Indexing an engagement file
How to index an audit or review file consistently, and how Achekam shows the same working papers by status, preparer, reviewer, risk or statement line.
By Achekam · · 4 min read · For Accountants & audit firms in South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya
Open any two audit files from the same firm and you can tell at once whether the firm has an index. In one, the planning memo is section A, debtors are in section D, and the going concern paper is where everyone expects it. In the other, papers are numbered in the order someone happened to create them, and finding the bank confirmation means scrolling.
An index is the table of contents of an engagement. A consistent one saves time for everyone who touches the file: the preparer knows where to put things, the reviewer knows where to find them, and next year's team can see at a glance what was done.
Why a consistent index matters
A shared structure across all engagements brings practical benefits:
- Faster review. Managers and partners stop hunting and start reviewing.
- Fewer gaps. An empty section stands out; a missing paper in a disorganised file does not.
- Easier handovers. Staff moving between engagements already know the layout.
- Better quality reviews. An engagement quality reviewer or monitoring reviewer can follow the file without a guide.
- Simpler roll-forward. Next year's file starts from the same skeleton.
Most firms build their index around the flow of the engagement and the areas of the statements. The exact letters matter less than everyone using the same ones.
The sections of a typical file
A common pattern for an audit file looks like this:
| Section | Contents |
|---|---|
| Administration | Engagement letter, acceptance and continuance, independence |
| Planning | Understanding the entity, risk assessment, materiality, audit strategy and plan |
| Completion | Going concern, subsequent events, representations, summary of misstatements, report |
| Statement areas, assets | Property and equipment, inventory, receivables, cash |
| Statement areas, liabilities and equity | Payables, borrowings, provisions, equity |
| Statement areas, income statement | Revenue, cost of sales, payroll, other expenses, tax |
| Permanent information | References to the client's lasting documents |
Review and compilation files are lighter, but the same principle applies: administration and planning first, then the areas, then completion. IFAC's Guide to Using International Standards on Auditing in the Audits of Small- and Medium-Sized Entities is a free two-volume guide on applying the ISAs proportionately in SME audits, with case studies that show how such files fit together.
In Achekam, the structure of the file is set by the firm's methodology. A firm's partners keep their own methodology and working-paper templates beside Achekam's platform methodology, which they can adopt, and a template version is published only by someone other than its author. Fix the index in the methodology once, and every engagement generated from it follows the same layout.
Progress by status at a glance
The Working Paper Control Centre, under AUDIT & ASSURANCE > Working Papers, shows each engagement's file as an index with progress by status. Every count on it comes from the server.
The statuses follow the life of a paper. Each working paper moves through preparation, manager review, partner review, an optional engagement quality review, completion and lock. The preparer cannot also review the paper, and Achekam refuses any sign-off made by an AI. A locked paper cannot be changed, and sending a paper back, reopening it or locking it needs a written reason.
Reading the index by status answers the questions a manager asks every week:
- Which sections are still in preparation?
- What is waiting for my review, and what is waiting for the partner's?
- What has been sent back, and why?
- Is anything ready to complete and lock?
Regrouping by preparer, reviewer, risk or line
The same papers can be grouped in other ways without changing the index itself. The Control Centre can show them by preparer, by reviewer, by risk or by statement line.
Each grouping suits a different person:
- By preparer: a senior sees everything they owe, across sections.
- By reviewer: a manager or partner sees their review queue on the file.
- By risk: the partner checks that every significant risk has papers addressing it, and that those papers are complete.
- By statement line: the reviewer confirms that each line of the statements has work behind it.
This is where a consistent index pays off twice. The index gives the file its shape; the groupings let each person see the part they are responsible for. The statement-line view is also where cross-referencing is checked, as described in cross-referencing lead schedules, papers and statements.
Menu entries that open the same list
Several menu entries lead to this same Control Centre, which can confuse new staff. The Lead Schedules entry opens the statement-line view, and the Review Notes entry opens the reviewer view.
Some entries are less obvious. The Sampling, Findings, Audit Procedures, Adjustments and Permanent Files entries do not open screens of their own. They open the working-paper list, its reviewer view or the Central Audit Data Hub. Sampling itself lives in Audit Intelligence, and adjustments are recorded in the Lead schedules tab.
Tell the team: the file is in one place, seen through different groupings. If a menu entry seems to open "the same list again", that is because it does.
Setting up the index once
- Agree the section letters and names with the partners.
- Build them into the firm's methodology templates.
- Have a second person publish the templates.
- Generate the next engagement's papers and check the result.
The papers themselves are created from the methodology, as covered in generating working papers.
Print the agreed index on one page, give it to every member of the audit team, and use it at the next planning meeting to assign sections to preparers by name.
General guidance only, not advice on your own circumstances. Tax and payroll rules change: check the current position with the authority or your adviser.
