Whаt is the cоrrect оrder fоr the lаyers of the gаstrointestinal tract wall, starting from the layer closest to the lumen?
The serоus membrаne thаt surrоunds the lungs is cаlled the pleura.
Using the infоrmаtiоn prоvided аbove in question 1, аnswer the following: Question 3 (10 marks): Consider the control environment at the Society, with a particular focus on specific internal controls. Provide 5 recommendations for preventative specific controls and explain why these controls would improve the control environment in the organization. Note: If you are recommending the organization implement segregation of duties, you must explain which duties need to be segregated and who in the organization would take on the role. No marks will be awarded for simply stating "segregation of duties".
Use the fоllоwing infоrmаtion to аnswer аll questions in this assignment: Northern Horizons Literacy Society Background Northern Horizons Literacy Society (the “Society”) is a registered charity based in Calgary, Alberta, focused on improving childhood and adolescent literacy for underserved communities. Activities include free reading clinics, mobile book-lending vans, tutoring, and school partnerships. It is funded through provincial and federal education grants, corporate sponsors, donations, and a highly publicized annual storytelling festival. The festival draws celebrities, authors, and the public for readings, food trucks, and a charity book auction. The Society owns a modest office and an adjacent venue that’s rented out for community use when not booked for Society activities. The Board and General Governance The Society’s Board of Directors includes six volunteers with diverse personal connections to the Society: Janet Wu (Chair) – A high school librarian who volunteers with refugee literacy groups. Carlos Fernandez (Vice Chair) – A business owner whose son improved his literacy skills significantly after attending the Society’s programs. David Kingston – A retired judge known for his support of prison literacy programs. Meera Rai – A teacher whose students use the financial literacy programming. Randy Kim – A junior tech executive, that has an interest in the organization and is building his resume as a board member. Carolyn D’Souza – A stay-at-home parent who is also chair of parent council at a local school. She refers students to the Society all the time. Meetings occur quarterly but most board members rely heavily on the Chair and Executive Director for leadership and decision making. The Society does not require background checks or reference checks for volunteer or staff roles, believing that trust and passion were the best indicators of success and longevity with the organization. The board did not establish a finance or audit committee because they felt it was best for everyone to be involved equally. Their financial statements are audited by a small accounting firm who continues to recommend they establish these committees. Budgets are prepared and approved by the board but any changes to the original budget numbers are not communicated or investigated unless there is a significant variance to the actual number presented at the meetings. The Executive Director Fiona Cross joined the organization in early 2021, initially as a strategic consultant to improve fundraising. Fiona always had the fanciest cars and clothes and the organization found that this was beneficial because the donors could relate to her. She mentioned in her initial interview that she had not worked for a few years, but she had started working again because she needed to continue to pay for a second property that she loved but had a high mortgage on. Confident, well-spoken, and armed with glowing letters of reference, she was eventually hired full-time. The hiring process for the executive director is informal and does not include background checks but rather a vote by the Board. The Board missed that she had previously been let go at the last not-for-profit organization that she worked for on suspicion surrounding missing funds. Her salary began at $90,000/year. Fiona sought a raise to $125,000 in 2024 but was approved only for $100,000. She was argued that she had done so much for the organization over the years that an extra $25,000 would not impact the bottom line or the organization at all. Her success included launching a digital donation platform, rebranding the Society, and significantly growing revenue. The Staff and Procedures The organization uses contract employees from time to time but relies mostly on full-time employees. The full-time employees included: Fiona Cross, the Executive Director Two Literacy Program Coordinators One Administrative Officer One Fundraising and Community Engagement Officer Dual signatures are required on cheques, with Fiona, the Administrative Officer, and one Board member as authorized signers. However, the Board member rarely participated in daily operations. Another Board member noted that cheques were often signed by these individuals without review of any supporting documentation. Sometimes the cheques were even blank. Fiona and the Admin Officer did not see any issue with this because for the organization to run efficiently they needed to have cheques available for payment immediately in case an expense arose. They cannot pay by e-transfer because there would be no second approval with this methodology. Fiona also prepared and reviewed the bank reconciliations on a monthly basis to ensure everything was accounted for. Expense reports were required for all and were reviewed and signed off on by Fiona. The Board was currently trying to document all policies and procedures but they had only just began. They have had a whistleblower policy in place all along with anonymous reporting from their website, but no one had reported anything through this channel since the reporting line was open, they were considering testing to see if this reporting system is in fact working. Rising Suspicions Concerns surfaced after the Fundraising Officer noticed that budget figures submitted to a major donor didn’t align with internal projections that had been approved by the Board. Fiona dismissed this concern indicating that the donor must have not had the correct information. She told staff to contact her if anyone had questions about the budget. The Board Chair grew uneasy after a quarterly performance report revealed perfectly met fundraising goals despite known event issues. When Janet Wu compared the report’s "budget" column to the version filed at the last Board meeting, she noticed numbers had been revised. When confronted, Fiona claimed she had “updated projections” but didn’t discuss with the board at all because the budget was now in line with actual results. Recently, a major donor requested a special audit before considering an estate donation. On hearing this, Fiona resigned immediately. The special audit findings are highlighted below: Audit Findings: Unauthorized Salary IncreasesFiona’s pay had increased to $125,000 even though the approved board minutes showed that the approved increase was to $100,000. The salary change was hidden within the budget line items as all salaries are included in one line, including contractor payments which fluctuate monthly. GrantsFiona applied for a $50,000 federal grant on behalf of the Society. In the application, she overstated expenses and understated revenues in an effort to maximize the grant amount. The federal government provided $75,000 to the Society with the condition it would be directly used to fund one new mobile book lending van. This grant application and receipt was not brought to the Board’s attention. The auditors revealed the money was never used as the restrictions outlined but was instead electronically transferred to an unknown bank account number. The supporting documentation indicated that the amount was used to pay for renovations to the building, that did not happen. Expense ManipulationFiona’s expense reports contained forged and altered invoices. One trip documented as “National Literacy Conference” was, in fact, the address of a luxury spa retreat. When the National Literacy Conference was later investigated, it was found that it never existed. Board Minute ApprovalBoard minutes showed approval for certain spending amounts. These were previously approved board meeting minutes that had been altered to approve certain spending items that had never been discussed at the board meetings. This was accompanied by changes made by Fiona to the approved budget. Required In the spaces provided below prepare your written response for questions 1 through 4. Your responses will be evaluated for “depth in discussion” using case facts and opinions that are substantiated with critical thought and reasoning. Question 1 (6 marks): Why did the fraud committed by Fiona occur? Discuss in the context of the three elements of the fraud triangle: Incentive, Opportunity & Rationalization.