Function audit

The elements that need to be taken into account during the implementation of a computer system are (i) the type of system (open or closed), (ii) security functions, audit trails, (iii) the operation controlled by the computer system, and (iv) the technology necessary to support the operation and Part 11. These last two elements are not identical for all systems. 

After the prototype is built, the next step is to evaluate your design using a function audit. A function audit (Exhibit 43.1) is similar to going to the doctor for a stress test, only in this case, the product is the patient and you re the physician measuring the design s response to both... 

EXHIBIT 43.1 (Downloadable). This is a partiai Function Audit for the wing fringe prototype. 

Paper-based Familiar Durable Transparent security model Costly Inefficient searches Space consumption Inhibits leveraging of information assets Environmental impact Emphasis on separate repository function Audit management overhead... 

QA s independence from operations should be identifiable in the organizational charts of a company or CRO. The reporting line of QA should go directly to senior management and in no case to any operational function. To preserve the independence of the audit function, audits are also often outsourced to external contractors however, this is no GCP requirement. 

A wide-ranging internal safety functional audit was conducted at the end of 2009... 

Ensures fundamentid Securky features provided Security functionality audit against requirements for Security Target level Proper implementation of security functional requirements... 

Quality Audit. Another important responsibiUty of quahty assurance is the audit function. Using the quahty audit as a tool, QA can monitor the operation of the manufacturing faciUty a toU, ie, contract, manufacturer or raw material suppHer to assure that written procedures are in place and that there is documentation to indicate the procedures are being followed. Properly executed audits allow QA to spot potential weakness in the quahty system that could allow errors to occur. Once identified, these weaknesses can then be corrected before they result in nonconformance. 

Postaudit Process The postaudit process consists of preparation of a draft report, preparation of a final report, development of artion plans, and follow-up. A draft report of the audit findings should be prepared shortly after the completion of the on-site audit. The draft report usually undergoes review and comment by facility personnel involved with the audit, experienced auditors not involved with the subject audit, functional specialists, and attorneys. The review of the draft report is done to assure that a clear, concise, and accurate report is issued, and not to modify or change the findings. Once this review procedure is completed, a final report can be issued and distributed based on a distribution list provided by the facility personnel. The final audit report should be issued in a timely manner and meet the time requirement specified in the audit plan. 

Step 2.1 R ne the Initial Checklist. Table 1 is a checklist of unit operations. Apply this as an initial guide and checklist that can be used to identify each unit operation within the unit process that the audit will focus on. You may have to make additions to the list, because it is meant to be a general overview. Next to each unit operation that applies to the unit process of interest, provide a brief description of its function or purpose. This will prove useful in developing a process flow scheme in Step 3. Much of this sub-step can be accomplished by... 

The trade associations that are members of lATF perform an assurance function and have set up a panel to administer certification activities in their country. This involves witness audits of certification bodies to verify that they are adhering to the lATF agreement. They will monitor the scheme on behalf of the vehicle manufacturers in ensuring that certificates are only awarded to organizations that are 100% compliant with the requirements. These activities should provide added confidence that the certification bodies are fulfilling their obligations. 

Remote locations where design function is performed shall undergo surveillance audits at least once within each consecutive 12-month period. Surveillance audits cannot exclude a remote design site more than once each year. 

The entire quality system shall be assessed at a minimum of once every three years. The audit plan for a supplier has to cover all requirements, all sites, all locations, all operations, all functions, all customers, all processes, all procedures at least once in a three-year cycle, unless it is an upgrade certification (see clause 4.6). Hence the sample of operations taken on each audit has to cover at least Veth of the whole. 

Don t include functions in your quality system unless they are essential to achieving customer requirements - they will be subject to third party audit otherwise. 

If your company has an in-house audit function or standing team, try to enlist their support, either on a consulting basis or to conduct the PSM assessment under your team s direction. At the very least, make sure they know about the PSM assessment, to avoid potential misunderstandings. 

If you do not have an in-house audit function, it may be wise to consider investing in a professional EHS auditing course for one or more staff members who can then share their knowledge with others. 

If your company has an internal EHS audit group or function, consider enlisting its support, either to help you devise a monitoring protocol, and/or to assist with data collection and analysis. 

The team should be realistic about the time required to see improvements in end-of-pipe measures in most cases the pilot project success will be measured on efficiency improvements and other in-process measures alone. In this case it is important to demonstrate that all PSM and ESH issues are being managed. You should consider having a management systems audit (validation) conducted by a group independent of the integration project team. This may be done in conjunction with the next scheduled audit. This may be a corporate or divisional audit function or a consultant engaged specifically for this task. 

Engine failures over a five year span for 138 emergency generators are listed. Discussion of each type of failure is presented. Data listed includes percentage of failure over the population and time period. All failures were presumably insured by Hartford Steam Boiler and subject to functional inspections and audits. 

The aforementioned reviews and assessments were assimilated to characterize the effect of dielectric, rotational, and mechanical hazards on motor performance and operational readiness. Functional indicators were identified that can be monitored to assess motor component deterioration caused by aging or other accidental stressors. The study also includes a preliminary discussion of current standards and guides, maintenance programs, and research activities pertaining to nuclear power plant safety-related electric motors. Included are motor manufacturer recommendations, responses from repair facilities to a questionnaire, in-service inspection data, expert knowledge, USNRC-IE audit reports, and standards and guides published by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 

However, many of these tools, while enabling markedly faster and more detailed analysis than paper-based methods, still mimic static, one-by-one paperlike reports with no real-time auditing capability. Moreover, these COTS do not have integrated data analysis and automated data screening capabilities and are not optimized for systematic analyses. Furthermore, the ad hoc analyses that these COTS produce lack interactive, automatic auditing reproducible functions. Thus these tools are often used to produce the same dense, unwieldy paper tables of counts and percentages that were created manually before personal computers became ubiquitous. 

Humans should use computers to do functional work for them in the most efficient manner possible. However, we must not delude ourselves into thinking that the mere use of a computer to analyze adverse events will magically analyze these events in a systematic, efficient way. Computers do not automatically produce coherent, auditable results that can be subsequently reproduced with ease. Computers must be actively programmed through an iterative process involving tight communication between analysts and software developers until these processes are totally functional. 

Thereafter, the primary functions of the study QA specialist fell into two main headings. First, GLP compliance during the collection and documentation of commodity samples had to be assured. This was done via observation of several collections for different shops (collection incidents) at various geographic locations. In these audits, the study QA specialist examined specific items, such as (1) did the shopper follow the written instructions, (2) were the correct types and numbers of samples collected, (3) was the documentation maintained as required, (4) were the samples labeled and packaged correctly, and (5) were the samples delivered to the shipper as required Findings were communicated to study management and used as appropriate in subsequent shops. 

Impact to network (does it run on LAN or WAN ) p. The security aspects of the system/ apphcation q. The audit trail function in the application ... 

QA SQPs should specify the amount of data to be audited and how the data points are chosen for audit. An auditor may choose to perform more thorough and more frequent audits on a recently validated system. The validation report can be used to assist in determining what and how much to audit. For example, if data summary printouts from the chromatographic computer system are used in the report, the validation report should be reviewed to verify that this summary function was tested during validation. If this portion of the computer software was successfully validated, verifying a few values from each table in the report may be sufficient. 

---