A test record you can inspect and edit
The test asks one question: did approval happen before posting, and was the approver authorized? The records are simple enough to trace each result back to its evidence.
Use the workpaper and follow the evidence
Formulas recalculate in Excel or LibreOffice when you change an input.
Keep the test logic and the conclusion distinct
Set the question
AP-03 asks whether vendor invoices were approved by an authorized person before they were posted. The test objective is deliberately narrower than a conclusion about the whole process.
Work the supplied selections
Five fictional selections are traced to a posting extract, approval history, and period-end roster. Five is enough to show the method; it is not a recommended sample size.
Separate attributes
Timing and authority are recorded separately. That makes one exception readable instead of hiding it behind a single pass/fail label.
Leave room for judgment
Formula counts update in the workbook. The reviewer conclusion is a manual field because completed cells do not establish operating effectiveness.
The exception is specific; its severity is not assumed
In the worked AP-03 case, selection S-03, invoice INV-1042, was posted on 29 December. The specimen approval was recorded on 2 January by a name absent from the period-end roster specimen.
Evidence trail
- E-01 · Posting extract
- Records the invoice identity and 29 Dec 2025, 15:48 posting time.
- E-02 · Approval history
- Records approval on 2 Jan 2026, 09:14 by Samuel L. Nash.
- E-03 · Authorized roster
- Lists authorized approvers as of 31 Dec 2025; Samuel L. Nash is not listed.
Two attributes, two exceptions
Recorded approval follows posting.
Recorded approver is absent from roster specimen.
Escalate the observed exception for cause and scope evaluation. The worked result does not determine whether the control operated effectively across the population.
Editable fields and formula fields
Yellow fields are editable tester or reviewer inputs, including the authority result and reviewer disposition.
Formula fields calculate timing from the entered timestamps and selection result from the two attributes. Blank dates stay Pending; they are not silently treated as a pass.
Reviewer conclusion is never formula-driven. Counts provide a prompt for review, not an automatic effectiveness decision.
Record what was seen and what is still open
The example records S-03 as open for root-cause and scope evaluation, with an owner and a date.
- Objective and attributes are explicit.
- Evidence supports the recorded exception.
- The exception is not erased by the other selections.
- Reviewer assessment remains an accountable, manual decision.