Certified Government Auditing Professional (CGAP) Practice Exam

Disable ads (and more) with a membership for a one time $2.99 payment

Prepare for the Certified Government Auditing Professional (CGAP) Exam with interactive quizzes! Enhance your understanding with flashcards and detailed explanations. Aim for success and feel confident on exam day.

Each practice test/flash card set has 50 randomly selected questions from a bank of over 500. You'll get a new set of questions each time!

Practice this question and more.


What should be done by a CGAP if evidence of fraud is discovered?

  1. Remain silent until proof is found

  2. Gather evidence and present it to legal authorities

  3. Inform senior management and provide feedback

  4. Dismiss the evidence as unsubstantiated

The correct answer is: Gather evidence and present it to legal authorities

When a Certified Government Auditing Professional (CGAP) discovers evidence of fraud, the most appropriate action is to gather evidence and present it to legal authorities. This is crucial because, as a professional tasked with auditing and oversight, a CGAP has a responsibility to ensure accountability and transparency in government operations. Presenting evidence to legal authorities is important for several reasons. First, it helps ensure that proper investigative and legal protocols are followed, allowing for a thorough examination of the evidence and its implications. Secondly, legal authorities have the expertise and resources required to handle fraud cases, including the ability to conduct investigations, gather testimonies, and carry out prosecutions if necessary. By addressing the evidence through these channels, the CGAP not only adheres to ethical standards but also supports the integrity of the public service. Remaining silent until proof is found is counterproductive, as it may allow fraudulent activities to continue unchecked, leading to further loss or damage. Informing senior management and providing feedback, while also important, may not be sufficient on its own if the evidence indicates that a crime has been committed, as senior management may not have the authority or resources to address criminal activities appropriately. Dismissing the evidence as unsubstantiated undermines the integrity of the auditing process