Audit/Follow up (Con’t)

85 – Is the staff educated regarding conflicts of interest? (No = bad)
86 – Was equipment run enough times to ensure proper performance in accordance with specifications? (No = bad)
87 – Are expediters paid to speed projects for approval? (Yes = blue)
88 – Are unexpected entries posted by unexpected people at odd times such as weekends or posted late? (Yes = bad)
89– Does PM/QA have a way to monitor in real-time whether the product/ system is functioning properly and meeting regulations/ following processes? (Yes = good)
90- Does the project manager confirm or review that the items to be procured on a shopping list and only the items on the shopping list are purchased? (Yes = good)
91 – Are policies in place to ensure that all charges are for business related expenses? (Yes = good)
92 – Do purchases include paperwork to indicate prior approval? (Yes = good)
93 – Is project required to pay sales tax? If documentation proves ‘no’ is project paying taxes anyway? (Yes – blue)
94 – Are standardized procedures and policies in place? (No = bad)
95 – Can procedures, protocols and safeguards be quickly changed, when required? (Yes = good)
96 – Does PM review unfinished activities associated with this project? (No = bad)
97 – Does PM ensure (by some effective means) that all work is performed properly? (Yes = good)
98 – Is there sufficient oversight of the ties between safety auditors and contractors/ clients to avoid potential conflicts of interests? (Yes = good)
99 – Do inspections reflect the actual situation, if objectives are not being met? (No = bad)
100 – Are field inspectors required to inspect too many locations, to be effective? (Yes = bad)
101 – Do/ did inspectors use instruments and professionally recognized criteria to confirm that equipment/ service is operating within the minimum safety limits? (Yes = good)
102 – Does PM direct QA to perform regular safety inspections? (Yes = good)
103 – Are test results accurate? (Yes = good) Are any test results done at the very edge of the product’s performance maximum/ minimum ranges (envelope)? (No = blue)
104 – Has PM/ QA performed sufficient simulations of the product/ service before roll-out?
105 – Does PM/ QA know how the lab does its testing? (No = bad)
106 – Does the project’s test results come comparatively close to other sources test results? (No = bad)
107 – Does PM/ QA oversee the roll-out of the project’s technology before delivery to the customer? (Yes = good)
108 – Does PM/ QA maintain/ have access to a lessons learned database which: Summarizes and distributes meeting minutes? Compile a list of incidents? Recommendations for improvement? Track the completion status of recommendations and their deadlines?
109 – Is/ was the correct equipment used to test the end product? (Yes = good)
110- When test failures occur – is there any attempt to replicate that failure to better understand how it occurred? (No = blue)
111– Has the management team fully accepted and addressed previously identified concerns/ issues? (No = bad)
112 – Can/ has SM/PM discern truth from lies? (No = bad)
113 – Are any test results excluded from the reliability calculations? (Yes = bad)
114 – Is all testing and evaluation being performed in accordance with industry standards? (Yes = good)
115 – Is SM/PM paying for non-existent (phantom) resources (shell companies/ personnel/ invoices/ equipment, etc.)? (Yes = bad)
116 – Has SM/ PM implemented systems to terminate access to systems, resources, etc to people who leave the project/ company? (Yes = good)
117 – Has/ does PM take action (if required) as soon as test results are in/ problems are uncovered? (Yes = good)
118 – Are there inconsistencies in the reported data? (Yes = bad)
119 – Does PM know where the actual testing is being done/ performed? (No = bad)
120 – (If possible) Has PM had project tested at a second laboratory/ independent lab in addition to the initial testing laboratory? Are the results similar? (Yes = good)
121 – Does PM ensure that faulty data is replaced once it has been discovered? (Yes = good)
122 – Does PM:
     *Double check the data that comes across her/his desk? (Yes = good)
      *Ask team to identify and evaluate and verify the reliability data source? (Yes = good)
     *Have team to evaluate the methods used to gather the data? (Yes = good)
      *Explain to team – why s/he wants to evaluate certain information? (Yes = good)
      *Request:
     *Divergent/ clashing facts/ facts from diverse sources
      *Different facts that support different conclusions (but are still rooted in reality)
123 – Has product/ equipment failed a number of real-life tests? (Yes = bad)
124 – Have qualified experts seen and reviewed the test data? (Yes = good)
125 – Has/ does PM make time to analyze the data to establish confidence in the results? (No = bad)
126 – Is the current testing protocol sufficient? (Yes = good) If protocol is insufficient – has additional testing been added to establish accuracy? (Yes = blue)
127 – Are tests results often unreliable due to: (Yes = red)
     *Being skewed? Inconsistent? Inaccurate?
      *Human errors?
      *Entered incorrect data?
     *Used outdated materials/ components?
     *Poor oversight?
      *Improper calibration?
      *Lacking technical/ management competence/ expertise? Inexperienced?
      *Poor standards? Not using acceptable standards?
      *Programming mistakes?
      *By-passed/ disabled safeguards?
      *Technical/ mechanical issues that can potentially yield the wrong result?
128– Are tests now being performed as they were intended? (Yes = good)
129 – Are/ were cases built on faulty tests? (Yes = bad)
130 – Does PM/ QA know and understand: (Yes = good)
     *How to run the test calculations?
     *If the coding has any built-in flaws?
131 – If relevant, are third party outside experts available to possibly analyze the testing software?
132 – Has QA discovered (or anyone reported) any undisclosed/ hidden records for/ withheld changes to:
     *Test equipment?
     *Test procedures?
     *Equipment or process being evaluated?
133 – Are testing devices fully operational right out-of-the-box? (No = blue)
134 – Does the test lab have a written procedure to set up and test machines? (No = red)
135 – Are test records/ certifiers’ signatures faked to show instruments were tested/ calibrated but were never touched? (Yes == red)
136 – Can/ do two separate/ independent testing methods produce substantially different results? (Yes = red)
137– Do QA people know where to look and what to look for with respect to this project? (No = bad)