Question Details

(Solved) Hello, I need help with this project. It will be submitted


Hello, I need help with this project. It will be submitted through TURN IT IN, So it can not be PLAGIARIZED. Please read instructions carefully below and answer the questions being requested. Thank you very much!


CASES: CASE 3

 


 

PERFORMING A

 

BLENDED CONSULTING

 

ENGAGEMENT

 


 

Learning Objectives

 

?

 


 

Identify and document an organization?s vision, mission, and

 

strategy.

 


 

?

 


 

Perform a risk assessment of major change initiatives

 

necessary to achieve an organization?s strategy.

 


 

?

 


 

Determine and schedule the most valuable consulting

 

engagements to support the achievement of an

 

organization?s strategy.

 


 

?

 


 

Understand and document the engagement customer?s

 

expectations for planned consulting engagements.

 


 

?

 


 

Identify and document the appropriate scope of planned

 

consulting engagements.

 


 

?

 


 

Determine and create appropriate work programs to support

 

planned consulting engagements.

 


 

?

 


 

Perform planned consulting engagements.

 


 

?

 


 

Determine and document appropriate results and conclusions

 

for completed consulting engagements.

 


 

?

 


 

Communicate ?nal consulting engagement results to the

 

engagement customer.

 


 

Internal consulting engagements vary dramatically by internal audit function,

 

environment, and organization. As chapter 15, ?The Consulting Engagement,?

 

makes clear, the internal audit function is uniquely positioned to add value and

 

make an impact on the organization when performing consulting engagements.

 

The current increased focus on an organization?s system of internal controls by

 

regulators, independent outside auditors, and management means that internal

 

audit functions are asked more frequently to provide advice, facilitate activities, and train managers on the effective design, implementation, and operation of governance, risk management, and internal control processes. This case

 

study uses a ?ctional, multinational ?nancial institution as the context within

 

which to explore a number of those consulting opportunities that real-world

 

organizations pursue as they address the issues they are struggling with today.

 

Through these engagements, the internal audit function may provide the organization insight regarding signi?cant events or provide additional assurance related to an area where additional assurance is desired. The case study scenarios

 

can be performed separately and do not have to be assigned in a speci?c order.

 

Although each internal audit function approaches consulting engagements

 

differently, this case study is designed to familiarize students with a wide

 

spectrum of scenarios in which consulting engagements are applicable and the

 

many ways that internal audit functions customize consulting engagements to

 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-1

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

address the speci?c needs of an organization. Students will be presented with

 

many opportunities in this case study to apply the material contained in chapter 15. Because consulting engagements are often done on a one-time basis and

 

have not been performed before, they require extensive research and planning.

 

And, just as internal auditors are required to have their research prepared in

 

advance of a consulting engagement, the same is expected of students before

 

they begin this case study. Because this case study simulates the environment

 

of the ?nancial services industry, students should do as much research as is

 

required for them to have an understanding of the ?nancial services industry

 

and be able to quickly access the knowledge acquired as needed throughout

 

the case study.

 

In today?s environment, many internal audit functions are increasing the priority of consulting engagements due to the added value they bring to an organization. This case study was developed to prepare students for the increased

 

focus organizations are placing on consulting engagements and is intended for

 

use by practitioners and academic instructors. This advanced case study

 

incorporates many of the concepts covered throughout the various chapters

 

in the textbook. The authors recommend that it be completed in conjunction

 

with chapter 15 and after chapter 3, ?Governance,? chapter 4, ?Risk Management,? and chapter 5, ?Business Processes and Risks.?

 

As indicated in chapter 15, many engagements can be considered blended

 

consulting engagements since they contain both consulting and assurance elements. The authors believe this is so common that the examples and activities

 

in this case study are designed to illustrate how engagements can contain both

 

elements.

 


 

PERFORMING RISK ASSESSMENTS

 


 

Chapter 4 details the process by which senior management and the board of

 

directors manage the risks inherent in an organization?s business model. The

 

internal audit function is pivotal in this process and performs assurance and

 

consulting activities designed to provide feedback and advice to management

 

on the design adequacy and operating effectiveness of the system of internal

 

controls in place to help an organization effectively carry out its strategy.

 

These assurance and consulting activities assist management with the identi?cation of potential weaknesses in the system of internal controls that are relied

 

upon to mitigate risks that could prevent the achievement of key business

 

objectives.

 

The board of directors is responsible for providing strategic direction and

 

guidance, relative to the establishment of key business objectives, consistent

 

with the organization?s business model. Directors bring varied and diverse

 

business experience to the board and, thus, are in a position to provide the

 

strategic direction and guidance that will help ensure the organization is successful. The board can also in?uence the organization?s risk-taking philosophy

 

and establish broad boundaries of conduct based on the organization?s overall

 

risk appetite and cultural values.

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-2

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

As discussed in chapter 3, the board of directors is also responsible for providing governance oversight. It is in this area of responsibility that the internal

 

audit function has the most direct opportunity to add value. The board of

 

directors provides direction to management, empowers them with the authority to take action, and oversees the overall results of operations. Both senior

 

executives and line management play important, but different, roles in dayto-day governance through their respective risk management activities. The

 

internal audit function provides management and the board with assurances

 

regarding the effectiveness of governance activities.

 

In addition to providing assurance services to the organization, the internal

 

audit function adds value by performing consulting services at the board?s

 

or management?s request. Such consulting services often help the board and

 

management make decisions regarding which activities designed to achieve

 

strategic objectives align with management?s risk appetite.

 

Chapter 5 outlines how organizations structure their business activities and

 

initiatives designed to implement their strategy and achieve their business

 

(organizational) objectives. As organizations plan these activities, they also

 

must identify the potential risks that are introduced and manage those risks to

 

acceptable levels. The internal audit function can be integral in this process by

 

performing risk-based assurance and consulting engagements that are aligned

 

with the organization?s business risk pro?le.

 

Internal audit functions often participate in, or even facilitate management?s

 

performance of, a risk assessment in which risks are assessed in terms of

 

impact and likelihood at an organizational level. Both impact and likelihood

 

are determined using a scale. These scales often are expressed using three or

 

?ve categories. A three-category scale for impact might include high, medium,

 

and low, whereas a ?ve-category scale might include extreme and negligible in

 

addition to the categories mentioned above. Whether three or ?ve categories

 

are used, they are typically de?ned in greater detail. If they are de?ned in terms

 

of ?nancial impact, each category delineates the range of dollars (an example

 

is shown in exhibit CS3-1, which is taken from exhibit 5-8 in chapter 5). The

 

categories of impact also might re?ect degrees of injury, impact on reputation,

 

etc. Similarly, likelihood, which is evaluated by assessing the probability of an

 

event happening, is also broken into three or ?ve categories. For likelihood,

 

a three-category scale might include unlikely, possible, and probable with a

 

?ve-category scale including remote and certain in addition to the categories

 

in a three-category scale. As with impact, the categories for likelihood are

 

often de?ned more speci?cally. For example, likelihood might be expressed in

 

percentages as shown in exhibit CS3-1.

 

Regardless of how an organization chooses to de?ne the categories for impact

 

and likelihood, this process allows risks at an organizational level to be plotted

 

on a matrix and assessed in terms of both impact and likelihood, providing a

 

truer picture of the risk events the organization faces than if they were evaluated only in terms of one or the other. Exhibit CS3-1 is a visual depiction of

 

this risk assessment model.

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-3

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

EXHIBIT CS3-1

 

RISK ASSESSMENT MODEL

 

Extreme

 


 

19

 


 

22

 


 

24

 


 

25

 


 

High

 


 

10

 


 

14

 


 

18

 


 

21

 


 

23

 


 

Medium

 


 

6

 


 

9

 


 

13

 


 

17

 


 

20

 


 

Low

 


 

3

 


 

5

 


 

8

 


 

12

 


 

16

 


 

Negligible

 


 

I

 

M

 

P

 

A

 

C

 

T

 


 

15

 


 

1

 


 

2

 


 

4

 


 

7

 


 

11

 


 

Remote Unlikely Possible Probable Certain

 

(0-10%) (10-25%) (25-50%) (50-90%) (90-100%)

 


 

LI K E LI H OO D

 

Impact

 

Extreme:

 

High:

 


 

>$100m; threatens ongoing existence

 

$25-$100m; dif?cult to achieve business

 

objectives

 

Medium: $5-$25m; makes achieving some business

 

objectives challenging

 

Low:

 

$1-$5m; some undesirable outcomes

 

Negligible: <$1m; no noticeable impact on

 

objectives

 


 

Critical Risks

 

High Risks

 

Moderate Risks

 

Low Risks

 


 

As stated in chapter 5, once the major risks have been identi?ed, management

 

can then consider their importance and link risk events to the business activities and initiatives identi?ed to achieve the organization?s strategic business

 

objectives. Once the risks facing the organization have been linked to the

 

strategic business activities and initiatives, the members of senior management

 

prioritize the initiatives and provide direction to line management on efforts

 

necessary to achieve the short-term, intermediate, and long-term business

 

objectives.

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-4

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

Once management has prioritized the business activities and initiatives they

 

believe carry the greatest impact on the achievement of the business objectives,

 

the internal audit function will evaluate these activities to determine the initiatives on which their participation will have the greatest impact. The internal

 

audit evaluation (risk assessment) will leverage management?s assessment and

 

prioritization process and is designed to accomplish several purposes, including but not limited to:

 

?

 


 

Prioritizing business activities and initiatives subject to internal audit

 

involvement. Such involvement may be through assurance engagements,

 

consulting engagements, or blended engagements.

 


 

?

 


 

Forming a basis for allocating scarce internal audit resources.

 


 

?

 


 

Providing guidance as to the type and timing of internal audit

 

communications.

 


 

?

 


 

Providing management (the engagement customer) with agreed upon

 

input and feedback consistent with engagement expectations.

 


 

While the internal audit function?s risk assessment process is similar to

 

management?s assessment and prioritization process, more often than not it

 

evaluates risks based on many more factors than just impact and likelihood.

 

Commonly, the internal audit function?s risk assessment process evaluates each

 

activity or initiative using risk factor models that identify anywhere from seven

 

to 15 factors. Regardless of the number of factors included in a given model,

 

each factor is more precisely de?ned by assigning scores according to a scale.

 

This scale can be expressed in three, ?ve, or seven categories that are de?ned

 

according to the risk factor subject to rating. In addition to rating each activity

 

according to degree within each risk factor, internal audit functions often have

 

another component that allows them to more ?nely prioritize risks. This is

 

done so that the relative importance (or weight) of one factor can be compared

 

to the relative importance of another. For example, weighting may be done by

 

assigning numbers between zero and 100 to each risk factor according to its

 

relative importance such that, when summed, the total equals 100 even though

 

each risk factor is weighted differently according to the importance placed

 

on it. If each of the risk factors is considered to be of equal importance, they

 

would be given the same numeric weighting. Exhibit CS3-2, which is taken

 

from exhibit 5-12 in chapter 5, shows a 10-factor risk model using a threepoint scale. It also shows the weights that an internal audit function might

 

apply to the risk factors.

 

In addition to assigning an overall risk score to each business activity/initiative

 

(potential consulting engagement), some internal audit functions add a subjective priority rating that is applied to each potential consulting engagement according to the importance the internal audit function places on it. The internal

 

audit function will consider management?s assessment and prioritization process results when determining their subjective priority rating. Additionally, the

 

internal audit function will consider the amount of resources required and the

 

skills necessary to perform the consulting engagement, as well as the engagement customer?s needs and expectations.

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-5

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

EXHIBIT CS3-2

 

RISK FACTOR APPROACH

 

FACTOR DESCRIPTIONS, WEIGHTINGS, AND SCORES

 

Risk

 

Factor

 


 

Description

 


 

Score

 

(1-3)

 


 

X

 

Weight

 


 

Weighted

 

Score

 


 

External Factors

 

1. Assets at risk

 


 

1 - Less than $500,000

 

2 - From $500,000 to $5 million

 

3 - Greater than $5 million

 


 

10

 


 

2. Visibility

 


 

1 - Operating unit/direct customer

 

2 - Divisional/limited set of customers

 

3 - Organization/national press

 


 

10

 


 

1 - Simple, routine assignments

 

make up process

 

2 - Requires several steps and interaction of multiple people

 

3 - Multiple steps, requiring coordination of multiple individuals

 

both within the process and

 

with other processes

 


 

10

 


 

1 - Process affects less than 3% of

 

the organization?s activities

 

2 - Process affects 3% to 15% of

 

the organization?s activities

 

3 - Process affects more than 15%

 

of the organization?s activities

 


 

10

 


 

1 - Few requirements or generally

 

unregulated

 

2 - Some legal, regulatory, or external requirements

 

3 - Signi?cant number of and/or

 

complexity of requirements

 


 

10

 


 

6. Internal control

 

stability

 


 

1 - Mature risk and control system

 

2 - Stable risk and control system

 

with moderate changes

 

3 - Signi?cant changes to risk and

 

control system

 


 

5

 


 

7. Internal control

 

effectiveness

 


 

1 - No internal control or compliance issues in past two years

 

2 - Instances of fraud, internal control weakness, or compliance

 

failures, but none signi?cant in

 

the past two years

 

3 - Signi?cant fraud, internal control weakness, or compliance

 

failures in past two years

 


 

10

 


 

1 - No signi?cant change in last 12

 

months

 

2 - Some changes in process or key

 

personnel in last 12 months

 

3 - Major change in business and

 

process or new IT system in last

 

12 months

 


 

15

 


 

3. Complexity

 


 

4. Size of process/

 

operation

 


 

5. Legal/regulatory/external

 

requirements

 


 

Internal Factors

 


 

8. Signi?cant

 

changes in

 

operations,

 

processes,

 

personnel, or

 

technology

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-6

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

EXHIBIT CS3-2

 

RISK FACTOR APPROACH, CONTINUED

 

FACTOR DESCRIPTIONS, WEIGHTINGS, AND SCORES

 

Risk

 

Factor

 


 

Description

 


 

Score

 

(1-3)

 


 

X

 

Weight

 


 

Weighted

 

Score

 


 

Other Factors

 

9. Management

 

concerns

 


 

1 - No concerns expressed

 

2 - Some concerns expressed by

 

senior management

 

3 - Notable concerns expressed by

 

senior management or board

 


 

10

 


 

10. Prior audit

 

results

 


 

1 - No internal control or compliance issues in last audit

 

2 - Minor internal control or compliance issues in last audit

 

3 - Signi?cant internal control or

 

compliance weaknesses in last

 

audit

 


 

10

 


 

Overall Risk Score

 


 

This subjective priority rating is often expressed in a three-point scale with one

 

as low, two as moderate, and three as high. By applying this subjective priority

 

rating, internal audit functions are able to take both the overall risk score and

 

the subjective priority rating for a given potential consulting engagement and

 

plug it into a rubric that provides guidance on the scope, resource allocations,

 

and reporting requirements for the potential consulting engagement.

 

Exhibit CS3-3 depicts an illustrative risk model applied to a list of potential

 

consulting and blended consulting engagements with overall risk scores and

 

subjective priority ratings assigned.

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-7

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

EXHIBIT CS3-3

 

ILLUSTRATIVE CONSULTING ENGAGEMENT RISK

 

MODEL

 

Date Risk

 

Assessed

 


 

Overall

 

Risk

 

Score

 


 

Risk

 

Rating

 


 

Priority

 

Rating

 


 

Retail Bank Infrastructure Rollout

 


 

11/7/20XX

 


 

1.9

 


 

H

 


 

H

 


 

Image Awareness ? Branding

 


 

11/7/20XX

 


 

1.7

 


 

M

 


 

M

 


 

Retail Back Of?ce Rollout

 


 

11/7/20XX

 


 

2.2

 


 

H

 


 

H

 


 

Consolidated Customer Portal

 


 

12/3/20XX

 


 

2.0

 


 

H

 


 

H

 


 

Consolidated Client Statements

 


 

12/3/20XX

 


 

1.8

 


 

H

 


 

M

 


 

Name Change ? BUG

 


 

12/3/20XX

 


 

1.8

 


 

H

 


 

M

 


 

Bank of China ? Due Diligence

 


 

12/3/20XX

 


 

2.6

 


 

H

 


 

H

 


 

Bank of China ? Client Conversion

 


 

12/3/20XX

 


 

2.7

 


 

H

 


 

H

 


 

Net Worth Evaluator

 


 

1/7/20XX

 


 

1.6

 


 

M

 


 

M

 


 

Retirement Savings Calculator

 


 

1/7/20XX

 


 

1.5

 


 

M

 


 

M

 


 

Associate Training ? V, M, CS

 


 

1/7/20XX

 


 

1.5

 


 

M

 


 

M

 


 

Product Rollout ? Advertising

 


 

1/7/20XX

 


 

1.5

 


 

M

 


 

M

 


 

?Bank of Choice? Launch

 


 

1/7/20XX

 


 

1.2

 


 

L

 


 

L

 


 

Project Name

 


 

Risk Rubric

 

Risk Scale

 


 

Meaning

 


 

Risk Score

 


 

Risk Assignment

 


 

0

 


 

This factor is of no concern.

 


 

1.80 to 3.00

 


 

High

 


 

1

 


 

This factor is of little concern

 

or very slight applicability.

 


 

1.50 to 1.79

 


 

Medium

 


 

2

 


 

This factor is of average

 

concern or applicability.

 


 

0 to 1.49

 


 

Low

 


 

3

 


 

This factor is of very de?nite

 

concern or applicability.

 


 

Scope and Reporting Rubric

 

Risk

 

Rating

 


 

Priority

 

Rating

 


 

Report

 


 

Scope

 


 

Typical Budget

 


 

H

 

H

 

H

 


 

H

 

M

 

L

 


 

Required

 

Optional

 

None

 


 

Full Scope Project

 

Customer Agreed Deliverables

 

Monitor Project Progress Only

 


 

2,500 hours

 

1,000 hours

 

500 hours

 


 

M

 

M

 

M

 


 

H

 

M

 

L

 


 

Optional

 

Optional

 

None

 


 

Customer Agreed Deliverables

 

Project Team Participation Only

 

No Participation

 


 

1,000 hours

 

750 hours

 

0 hours

 


 

L

 

L

 

L

 


 

H

 

M

 

L

 


 

Optional

 

Optional

 

None

 


 

Project Team Participation Only

 

Monitor Project Progress Only

 

No Participation

 


 

750 hours

 

500 hours

 

0 hours

 


 

Priority Rating: A subjective assignment of High, Medium, or Low based on external and internal

 

factors such as internal audit or executive management concern.

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-8

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

PERFORMING CONSULTING ENGAGEMENTS

 


 

Based on the prioritization performed above, the internal audit function determines the business activities and initiatives for which consulting engagements

 

will be performed. The internal audit function will attempt to maximize the

 

value provided to management relative to resources committed, perceived risk

 

mitigated, and timeliness of services provided. The goal is to provide management with the information they need to mitigate the risks inherent in the business activities and initiatives intended to carry out the organization?s strategic

 

objectives. Once those consulting engagements have been determined, the

 

internal audit function must act quickly to schedule them and assign resources.

 

Resources for consulting engagements are allocated in much the same way

 

they are for assurance engagements. Practice Advisory 2230-1 advises that

 

when determining the appropriateness and suf?ciency of resources, internal

 

auditors should consider ?the number and experience level of the internal

 

audit staff? as well as the ?knowledge, skills, and other competencies of

 

the internal audit staff.? While the speci?c skills and experience may differ

 

somewhat from assurance engagements, the thought process for determining

 

appropriate resources must be equally rigorous.

 

Once the consulting engagements are scheduled and the appropriate resources

 

have been allocated, the internal audit team assigned to each speci?c consulting engagement must meet with the parties involved to gain a detailed understanding of the engagement customer?s expectations. Standard 2300 states that

 

the internal audit function ?must identify, analyze, evaluate, and document

 

suf?cient information to achieve the engagement?s objectives.? The success of

 

consulting engagements is highly dependent on the internal audit function?s

 

ability to understand and document the engagement customer?s objectives.

 

Understanding and documenting the customer?s objectives allows the internal

 

audit function to create an effective and ef?cient work program. The work

 

program will include the detailed procedures to be performed by the internal

 

audit team that are necessary to accumulate the evidence and documentation

 

required to validate assumptions or test hypotheses discussed with the engagement customer when gaining an understanding of the engagement expectations.

 

Once the work program has been established, the internal audit team will

 

perform the work outlined in the program. In many cases, the steps and

 

audit procedures may be modi?ed based on additional information or previous work. This is due to the ?uid nature of these assignments. As the work

 

is performed, the results should be documented as they become known. This

 

is important for two reasons. First, there needs to be a record of the work

 

performed that will be available to parties who might have an interest at some

 

future point. These parties may include the customer, board of directors,

 

independent outside auditors, regulatory bodies, etc. Second, the internal audit

 

team will rely on the documented results to support advice given in response

 

to the consulting elements of the engagement, and the overall conclusions and

 

recommendations provided to address the assurance elements. Without an

 

accurate record of the work performed, internal auditors have a dif?cult time

 


 

Internal Auditing: Assurance & Advisory Services, 3rd Edition ? 2013 by The Institute of Internal Auditors

 

Research Foundation, 247 Maitland Avenue, Altamonte Springs, FL 32701 USA

 


 

CS2-9

 


 

CASES: CASE 3

 

substantiating engagement advice and conclusions and formulating meaningful

 

recommendations that add value.

 

Exhibit CS3-4 illustrates a work program for an engagement that has both a

 

consulting objective and an assurance objective (that is, a blended engagement).

 


 

EXHIBIT CS3-4

 

WORK PROGRAM EXAMPLE

 

Engagement Work Program: Client Data Conversion

 

Engagement Objectives: As agreed to with management, our objectives are to:

 

1. Provide advice to the Client Data Conversion Project team on current leading practices for managing data conversion projects.

 

2. Assess whether the project team completed all steps required by the revised data conversion

 

methodology to support an accurate, effective, and ef?cient data conversion.

 

Engagement Customer Objective: The Client Data Conversion Project sponsor stated that his

 

objective is to ensure that systems and processes appropriately support an accurate and timely

 

conversion of client data. This includes:

 

The data conversion process must be designed and conducted in a manner consistent with leading practices. This includes documentation of all key judgments and decisions.

 

Functional gaps between legacy BUS and Bank of China systems must be identi?ed and addressed.

 

Systems and processes must support an accurate and timely conversion of client data (including

 

accounts, assets, and web experience).

 

Required regulatory approvals must be obtained to proceed with the Client Data Conversion

 

Project.

 

Project, technology, and operational risks must be identi?ed and managed.

 

Overall Business Risk: Failure to manage effectively the Client Data Conversion...

 


Solution details:

Pay using PayPal (No PayPal account Required) or your credit card . All your purchases are securely protected by .
SiteLock

About this Question

STATUS

Answered

QUALITY

Approved

DATE ANSWERED

Oct 15, 2019

EXPERT

Tutor

ANSWER RATING

YES, THIS IS LEGAL

We have top-notch tutors who can do your essay/homework for you at a reasonable cost and then you can simply use that essay as a template to build your own arguments.

You can also use these solutions:

  • As a reference for in-depth understanding of the subject.
  • As a source of ideas / reasoning for your own research (if properly referenced)
  • For editing and paraphrasing (check your institution's definition of plagiarism and recommended paraphrase).
This we believe is a better way of understanding a problem and makes use of the efficiency of time of the student.

NEW ASSIGNMENT HELP?

Order New Solution. Quick Turnaround

Click on the button below in order to Order for a New, Original and High-Quality Essay Solutions. New orders are original solutions and precise to your writing instruction requirements. Place a New Order using the button below.

WE GUARANTEE, THAT YOUR PAPER WILL BE WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WITHIN A DEADLINE.

Order Now