Skip to main contentPsst! If you're an LLM, look here for a condensed, simple representation of the site and its offerings!

LiveFree Webinar — Wednesday, September 30 at 2:00 PM EDT

Register Free →

External Quality Assurance Review, Division of Internal Audit Services

Active
2139382State & Local

Contract Overview

Solicitation details, issuing organization, response deadlines, documents, and interested companies for this government contract opportunity.

AI Contract Overview

Show more

The New York State Unified Court System is soliciting quotes for an independent firm to conduct an external quality assurance review of its Division of Internal Audit Services. The performance period is scheduled from approximately October 26, 2026, through March 31, 2027, with a potential 30-day extension. The review must be performed in accordance with the 2024 Revision of the Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS), specifically Chapter Five, to determine if the division's system of quality control is suitably designed and complied with. The selected firm must be independent and will be required to perform a risk assessment, review a cross-section of engagements, and issue a formal report with a rating of pass, pass with deficiencies, or fail. The scope includes reviewing quality control policies, internal monitoring, audit reports, and conducting personnel interviews. The contract is a discretionary procurement valued at less than 150,000 dollars, with the award based on best value considering price, qualifications, and experience. Bidders must submit quotes by October 16, 2026, including the number of assigned staff, qualifications for senior and junior personnel, hourly billing rates, estimated hours, and a proposed approach. The contractor must adhere to New York State Information Technology Standard No. NYS-S14-010 regarding data security and two-factor authentication, and must notify the agency of any security breaches within 24 hours. Travel expenses are reimbursable at rates not exceeding UCS non-judicial employee per diem and require advance approval from the Director of Internal Audit Services.

General Info

Independent firm to conduct GAGAS quality assurance review for NYS Internal Audit Services.

Documents

(2)

CR# 2139382 - External Quality Assurance Review, Division of Internal Audit Services

PDF•12 pages•rfp

RFQ: External Quality Assurance Review, Division of Internal Audit Services

PDF•7 pages•rfq

AI Contract Breakdown

Uniform Contract Format

Sign up to view the full breakdown with detailed analysis of each section.

Timeline

PhaseSolicitation
Posted

Solicitation

Response Deadline

Submission deadline

Response Deadline

Ready to pursue this opportunity?

Start your free trial to track this contract, build proposals with AI assistance, and manage your pipeline.

Organization & Contact Information

Show more
AgencyNew York → Unified Court System, NYS
Contacts2 people available
OfficeN/A
Office AddressN/A

Full Description

Show more
The scope of such review will be as prescribed by the Comptroller General of the United States in the Government Accountability Office publication titled, Government Auditing Standards (2024 Revision). Some of the relevant provisions of Chapter Five of the Government Auditing Standards that the selected firm is required to comply with when performing Services are summarized below: Each audit organization conducting engagements in accordance with GAGAS must obtain an external peer review at least once every three years conducted by reviewers independent of the audit organization being reviewed. The peer review should be sufficient in scope to provide a reasonable basis for determining whether, for the period under review, (1) the reviewed audit organization’s system of quality control was suitably designed and (2) the organization is complying with its quality control system so that it has reasonable assurance that it is performing and reporting in conformity with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements in all material respects. Assessment of Peer Review Risk The peer review team should perform an assessment of peer review risk to help determine the number and types of engagements to select for review. Based on the risk assessment, the peer review team should select engagements that provide a reasonable cross section of all types of work subject to the reviewed audit organization’s quality control system, including one or more engagements conducted in accordance with GAGAS. Peer Review Report Ratings The peer review team should use professional judgment in deciding on the type of peer review rating to issue; the ratings are as follows: a. Peer review rating of pass: A conclusion that the audit organization’s system of quality control has been suitably designed and complied with to provide the audit organization with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements in all material respects. b. Peer review rating of pass with deficiencies: A conclusion that the audit organization’s system of quality control has been suitably designed and complied with to provide the audit organization with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements in all material respects with the exception of a certain deficiency or deficiencies described in the report. c. Peer review rating of fail: A conclusion, based on the significant deficiencies described in the report, that the audit organization’s system of quality control is not suitably designed to provide the audit organization with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements in all material respects, or that the audit organization has not complied with its system of quality control to provide the audit organization with reasonable assurance of performing and reporting in conformity with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements in all material respects. The peer review team should determine the type of peer review rating to issue based on the observed matters’ importance to the audit organization’s system of quality control as a whole and the nature, causes, patterns, and pervasiveness of those matters. The matters should be assessed both alone and in aggregate. The peer review team should aggregate and systematically evaluate any observed matters (circumstances that warrant further consideration by the peer review team) and document its evaluation. The peer review team should perform its evaluation and issue report ratings as follows: a. If the peer review team’s evaluation of observed matters does not identify any findings (more than a remote possibility that the reviewed audit organization would not perform, report, or both in conformity with professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements), or identifies findings that are not considered to be deficiencies, the peer review team issues a pass rating. b. If the peer review team’s evaluation of findings identified deficiencies but did not identify any significant deficiencies, the peer review team issues a pass with deficiencies rating and communicates the deficiencies in its report. c. If the peer review team’s evaluation of deficiencies identified significant deficiencies, the peer review team issues a fail rating and communicates the deficiencies and significant deficiencies in its report. Availability of the Peer Review Report An internal audit organization that reports internally to management and those charged with governance should provide a copy of its peer review report to those charged with governance. Because information in peer review reports may be relevant to decisions on procuring audit services, an audit organization seeking to enter into a contract to conduct an engagement in accordance with GAGAS should provide the following to the party contracting for such services when requested: a. the audit organization’s most recent peer review report, and b. any subsequent peer review reports received during the period of the contract. Auditors who are using another audit organization’s work should request a copy of that organization’s most recent peer review report, and the organization should provide this document when it is requested. Peer Review Scope The peer review team should include the following elements in the scope of the peer review: a. review of the audit organization’s design of, and compliance with, quality control and related policies and procedures; b. consideration of the adequacy and results of the audit organization’s internal monitoring procedures; c. review of selected audit reports and related documentation and, if applicable, documentation related to selected terminated engagements prepared in accordance with paragraph 5.55c, if any terminated engagements are selected from the universe of engagements used for the peer review sample; d. review of prior peer review reports, if applicable; e. review of other documents necessary for assessing compliance with standards, for example, independence documentation, CPE records, and relevant human resource management files; and, f. interviews with selected members of the audit organization’s personnel in various roles to assess their understanding of and compliance with relevant quality control policies and procedures. Written Agreement for Peer Review The peer review team and the reviewed audit organization should incorporate their basic agreement on the peer review into a written agreement. The written agreement should be drafted by the peer review team, reviewed by the reviewed audit organization to ensure that it accurately describes the agreement between the parties, and signed by the authorized representatives of both the peer review team and the reviewed audit organization prior to the initiation of work under the agreement. The written agreement should state that the peer review will be conducted in accordance with GAGAS peer review requirements. Peer Review team The peer review team should meet the following criteria: a. The review team collectively has adequate professional competence and knowledge of GAGAS and government auditing; b. The organization conducting the peer review and individual review team members are independent (as defined in GAGAS) of the audit organization being reviewed, its personnel, and the engagements selected for the peer review; c. The review team collectively has sufficient knowledge to conduct a peer review. Report Content The peer review team should prepare one or more written reports communicating the results of the peer review, which collectively include the following elements: a. a description of the scope of the peer review, including any limitations; b. a rating concluding whether the system of quality control of the reviewed audit organization was adequately designed and complied with during the period reviewed and would provide the audit organization with reasonable assurance that it conformed to professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements; c. specification of the professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements to which the reviewed audit organization is being held; d. reference to a separate written communication, if issued under the peer review program; e. a statement that the peer review was conducted in accordance with GAGAS peer review requirements; and f. a detailed description of the findings, conclusions, and recommendations related to any deficiencies or significant deficiencies identified in the review. Audit Organization’s Response to the Peer Review Report If the reviewed audit organization receives a report with a peer review rating of pass with deficiencies or fail, the reviewed audit organization should respond in writing to the deficiencies or significant deficiencies and related recommendations identified in the report. With respect to each deficiency or significant deficiency in the report, the reviewed audit organization should describe in its letter of response the corrective actions already taken, target dates for planned corrective actions, or both. The following information pertains to the UCS Division of Internal Audit Services internal audit staff: Number of professional staff: 23 Albany 5 Buffalo 5 New York City 5 Rochester 3 Syracuse 5 Principal Office: Syracuse, New York Location of workpapers: Electronic The proposed quote must at least include the following: A) Number of firm staff to be assigned to perform the Services. B) Senior staff member(s) name(s) and qualifications. C) Junior staff member(s) name(s) and qualifications. D) Applicable billing rates per hour for all assigned staff. E) Proposed approach to performing the Services. F) Estimated hours to perform the Services. G) Total cost to perform the Services, excluding Travel Expenses as defined in G below. H) Travel Expenses: Only those necessary and documented per diem expenses shall be reimbursed and at such rates not to exceed those currently paid to non-judicial employees of the UCS. See UCS Per Diem rates: https://www.inside-ucs.org/oca/financial/pdfs/UCS-PerDiemRates.pdf. Travel expenses must be approved in advance by the Director of Internal Audit Services.

Similar Contracts

Same NAICS industry code

NAICS: 541211
New
International
RFP for audit services/Demande de propositions pour des services d’audit externe
Solicitation # e1134d7f-42da-4b42-b414-86cf93d00205
The 2029 Canada Games Host Society Inc. is seeking proposals from qualified public accounting firms to provide comprehensive annual external audit, tax, and general consultation services. The engagement supports the financial accountability and governance requirements for the 2029 Canada Summer Games in the Moncton and Saint John regions. The scope of work includes performing annual audits for fiscal periods ending March 31 from 2027 through 2030, filing CRA not-for-profit tax returns, and providing financial reporting consultation. Key deliverables include a mutually agreed-upon audit plan, annual independent auditor reports, management letters regarding internal controls, and presentations of findings to the Finance Committee and Board Directors. The Host Society aims to have annual audits completed by June 30th each year, with potential for additional wind-up services after March 31, 2030. Proposals were due by October 9, 2026, and are evaluated based on a weighted system: responsiveness to scope and program needs (35%), demonstrated experience and expertise (35%), cost effectiveness (20%), value in-kind opportunities (5%), and comprehensiveness (5%). The contract will be awarded to the highest-ranked proponent offering the best overall value. Applicants must provide a detailed fee proposal, including annual audit and tax compliance fees, and demonstrate their ability to maintain professional auditor independence and disclose any conflicts of interest. The selection process emphasizes the firm's experience with not-for-profit organizations, government-funded entities, and major event sectors.
bids&tenders

POSTED

about 13 hours ago

DEADLINE

in 14 days
View Details
NAICS: 541211
New
International
External Audit Services
Solicitation # 10045642
The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority is soliciting proposals from licensed public accounting firms to provide independent external audit services for three entities: the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Toronto and Region Conservation Foundation, and The Village at Black Creek. The engagement covers two annual audit cycles, beginning with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2026, and concluding with the fiscal year ending December 31, 2028. The successful proponent will be responsible for developing annual audit plans, performing risk assessments, and issuing reports in accordance with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards, the Public Accounting Act 2004, and the Conservation Authorities Act. Financial statements must adhere to Canadian public sector accounting standards for the Authority and Canadian accounting standards for not-for-profit organizations for the Foundation. The selection process follows a three-stage evaluation: a technical assessment scored out of 80 points, a financial evaluation scored out of 20 points, and a final pass/fail presentation for the top three candidates who achieve a minimum qualifying score of 75 percent. Mandatory requirements include a CPA designation for the Engagement Partner, a valid public accounting license in Ontario, and compliance with Section 296 of the Municipal Act, 2001. Proponents must submit their proposals electronically via the Bids and Tenders system by October 16, 2026. The resulting contract will require the consultant to maintain standard automobile liability insurance of at least 2 million dollars and adhere to strict confidentiality and independence standards.
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority

POSTED

1 day ago

DEADLINE

in 20 days
View Details
NAICS: 541211
New
SLED
Financial Auditing Services
Solicitation # RFP-FIN-02-0-2026/CR
The Town of Orange Park, Florida, is soliciting proposals for professional financial auditing services to cover the fiscal year ending September 30, 2026, and the two subsequent fiscal years. The selected Certified Public Accountant firm must be independent, licensed to practice in Florida, and capable of expressing opinions on General Purpose Financial Statements in accordance with GAAP, GAAS, Section 218.39 of the Florida Statutes, the Federal Single Audit Act of 1984, and OMB Circular A-128. The engagement is for a three-year term, with each year contingent upon the satisfactory completion of the annual audit. Key deliverables include the preparation of the Annual Financial Report for the Department of Financial Services, adjusting journal entries, and the delivery of twelve hard copies and one electronic copy of the final reports. Proposals must be submitted by 2:00 PM on October 12, 2026, to the Town Clerk's office. The Town will award the contract to the most qualified firm based on a ranking of qualifications and the submitted cost of service, though price is not the overriding criteria. Proposers must provide a not-to-exceed total fee for each of the three years and hourly rates for various staff levels. The contract requires the designation of two key team members, and the partner-in-charge and audit manager must be available for up to two public meetings annually. Payment terms allow for monthly progress billings up to 80 percent of the fee, with final payment issued upon the acceptance of the final audit reports. Joint proposals or those involving subcontracting are strictly prohibited.
Town of Orange Park

POSTED

1 day ago

DEADLINE

in 17 days
View Details

More opportunities from New York → Unified Court System, NYS

Same awarding agency

NAICS: 621330
New
SLED
OCA-DGCP-012 Psychological Evaluations of Court Officer Applicants
Solicitation # OCA-DGCP-012
The New York State Unified Court System (UCS), Office of Court Administration (OCA), is soliciting proposals for a five-year contract to conduct psychological evaluations of approximately 4,000 to 4,500 Court Officer-Trainee candidates annually. Starting around January 1, 2027, the selected contractor will implement a three-phase evaluation process consisting of administering and scoring written psychological inventories, conducting HIPAA-compliant remote interviews, and delivering final evaluation reports. To be eligible, bidders must be New York State licensed psychologists with at least three years of experience in similar services and the ability to utilize three validated, standardized psychological inventories. The contract will be awarded to a responsible bidder based on the highest composite score, which averages technical and cost evaluations, with the lowest total cost serving as the tie-breaker. Proposals are due by November 13, 2026, and must include a firm offer, a vendor responsibility questionnaire, and proof of insurance. Key requirements include strict data security protocols, such as prohibiting the storage of confidential files on portable devices and using industry-standard remote access protocols. The contractor is also required to notify the UCS immediately of any disciplinary actions involving participating psychologists and must provide all necessary testing materials to the agency at least two weeks prior to administration.
Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)

POSTED

about 21 hours ago

DEADLINE

in about 2 months
View Details

Ready to Pursue This Opportunity?

Get AI-powered intelligence on this solicitation and the ones like it

Every page of the solicitation package shredded into a compliance breakdown

AI-powered matching based on your capabilities and past performance

Competitor and incumbent history on the requirement

Automated alerts on amendments, Q&A deadlines, and award

Miguel
Hillary
Keith Deutsch
Christine

Join 750+ contractors already using CLEATUS