| Course | AC499 Bachelor's Capstone in Accounting |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Control weakness assessment |
| Length | About 650 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Accounting |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for AC499 Unit 6
One Supervisor, Three Duties: A Unit 6 Capstone Control Weakness Assessment of Seasonal Payroll
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
AC499: Bachelor's Capstone in Accounting
Unit 6 Control Weakness Assessment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Kettle Hollow Sauna Works, its staff and every figure are composite; the framework, report and standard cited are real.
Finding Summary
One production supervisor enrolls about 42 seasonal temps each peak, approves their timecards and hands out the payroll cards they are paid on. Those three duties, authorizing, recording and custody, belong with different people (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission, 2013). Tests of the peak payroll found $20,310 paid without support. The weakness is a design deficiency, and the finding refers one matter for investigation without drawing any conclusion about intent.
Process Description
During the August to December peak, the supervisor adds each temp to the payroll system using a form only the supervisor signs. Timecards are approved by the same supervisor at the end of each week. Payroll cards are ordered by the office and delivered in a batch to the supervisor, who hands them out on the floor. Separation dates are entered by the supervisor when a temp stops coming in. No one outside production compares the staffing log with the payroll register.
Test Results
Test 1: Pay after separation. Matching the staffing agency's separation log to the payroll register found 196 hours paid after recorded separation dates, at $20.50 an hour, $4,018 in all.
Test 2: Shared payroll card accounts. Comparing payroll card account numbers across employee records found two temp records paying into one account for 16 weeks, $6,912 in all. This item is referred for investigation; the assessment does not conclude who received the money or why.
Test 3: Overtime without production. Setting each week's overtime premium against daily stave set counts found $9,380 of premium paid in weeks when output did not exceed the straight-time standard.
The $20,310 is immaterial to the statements, but it is material to the costing decision, because overstated temp hours inflate the milling labor rate by about $6.37 a stave set and that rate is what Unit 4 used to compare milling with buying.
Exposure Schedule
The $20,310 can be read in three frames. Against corrected pretax income of $1,171,240 it is 1.73 percent, below any reasonable materiality threshold for the statements. Against next season it grows: if a second profiling line adds a second shift and 30 percent more temps, the same rate of loss would reach about $26,403. Inside the cost card, spread over 3,190 stave sets milled this year, it overstates milling labor by about $6.37 a set. Correcting that rate makes in-house milling cheaper, so it strengthens the Unit 4 recommendation rather than reversing it; the Unit 8 review will carry the corrected figure forward.
Occupational fraud research finds payroll schemes among the most common in small organizations and notes that they run longer where duties are not separated (Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, 2024).
Remediation Plan
1. Move enrollment to the office: the human resources assistant enters each temp from the agency's assignment record, and the supervisor can request but not enter.
2. Separate approval from custody: timecards stay with the supervisor, but payroll cards are issued by the office directly to each temp with identification.
3. Add a weekly match: the office compares the staffing log, the payroll register and card account numbers every Friday before funding.
4. Review overtime against output: the plant manager signs off any week where overtime exceeds 5 percent of hours without a matching output increase.
The changes cost about $6,500 a year in office time and should be in place by July 15, 2027, before peak hiring begins. A deficiency that could allow a misstatement to go undetected should be reported to those charged with governance even when the amounts are small (Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 2007).
References
Association of Certified Fraud Examiners. (2024). Occupational fraud 2024: A report to the nations. ACFE.
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. (2013). Internal control: Integrated framework. COSO.
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (2007). An audit of internal control over financial reporting that is integrated with an audit of financial statements (Auditing Standard No. 5). PCAOB.
The Purdue Global AC499 Unit 6 instructions
Unit 6 of AC499 asks you to assess one internal control weakness in the case company. Summarize the finding first. Describe the process as it actually runs, naming the duties that are combined. Design tests that would detect the consequences of the gap and report each with its method and result. Refer any matter that may involve wrongdoing for investigation without concluding on intent. Build an exposure schedule that measures the amount against the statements, against future operations and against figures used in earlier units. Propose remediation steps with owners, costs and dates. Explain why the deficiency should be reported to governance even if the amounts are small. Cite the COSO framework, fraud research and an internal control standard in APA 7.
How this AC499 Unit 6 example is built
The sample's summary names the three combined duties and the $20,310 total. The process section shows enrollment forms signed only by the supervisor, weekly timecard approval and payroll cards handed out on the floor. Three tests follow: 196 hours paid after separation for $4,018, two records paying one card account for $6,912, and $9,380 of overtime without extra output. The highlighted sentence explains why an immaterial amount still matters to the costing decision. The exposure schedule reads the total at 1.73 percent of pretax income, $26,403 with a second shift and $6.37 a set. Four remediation steps follow, costing about $6,500 a year and due before July 15, 2027.
AC499 Unit 6 rubric: what earns full points
Control assessments in AC499 earn points for a precise description of the gap, well-designed tests and a measured exposure. Graders check that the combined duties are named in COSO terms and that each test is matched to a risk the gap creates. Results should be quantified and traced to evidence. The rubric rewards exposure analysis that goes beyond materiality to the statements, especially when the finding changes an earlier figure. Remediation steps need owners, costs and dates. Assessments that accuse a person, or that recommend controls without testing anything, lose substantial credit. Clear structure and APA 7 citations to the framework and research complete a strong submission.
Common AC499 Unit 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Many Unit 6 assessments describe a weakness in general terms without showing how the process actually runs. Tests are proposed but not performed, or performed without amounts. Matters that may involve fraud are written up as conclusions about a person. Exposure stops at materiality, so the link to earlier work is missed. Remediation is a list of best practices with no owner, cost or date. The weakness chosen touches nothing else in the case, which wastes the integration the capstone rewards. If your section's case points to a different cycle, such as purchasing or revenue, our writers can build the tests and exposure schedule around that process.
Get an AC499 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
Describe the process your case documents, attach any payroll or cycle data it supplies, then include the Unit 6 prompt and rubric. The assessment returned names one gap, tests it against your figures, sizes the exposure against your earlier deliverables and assigns the fix. Nothing is charged for a first sample, and 24-48h is typical. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More AC499 papers and BS in Accounting samples
- AC499 Unit 1: Capstone Integration Discussion
- AC499 Unit 2: Capstone Case Scoping Plan
- AC499 Unit 3: Statement Rebuild Package
- AC499 Unit 4: Make or Buy Costing Decision
- AC499 Unit 5: Corporate Tax Position Brief
- AC499 Unit 7: Ethics Decision Response
- AC499 Unit 8: Seminar Draft Review
- AC499 Unit 9: Integrated Final Report
- AC499 Unit 10: Recommendation Presentation
- AC112 Unit 6: Profit Versus Cash Discussion
- AC468 Unit 6: Email Header Trace
- AC114 Unit 6: Ten-Column Adjusting Worksheet
- AC466 Unit 6: Cash Versus Earnings Analysis
AC499 Unit 6 questions, answered
Why test payroll rather than the revenue cycle?
Because here the payroll gap reaches furthest into earlier work. Seasonal labor sits inside the cost card the costing decision relied on, so a weakness there changes a submitted figure, while a revenue-cycle gap here would touch the statements only. Where your case points to a different cycle, the same logic applies: choose the gap whose exposure crosses the most deliverables.
Should the assessment name the supervisor?
It names the role and the duties, not a person, and it refers the paycard match for investigation without drawing a conclusion. A control assessment evaluates design and tests evidence; deciding intent belongs to whoever investigates. This sample reports what the records show and who should receive the referral, which keeps the finding defensible if the explanation turns out to be innocent.
Where can I find a free AC499 Unit 6 sample paper?
This page holds a full AC499 Unit 6 control weakness assessment of seasonal payroll at Kettle Hollow Sauna Works with a process description, three tests, an exposure schedule, a remediation plan and APA 7 references.
Does an immaterial amount still matter here?
Yes. At 1.73 percent of corrected pretax income, $20,310 does not change the statements, and the assessment says so. But it overstates the milling labor rate the costing decision used and would grow by about 30 percent with a second shift.
Why does the remediation cost money?
Moving enrollment and card issue to the office and adding a weekly match takes about $6,500 a year of office time. Stating that cost lets the board weigh it against the $20,310 the gap has already allowed.