This document provides a set of rules and processes to be followed when conducting Investment Dealer activities in our company. Investment Dealer plays a crucial role in our business as it involves acting as a middleman between buyers and sellers of financial instruments. To maintain the highest level of trust and dependability in our services, we must follow the highest standards of ethics, transparency, and accountability. The main goal of this policy is to ensure that all employees involved in Investment Dealer activities have a clear understanding of our expectations and responsibilities. It creates a framework for managing and monitoring risks associated with these activities and applies to all employees, regardless of their role or seniority level. This policy covers various essential areas such as defining the scope of Investment Dealer, outlining the roles and responsibilities of top management and employees involved in Investment Dealer activities, setting procedures for handling client orders and transactions, managing conflicts of interest, and monitoring and reporting key performance indicators and risk metrics. By following the guidelines and procedures set forth in this policy, we can guarantee that our Investment Dealer activities are conducted ethically, professionally, and in compliance with applicable regulations. All employees must read and understand this policy and comply with its provisions. Not following the policy may result in disciplinary action, including termination of employment.
The Company takes responsibility for ensuring that it maintains the necessary incorporation and licensing to provide its services, and that any individuals employed or appointed to assist in service delivery are fit and proper, and duly licensed or registered as required. When considering expansion into new markets, the Company will conduct comprehensive legal research to assess the legality of its services, and will seek the advice of external legal counsel to verify compliance with regulations and to resolve any uncertainties
The Company will make sure to optimize the resources but in line with regulation but not limited with the followings:
In addition to any other duties and obligations imposed upon by the Company, any officers appointed will always:
Our company recognizes the importance of establishing a clear and effective organizational structure to ensure that our business operations are conducted efficiently and effectively. This policy outlines the roles, responsibilities, and reporting lines for each position within our organization, including the key functions and departments that make up our company. By adhering to this policy, we can ensure that each employee understands their role in achieving our organizational goals and objectives, and that we maintain a strong culture of accountability and collaboration across all levels of the organization. This also applies to all employees, regardless of their role or level of seniority, and it is the responsibility of each employee to familiarize themselves with this policy and to comply with the roles and responsibilities outlined herein. The policy covers key areas such as the company's mission and vision, reporting lines and communication channels, decision-making processes, and the allocation of resources and responsibilities. Through this policy, we aim to establish a clear and effective organizational structure that promotes transparency, accountability, and collaboration, and enables us to achieve our strategic objectives and meet the needs of our stakeholders.
The Company is committed to conducting its business with integrity, honesty, and transparency. To maintain this commitment, we recognize the importance of identifying and managing conflicts of interest that may arise in the course of our operations. A conflict of interest occurs when an individual's personal interests, financial or otherwise, could influence or appear to influence their ability to act impartially and in the best interests of the company and its clients. Our Internal policy for conflict-of-interest is designed to promote a culture of openness and awareness of potential conflicts, to ensure that all employees act in the best interests of our clients, and to safeguard the integrity and reputation of our company. It sets out the procedures and guidelines that must be followed by all employees to identify, disclose, and manage conflicts of interest. It also establishes the roles and responsibilities of our management team in overseeing and monitoring compliance with this policy. We expect all employees to act with the utmost professionalism and to avoid any situation that could create or appear to create a conflict of interest. Any employee who becomes aware of a potential conflict of interest must immediately disclose it to their supervisor or the compliance officer. Failure to disclose a conflict of interest may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment.
The Company will identify the conflict based on the followings: -
While it is not feasible to define precisely, or create an exhaustive list of, all relevant conflicts of interest that may arise, as per the current nature, scale and complexity of the Company’s business, The company may consider the following step on the identification of conflict of interest: -
The following list includes circumstances which constitute or may give rise to a conflict of interest entailing a material risk of damage to the interests of one or more Clients, as a result of providing investment services:
In general, the procedures and controls that the Company follows to manage the identified conflicts of interest include the following measures (list is not exhaustive):
The Company acknowledges that it will be collecting personal information from potential clients and is committed to upholding high standards of integrity in handling this information. It seeks to provide fair, secure, and appropriate methods for processing this information in accordance with generally accepted privacy ethics and standard business practices. The Company will implement an appropriate Information management (IM) to complement its Customer Due Diligence (CDD) process, tailored to its business activities and the risk profile of money laundering/terrorist financing (ML/TF). The IM will be accessed through the Company's KYC and back-office systems, and the Compliance Officer and back-office will monitor all transactions recorded in the system. Any suspicious activities exceeding the Company's threshold will be investigated, and the information recorded in the CRM system, which is reliable, accurate, and up-to-date.
This system information aligns with the regulatory requirements and standards in the following ways:
In this respect, the Company will adopt and implement adequate privacy policy measures.
Principles of the Company's privacy policy will include:
The Risk-Based Approach (RBA) is a crucial strategy that should be implemented to ensure that measures taken to prevent or mitigate money laundering and terrorist financing are in line with the level of risk identified. The application of the RBA enables efficient allocation of resources across the anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regime. This approach should be integrated into the implementation of risk-based measures throughout the FATF Recommendations. The RBA involves the identification of the potential risks associated with particular activities or individuals, assessing the level of risk and implementing appropriate measures to manage the identified risks. This approach recognizes that not all risks are the same, and thus, measures taken to address the risks should be proportionate to the level of risk identified. By applying the RBA, entities can prioritize their resources and focus their efforts on the areas that pose the highest risk of money laundering or terrorist financing. This approach can also enhance the effectiveness of AML/CFT measures by ensuring that resources are directed towards areas of greatest need, resulting in a more efficient and effective AML/CFT regime.
Risk based assessment will consist the followings:
Customer risk refers to the potential level of risk associated with a prospective client. The company caters to a diverse client base ranging from individuals to listed corporations, private companies, and regulated institutions, each with varying levels of risk based on their nature. Assessing client risk involves a thorough evaluation and determination of the level of risk associated with a potential or existing client. This process entails assessing several factors such as the client's background, business activities, financial status, and overall risk profile to determine the risk level they pose to the company. The aim of this assessment is to identify and mitigate potential risks, thereby safeguarding the interests of the company and its stakeholders. This approach ensures that the company provides services in a responsible and compliant manner while protecting its own interests. The following factors must be taken into account when conducting client risk assessment:
The company primarily offers financial instruments, which unfortunately have been used for money laundering. To address this risk, we are enhancing our KYC tools to better combat money laundering and terrorist financing. It is well-known that establishing a business relationship through non-face-to-face channels is riskier than face-to-face interactions. This is because it can be harder to verify the customer's identity and confirm the accuracy of the information provided. However, we use electronic checks such as geolocation, IP tracking, and bin information management matching to mitigate this risk. We also conduct interviews and collect proof to ensure that our policies and tools are functioning properly in line with our procedures. All of our clients are non-face-to-face, but we are taking proactive measures to manage this risk.
Assessing country and geographical location risk is essential to determine the level of risk associated with conducting business in a specific region or country, such as Mauritius where our company operates. According to the National Risk Assessment (NRA) report dated 29 August 2019, Mauritius is classified as Medium to High risk with an overall medium risk for terrorist financing. To evaluate the level of risk associated with conducting business in Mauritius, our company will consider various factors, including political stability, economic conditions, and legal and regulatory environment. By conducting this assessment, we aim to identify potential risks and take measures to mitigate them to protect our company and stakeholders while ensuring compliance with relevant laws and regulations. The ultimate goal of this assessment is to make informed decisions about where to conduct business, i.e., target markets, and how to manage and mitigate risks in those areas. We understand that conducting business in certain regions may pose higher risks, and we are committed to mitigating those risks through robust risk management practices and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Based on the information above. The Company will calculate the risk based on the below information from the clients of the Company. From this the company will now how much the risk of the Company have. The client risk template will be presented in Appendix I.
Type of risk | Risk Factor | Risk factor |
---|---|---|
Client risk | a. Type of client |
a. Individual, b. Corporate, c. Legal arrangement, Club, societies and charities |
b. Type of occupation |
a. Salaried b. Self-employed |
|
c. Type of business |
a. trading b. Services c. Cash intensive business |
|
d. Risk client country level (this is based on the company’s policy) |
a. Low (e.g. Malaysia) b. Medium(e.g. Australia) c. High (e.g. China) |
|
e. Characteristic of client |
a. High net worth b. Domestic PEP c. Foreign PEP |
|
f. Structure/nature of client |
a. Legal person with complex structure b. Legal person which has nominee relastionship c. Others |
|
Product and service risk | a. Easily transferable to another party | |
b. Ownership not easily traceable to customer | ||
c. Can be easily to convert to cash | ||
d. Place deposit for a period of time for trading purpose | ||
e. Can easily transported or concealed | ||
f. Product can be use as an alternative for of currency | ||
g. Product is high value in nature | ||
h. Customer can purchase the product via non-face-to-face channel | ||
i. Allow use of virtual asset and other anonymous means of payment | ||
j. Allow use of unusual payment such as real estate, precious metal and stones | ||
Geographical location risk | Location of holding company, subsidiary company and branch | Located at crime hotspot |
Located at country’s border | ||
Located at country’s entry points | ||
Located at high risk countries | ||
transactions and delivery channel risk |
a. Mode of delivery b. Mode of payment (cash/electronic payment) c. transaction location |
a. Total of non-face to face transaction b. Total number of value of cash transaction c. Total value of cash in fiat d. Volume of e-payment transaction e. Total value of e- payment in fiat f. Volume of transactions from high-risk country g. Value of transaction from/to high-risk countries |
We have carefully considered the various business risks and developed the below table. The resultant scores will determine which level of due diligence is applied to a given customer interaction.
The formula of this assessment will be as follows: Inherent Risk – Control Effectiveness = Residual Risk The tables below summarized the findings and scores obtained from the assessment.
Parameters of risk factor | Findings | Scoring Point |
---|---|---|
Customer Risk Factor | ||
Percentage of High-Net-Worth Investors within the Company | % | |
Percentage of high-risk customer compared to total number of customers | % | |
Nature of business of the customers (Cash Intensive Business) | % | |
Exposure of PEPs | % | |
Complexity of the customer’s legal structures | ||
Likelihood of the customers and/or transactions originating from FATF blacklist countries or tax haven jurisdictions | Likely/unlikely | |
Geographical and Jurisdiction | ||
The geographic location of the Company | % | |
Ratio of customers from high-risk countries | % | |
Products and Services Risk Factor | ||
Inherent risk rating derived from the self-assessment completed by Business Division | % | |
transactions and Delivery Channel Risk Factor | ||
Percentage of transaction conducted through non- face-to-face channel | 100% | |
Percentage of mode of payment in cash | % | |
Percentage of transaction from/to high-risk countries | % | |
Company’s Structure | ||
Number of subsidiaries/branches located at high-risk countries, crime hotspots, country’s border or entry- points, high corruption rate. | ||
Level of staff turnover | ||
Findings on the National Risk Assessment | ||
Findings of NRA in terms of sectoral risk assessment (2019) | Low/Medium/Hig h Risk | |
Total Score | X/45 | |
Overall Inherent Risk Rating | Low/Medium/Hig h |
Guide: | 15-24 | Low | 25-33 | Medium | 34-45 | High |
Average Category Score (%) | Category Rating | Final Score Rating | |
---|---|---|---|
Governance and Framework | 𝑋 12 × 100% = 100% | Deficient /Marginal /Satisfactory/Good | |
Customer Due Diligence | 𝑋 8 × 100% = 100% | Deficient /Marginal /Satisfactory/Good | |
On-Going Monitoring | 𝑋 9 × 100% = % | Deficient /Marginal /Satisfactory/Good | |
Screening | 𝑋 12 × 100% = % | Deficient /Marginal /Satisfactory/Good | |
training and Awareness | 𝑋 7 × 100% = % | Deficient /Marginal /Satisfactory/Good | |
Periodical Risk Assessment | 𝑋 5 × 100% = 100% | Deficient /Marginal /Satisfactory/Good | |
Total Score | |||
Average Score | |||
Overall Control Effectiveness Rating |
Average Score | Category Rating |
---|---|
>75 | Good |
50-74 | Satisfactory |
25-50 | Marginal |
0-24 | Deficient |
Residual Risk Rating | Control Effectiveness | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Good | Satisfactory | Marginal | Deficient | |||
Inherent Risk | Low | Low | Low | Medium | High | |
Medium | Low | Medium | Medium | High | ||
High | Medium | Medium | High | High |
Inherent Risk assessment and Control Effectiveness is based on the Appendix I and II.
After get the result the risk assessment Compliance will determine the compliance review cycle of the Company which based on the followings :-
Final Residual Risk Rating | Compliance Review Cycle |
---|---|
High | Once every 6 months |
Medium | Once every year |
Low | Once every 2 years |
In addition, based on the score the Company will suggests that the frequency of AMLCFT Independent Audit (the "Audit"), to be conducted, in order to commensurate with the Company's size, volume of clients, business nature as an investment advisor and risk appetite. In the event that the compliance review cycle is shorten after the next assessment, The Company also can propose the Audit to be shorten accordingly to uphold sound risk management and governance.
The Internal Control Policy and Procedure are crucial for ensuring effective governance of a company. Without proper governance, a company risks violating various codes and practices, which could lead to Information management and communication breakdowns. It is important to establish clear segregation of duties and ensure its implementation so that employees understand their roles and responsibilities, and to avoid any potential conflicts of interest. The company must also closely monitor and ensure compliance to prevent any discrepancies or personal gain by top management that could breach their duties.
No | Risk Factor | |
---|---|---|
1 | Product can be easily transferable to another party | Yes |
No | ||
2 | Product’s ownership not easily traceable to customer | Yes |
No | ||
3 | Product can be easily converted to cash or exchange to another form | Yes |
No | ||
4 | Customer can place deposit for a period of time for product purchase | Yes |
No | ||
5 | Product can easily be transported or concealed | Yes |
No | ||
6 | Product can be used as an alternative form of currency | Yes |
No | ||
7 | Product is high value in nature | Yes |
No | ||
8 | Customer can purchase product through non-face-to-face channel | Yes |
No | ||
9 | Allow use of virtual asset and other anonymous means of payment | Yes |
No | ||
10 | Allow use of unusual mean of payment e.g. high value items such as real estate, precious metals and stones | Yes |
No |
No | Risk Factor | |
---|---|---|
1 | Services that allow deposit/payment from third-party/unknown parties to pay on behalf | Yes |
No | ||
2 | Services that allow transfer of fund to third-party/unknown parties | Yes |
No | ||
3 | Services that allow cross-border fund transfer | Yes |
No | ||
4 | Services include creation/setting up of complex legal arrangements | Yes |
No | ||
5 | Services that are capable of concealing beneficial ownership from competent authorities | Yes |
No | ||
6 | Services that provide nominee director/shareholders | Yes |
No |
Products and Services risk assessment: 0% - 34% “Yes” = Low risk 35% - 66% “Yes” = Medium risk 67% - 100% “Yes” = High Risk |
Low | Medium | High |
---|
Risk Factors | Total (No.) | Percentage (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Type of customers | Individual customers: | |||
Legal persons: | ||||
Legal arrangements: | ||||
Clubs, Societies and Charities: | ||||
Others (Please specify): | ||||
Type of occupation for individual customer | Salaried: | |||
Self-employed | trading: Services: Others: | |||
Nature and type of business of | trading: | |||
Services: | ||||
legal persons | Cash intensive business (e.g. used cars): | |||
Others: | ||||
Risk Level (based on the Company own customer risk profiling) | Low risk: | |||
Medium risk: | ||||
High risk: | ||||
Characteristics of customers | High net worth: Domestic PEPs: Foreign PEPs: | |||
Structure/ nature of customer | Legal person which has complex structure or multiple layers of ownership | |||
Legal person which has nominee relationship | ||||
Customers that are cash intensive businesses | ||||
Others (please specify): |
Total | Percentage(%) | ||
---|---|---|---|
No of subsidiaries or branches located | |||
at/near crime hotspots | |||
No of subsidiaries or branches | |||
located at/near country’s border | |||
No of subsidiaries or branches located | |||
Location of Holding, subsidiary or branch | at/near country’s entry points | ||
No of subsidiaries or branches located in | |||
higher risk countries |
Risk Factors Total | Percentage (%) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Mode of delivery | Volume of non-face-to-face transactions e.g. online, agents | |||
Mode of payment | Cash | Value of cash transaction (total value of cash transaction/total value of all transaction) | ||
Volume of cash transaction (total no. of cash transaction/total no. of all transaction) | ||||
Electroni c payment | Volume of e-payment (no. of e- payment transaction/total no. of all transaction) | |||
Value of e-payment transaction (total value of e-payment transaction/total value of all transaction) | ||||
transaction location | Volume of the transactions from/to high- risk countries | |||
Value of transactions from/to high-risk countries |
Appendix II
# | QUESTION | Response | Additional Comment | Point allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Does this Assessment Unit have written AML related policies or procedures? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
2 | Have the AML related policies and procedures been reviewed and, if necessary, revised to reflect changes in the Company, regulations, industry best practices? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
3 | Does all Assessment Unit staff have easy access to the AML policies and procedures and plain- language explanations of policies and procedures? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
4 | Does the Assessment Unit or (via any party in the Company) communicate AML policies and procedures to relevant subsidiaries or branches? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
5 | Does the Assessment Unit or the Company have mechanisms in place to ensure relevant subsidiaries or branches comply with AML policies and procedures? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
6 | Does the Board of Directors or Senior Management responsible to the overall oversight of ML/TF risks of the Company? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
7 | Does the committee include senior management from the risk and/or compliance function? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
8 | Is there a staff in the Assessment Unit assigned for ML/TF risks detection and due diligence process? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
9 | Are Assessment Unit staff’s job responsibilities and expectations with regard to AML clearly defined such as in job descriptions and performance goals, and evaluations? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
10 | Is there a Compliance Officer (“CO”) or Designated Compliance Officer ("DCO") with responsibility for overseeing all of the Assessment Unit’s activities relating to the prevention and detection of ML/TF risks? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
11 | Does the CO provide sufficient support and guidance to the Assessment Unit to ensure that ML/TF risks are adequately managed? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
12 | Does the Assessment Unit have processes and procedures to identify and escalate ML risk and compliance issues to the CO, MLRO, and/or senior management as appropriate? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
Total | X/12 |
# | QUESTION | Response | Additional Comment | Point allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Does the Assessment Unit have clear KYC/CDD/ECDD processes for evaluating ML/TF risks of the Company's clients? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
2 | Does the Assessment Unit conduct KYC/CDD/ECDD as per the procedures within the stipulated timeline? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
3 | Does the Assessment Unit have clear procedures in detecting potential suspicious activity, changes in activity, changes in the purpose or nature of the business relationship, or any other possible red flags? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
4 | Does the Assessment Unit have clear procedures in reporting the suspicious activity to the regulators? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
5 | Does the Assessment Unit have a clear process for referring identified trigger events to the appropriate PIC responsible for performing CDD? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
6 | Does the Assessment Unit have a clear process for referring identified changes in activity responsible for performing CDD and escalating the matter to the CO or PO as appropriate? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
7 | Does the Assessment Unit use a risk-based approach to determine the extent of its customer and account monitoring for each customer or category of customers? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
8 | Does the Assessment Unit provide training and guidance to its staff to identify potentially suspicious behaviour, to recognize when ML is taking place, and to escalate such suspicions to the CO/DCO? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
Total | X/8 |
# | QUESTION | Response | Additional Comment | Point allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Does the Assessment Unit investigate the alerts arising from customer and account monitoring and report to DCO? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
2 | Does the Assessment Unit have clear procedures for investigating alerts to identify where ML is or is suspected of occurring? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
3 | Does the Assessment Unit has a process to manage, track, and escalate alerts and cases? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
4 | Does the Assessment Unit perform any manual monitoring of customers and accounts? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
5 | Does the Assessment Unit prepare and file suspicious transaction reports (“Strs”) where there is knowledge or suspicion of ML occurring? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
6 | Are all such reports filed in a timely manner? (If any) | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
7 | Does the Assessment Unit have in place clear procedures for informing LFSA, BNM and other relevant local regulators of sanctions violations? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
8 | Does the Assessment Unit or the Company have a DCO who oversees all investigations, Str filing, and any other relevant regulatory reporting? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
9 | Does the DCO provide clear guidance regarding to the identification, escalation, investigation, and reporting of potentially suspicious activity to relevant staff? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
10 | Does the DCO update guidance in response to changes in regulations and regulatory guidance, the Company’s ML risk profile, ML topologies, and policies and procedures? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
11 | Does the Assessment Unit take measures to prevent “tipping off” the customer/target/related party with regard to the investigation of potentially suspicious activity or the filing of Strs? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
Total | X/11 |
# | QUESTION | Response | Additional Comment | Point allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Does the Assessment Unit have policies and procedures on screening process? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
2 | Does the Assessment Unit maintain a database or list of names for screening of transactions, customers, accounts? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
3 | Does the screening list or database include relevant names and details of sanctioned persons and entities? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
4 | Does the screening list include terrorist financing suspects? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
5 | Does the Assessment Unit screen the clients against the relevant database prior to onboarding? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
6 | Does the Assessment Unit employ a transaction screening system to screen the clients? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
7 | Does the Assessment Unit perform manual transaction or document screening for any transactions? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
8 | Does the Assessment Unit screen its entire customer base after any update to the database? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
9 | Does the Assessment Unit screen parties connected to customers such as BO, directors, account signatories, controllers? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
10 | Does the Assessment Unit perform manual customer, employee, and connected parties names and related-information screening? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
11 | Does the Assessment Unit have in place clear procedures and guidance for dispositioning screening hits as false hits? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
12 | Does the Assessment Unit have clear processes for escalating screening hits to the appropriate investigation team? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
Total | X/12 |
# | QUESTION | Response | Additional Comment | Point allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Does the Assessment Unit have a clear training plan? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
2 | Does the Company provide AML training to relevant staff in the Assessment Unit on an at least annual basis? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
3 | Does the Assessment Unit provide AML training to relevant staff when there are changes in regulations, policies and procedures, or ML typologies? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
4 | Are trainings sufficiently comprehensive to inform staff of their AML roles and responsibilities? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
5 | Does the Assessment Unit attended all the AML training sessions? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
6 | Does the Assessment Unit document the attendance, content, timing, and results of training? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
7 | Do the training records being kept in a proper manner? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
Total | 0/7 |
# | QUESTION | Response | Additional Comment | Point allocated |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Is there any periodical AML risk assessment in the Assessment Unit or Company? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
2 | Does the Assessment Unit conduct customer risk profiling and assessment? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
3 | Is the Assessment Unit's AML capability being reviewed and assessed by an independent audit function? | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
4 | There is no material finding detected from the above-mentioned independent audit or assessment. | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
5 | If there is any minor observation detected from the above-mentioned independent audit, the Assessment Unit/Company deployed sufficient action plan to resolve the issue. | YES/NO | 0/1 | |
Total | X/5 |