range of specialist skills. It can also provide continuity, structured planning and direct reporting to the board or audit committee without increasing internal headcount.

A co-sourced model may be more appropriate when an existing internal audit function requires additional capacity or expertise. For example, the in-house team may need support with cyber security, data analytics, complex contracts, major transformation programmes or a temporary increase in workload.

The right model depends on the organisation’s risk profile, regulatory environment, resources and governance arrangements. SCC can help determine a proportionate approach, from a focused assignment to a multi-year plan. If the review identifies wider financial pressure or operational weakness, our restructuring specialists can provide separate commercial support where needed.

An internal audit review normally begins with planning and scoping. We meet relevant stakeholders to understand the process, risks, objectives, responsibilities and existing controls. We then agree the terms of reference, including what will be reviewed, the evidence required, the timetable and how findings will be reported. Regular communication throughout the engagement also helps reduce disruption and ensures that relevant evidence is available when needed for the review.

Fieldwork may include interviews, walkthroughs, document review, sample testing, data analysis and observation of controls in practice. We consider whether controls are suitably designed, whether they are operating consistently and whether the available evidence supports management’s understanding of the process.

Before issuing a final report, we discuss emerging findings with the relevant teams. This provides an opportunity to confirm facts, understand practical constraints and agree realistic actions. The final report normally sets out the finding, associated risk, recommendation, management response, responsible owner and target completion date. Significant matters can also be presented to senior management, the board or the audit committee.

Internal audit can examine almost any area where an organisation needs independent assurance. Common reviews include finance, income, expenditure, payroll, purchasing, delegated authorities, contract management, inventory, data protection, cyber security, IT access, project governance, grant compliance, regulatory obligations and business continuity.

The audit plan should be linked to the organisation’s risk assessment rather than limited to a repeated set of financial checks. Emerging risks may include changes in regulation, reliance on third parties, new technology, automation, artificial intelligence, workforce capability, supply chain disruption and the delivery of major programmes. The scope can therefore change as the organisation and its environment change.

A risk-based plan prioritises reviews according to impact, likelihood, control maturity and the level of existing assurance. SCC works with key stakeholders to develop a balanced programme that supports governance, resilience and organisational objectives.

Management should first confirm that each finding is understood. Treating only the visible symptom may leave the organisation exposed to the same issue in another form. The response should therefore address why the control failed, whether the problem is isolated or widespread and what level of risk remains until corrective action is complete.

Each agreed action should have a clear owner, realistic deadline and measurable outcome. Higher-risk findings normally require more urgent attention and closer oversight. Progress should be reported through the appropriate governance route, such as a management meeting, risk committee or audit committee. Evidence should be retained to demonstrate that the action has been completed.

Follow-up is an important part of the process. It allows the organisation to confirm that agreed actions have been implemented, assess whether risk has reduced and escalate overdue matters. SCC can provide follow-up reviews or regular action tracking, helping boards and senior leaders maintain visibility and accountability after the original report has been issued.