| Course | AC503 Advanced Auditing |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Substantive procedures set |
| Length | About 620 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MS in Accounting |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for AC503 Unit 6
Data, Method, Assumptions and a Range: A Unit 6 Substantive Procedures Set for a $6.84 Million Self-Insurance Reserve
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
AC503: Advanced Auditing
Unit 6 Substantive Procedures Set
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Polar Ridge Cold Logistics, its claims and every figure are composite; the standards and textbook cited are real.
The Risk
The reserve is a significant risk. It rests on development factors, the multipliers that grow today's reported claims into their expected final cost, and those factors are chosen by management. Management also has a reason to keep the reserve low, since every dollar of reserve reduces the earnings measured by the lender's fixed-charge coverage covenant. Materiality is $640,000, and the threshold for investigating a difference between management's figure and ours is set at $160,000, a quarter of materiality, because the estimate is subjective and close to the covenant.
The standard on accounting estimates asks auditors to respond to the specific reasons an estimate is risky, which here are its data, its method and its assumptions, and allows them to develop their own point estimate or range as one of those responses (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants [AICPA], 2020).
Procedures on the Data
The first procedures test what goes into the model. The model's paid losses and case reserves for each accident year are agreed to the third-party administrator's loss runs at December 31. Twenty open claims are traced from the loss runs to the adjusters' files to confirm that case reserves reflect the adjusters' latest assessment and that claims are coded to the right accident year. The claim count by year is compared with the safety department's incident log to test whether any reported incidents never became claims. These steps found the data complete and accurate, with one claim coded to the wrong year, corrected by management.
Procedures on the Method and Assumptions
The middle procedures test how the model turns data into an estimate. Management uses a paid loss development method with industry factors for its first two accident years, when its own history was thin, and its own factors afterward. We recomputed the model and found it calculates as described. We then compared management's development factors with the industry factors published by a rating bureau and with Polar Ridge's own history over five years. For workers' compensation, management's selected factors for the most recent year are 18 percent lower than its own five-year average, and management could not explain the change beyond a belief that a new safety program had reduced claim severity. The safety program began in September, too late to affect most of the year's claims.
An assumption that lowers the reserve, chosen in the year the covenant tightened, and supported only by a program that began in September, is the kind of judgment the standard asks auditors to examine for bias rather than accept as a change in experience.
The Independent Range
We engaged an actuarial specialist, evaluated her competence, capabilities and objectivity, and agreed the scope of her work in writing (AICPA, 2012). She applied both paid and incurred development methods to the tested data and produced a range of $7,120,000 to $7,980,000. Management's $6,840,000 lies below the low end of that range by $280,000.
Evaluation
Because management's estimate falls outside a reasonable range, the misstatement is measured to the nearest point of the range, $280,000. The amount is below materiality but above our investigation threshold, and its direction matches the incentive identified in planning. It is recorded on the summary of uncorrected misstatements, discussed with management and reported as a possible indicator of bias, and the reserve is a likely key audit matter if the owner asks for that reporting (Arens et al., 2020).
References
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2012). Using the work of an auditor's specialist (AU-C Section 620). AICPA.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. (2020). Auditing accounting estimates and related disclosures (Statement on Auditing Standards No. 143). AICPA.
Arens, A. A., Elder, R. J., Beasley, M. S., & Hogan, C. E. (2020). Auditing and assurance services (17th ed.). Pearson.
AC503 Unit 6 instructions, in plain terms
Unit 6 of AC503 asks you to design and report substantive procedures for a significant estimate. Restate the risk and why it is significant, including any incentive management has. Set a threshold for investigating differences. Organize procedures by what they address: the data feeding the estimate, the method, the significant assumptions, and an independent estimate or range. Test data against third-party sources and underlying files. Recompute the model and compare assumptions with external benchmarks and the entity's own history, asking for support where they differ. If you use a specialist, evaluate competence, capabilities and objectivity and agree the scope in writing. Measure any misstatement correctly when management's figure falls outside your range, and consider whether its direction suggests bias. The estimates and specialist standards, plus the course text, belong in your APA 7 references.
How the AC 503 Unit 6 example is put together
The sample restates the risk: development factors chosen by management, with covenant pressure to keep the reserve low, and a $160,000 investigation threshold. Data procedures agree paid losses and case reserves to administrator loss runs, trace twenty open claims to adjuster files and compare claim counts with the safety log, finding one misdated claim. Method and assumption procedures recompute the model and find workers' compensation factors 18 percent below the company's own average, supported only by a safety program that began in September. The highlighted sentence identifies possible bias. The specialist's range of $7,120,000 to $7,980,000 follows, and the evaluation measures a $280,000 misstatement to the nearest end and reports its direction.
AC503 Unit 6 rubric: what earns full points
AC503 estimate procedures earn points for addressing the specific reasons the estimate is risky. Graders look for separate attention to data, method and assumptions, or a well-supported independent estimate. Data testing should reach third-party evidence. Assumptions must be compared with benchmarks and history, and unexplained departures pursued. The rubric gives substantial weight to recognizing possible management bias, especially when an assumption moves in the direction of an incentive. Use of a specialist must be properly evaluated. The misstatement must be measured correctly against a range. Procedure sets that only recompute management's model, or that accept a figure outside the range, fall short of the rubric. Standards on estimates and specialists should be referenced in APA 7.
Common AC503 Unit 6 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Weak Unit 6 sets recompute management's model and stop, which proves only that the arithmetic works. Claims data is accepted from the client without tracing it to the administrator or adjuster files. Assumptions are described but never compared with anything. Management's explanation for a changed assumption is accepted without checking whether it could have affected the year. A specialist's range is used without evaluating the specialist. The misstatement is measured to the midpoint of the range instead of the nearest end, or bias is never considered. If your section's estimate is a warranty, allowance or impairment, a writer can design procedures around that estimate for its specific data and assumptions.
Get an AC503 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
Send the estimate your Unit 6 case describes, the client's model or its outputs, and the rubric. Procedures come back grouped by data, method and assumptions, with an independent range wherever the facts support one, in 24-48h. The first custom sample is free and follows the case your section issued, including any specialist it names. 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 AC503 papers and MS in Accounting samples
- AC503 Unit 1: Industry Audit Risk Discussion
- AC503 Unit 2: Audit Engagement Planning Memo
- AC503 Unit 3: Risk Assessment Worksheet
- AC503 Unit 4: Test of Controls Workpaper
- AC503 Unit 5: Monetary Unit Sampling Plan
- AC503 Unit 7: Analytical Procedures Exercise
- AC503 Unit 8: Seminar Reflection
- AC503 Unit 9: Going Concern Evaluation
- AC503 Unit 10: Audit Report Analysis
- AC502 Unit 6: Article 9 Priority Problem
- AC501 Unit 6: Fair Value vs Amortized Cost Comparison
AC503 Unit 6 questions, answered
Why not simply recompute management's model?
Because a model can be computed correctly and still be wrong. The estimates standard directs attention to the data, the method and the significant assumptions, or to an independent estimate, or to events after year end. The AC503 example uses all three because the reserve is a significant risk, and it keeps recomputation to a single row of the table.
Does the auditor need its own actuary?
Not always, but for a significant actuarial estimate an auditor's specialist is common. When one is used, the auditor evaluates the specialist's competence, capabilities and objectivity and whether the work is adequate for the audit's purpose. The example documents that evaluation in a row of its own, since the specialist's range carries much of the conclusion.
Where can I find a free AC503 Unit 6 sample paper?
This page holds a full AC503 Unit 6 substantive procedures set for a $6,840,000 self-insurance reserve at Polar Ridge Cold Logistics covering data, method, assumptions, a specialist's range and APA 7 references.
How is the $280,000 misstatement measured?
Management's $6,840,000 falls below the specialist's reasonable range of $7,120,000 to $7,980,000. When a booked estimate lies outside the range, the misstatement is at least the distance to the nearest end, here $280,000.
Does the auditor need its own actuary?
Not always, but for a significant actuarial estimate like this one a specialist is common. The sample evaluates the specialist's competence, capabilities and objectivity and agrees the scope of her work in writing before relying on her range.