Goal: Review all control failures affecting your IT systems and operations. Understand what broke, where it's broken, and how widespread the issue is. This is your starting point for investigation and remediation.
Identify all control failures
Assess scope and scale of issues
Understand affected systems and users
Prioritize for investigation (Phase 2)
MANAGER VIEWInvestigation Briefing: These are the control failures detected in your ITSM system from 2,847 tickets over the last 90 days. Each represents a breakdown in your operational controls. Use this summary to identify which issues need detailed investigation, then move to Phase 2 to dig into root causes, affected systems, and remediation strategies.
AUDIT FINDINGS
DAMAC PRODUCTION DATA
REAL-TIME
5 Critical Issues to Investigate Your Team's Action Items - 90-Day Analysis
For Your Team - Investigation & FixAnalysis: Dec 2024
Priority: High - Investigate in Phase 2Understand root causes and develop remediation strategy for your team to execute
🔧 1. CONTROL PROCESSChange Control Bypass: 23 changes without CAB approval - need change management process review
🔧 2. ACCESS CONTROLApproval Gap: 24 admin access grants without documented approval - need authorization process
🔧 4. ROOT CAUSERecurring Issues: 156 Yardi issues repeating 23x in 7 days - root cause not fixed
🔧 5. DOCUMENTATIONMissing Analysis: 47 P1 tickets closed without root cause documentation - need process discipline
Data Source:DAMAC ITSM Production DB|2,847 tickets analyzed
|
Last 90 days
|Synced just now
137SLA Breaches
156Recurring Issues
23Process Gaps
5Root Causes
Investigation Priorities
Control Failure DetectedChange CHG-2847 implemented without CAB approval
2m ago
SLA Pattern DetectedYardi auth failures recurring - 23 incidents in 7 days
5m ago
Access AnomalyAdmin access granted without documented approval
12m ago
Documentation Gap47 P1 tickets closed without root cause analysis
18m ago
34
Open Findings
18%
Investigation Progress
90
Est. Days to Fix
🎯 Your Next Steps:
Immediate (Today): Create remediation tickets for the 5 critical issues shown in the hero section
This Week: Assign investigations to team members based on expertise - access control experts on approval gaps, ops team on SLA breaches
Phase 2 Dive: Use the investigation categories below to understand root causes and estimate remediation effort for each issue
90-Day Plan: Build your team's remediation roadmap using the estimated days-to-fix data shown above
🔎
Phase 2: Investigation & Analysis
Manager & Auditor
❓ Why is it wrong?
Goal: Dig deeper into each issue to understand scope, root causes, and patterns. See the details that explain why these control failures occurred.
Browse findings by category
Understand root causes
See affected tickets
Identify patterns
PHASE 2Investigate & Estimate Remediation: Click on any risk category below to drill into specific issues affecting your operations. Review root causes, affected systems, and patterns. Use this to estimate remediation effort and assign investigations to your team members.
📊 Browse by Issue Category - Click on any category card below to see detailed findings your team needs to investigate. Each number shows how many incidents were found. Review evidence and patterns to estimate effort for your team's remediation work.
Investigation Categories - Breakdown by Issue Type
5 Risk CategoriesReady for Team Assignment
5 Critical findings
Click "View Details" to see all control failure findings with ticket evidence.
Top: Yardi Auth (156x)
Click "View Details" to see recurring issues and root cause analysis.
P1: 67% compliance
Click "View Details" to see SLA breach analysis by priority level.
8 admin grants unapproved
Click "View Details" to see access control violations and approval gaps.
28% tickets incomplete
Click "View Details" to see documentation gaps and required audit trail information.
23 no CAB approval
Click "View Details" to see change management issues and approval process gaps.
AI Risk Intelligence Agent
Ready to analyze
Analysis Configuration
Agent Execution LogIdle
[System]Risk Intelligence Agent initialized. Click "Run Comprehensive Analysis" to begin.
[Config]Connected to: DAMAC ITSM Database
[Config]AI Model: SCIKIQ AI
⚡
Phase 3: Impact Assessment
Manager & Auditor
❓ How serious is it?
Goal: Understand the business and compliance impact of these issues. See which frameworks are affected, which controls failed, and how they rank in terms of risk.
Understand compliance gaps
See control failure status
Review risk scores
Assess business impact
PHASE 3Assess impact: This section shows how your findings map to compliance frameworks (SOX, ITIL, ISO 27001). See which controls are effective, which have deficiencies, and which represent material weaknesses. The risk heat map shows which systems are most problematic.
⚖️ Compliance & Control Status: Your issues affect specific regulatory controls. This section shows which frameworks are impacted (ITIL, ISO, SOX), which controls are failing, and the material weaknesses you need to report.
Regulatory & Framework Compliance
ITIL v4 Process Compliance
68%
-5% from last month
INC.01 - Incident Logging28% of major incidents missing root cause analysis
47 gaps
CHG.02 - Change Authorization23 changes implemented without CAB approval
23 gaps
SLA.01 - Response TimeP1 response SLA at 67% (target: 95%)
137 breaches
PRB.01 - Problem ManagementProblem tickets created for recurring issues
Compliant
ISO 27001 Security Controls
74%
No change
A.9.2.3 - Access Rights Management24 privileged access grants without documented approval
A.16.1.5 - Incident ResponseSecurity incidents escalated within SLA
Compliant
A.12.4.1 - Event LoggingAll security events logged and retained
Compliant
SOX IT General Controls
71%
+3% from last month
ITGC.AC.01 - Access ProvisioningAccess to financial systems without proper authorization
12 gaps
ITGC.CM.02 - Change TestingChanges to Oracle Financials without UAT sign-off
8 gaps
ITGC.OP.03 - Incident ResolutionFinancial system incidents not prioritized correctly
5 gaps
ITGC.BC.01 - Backup & RecoveryAll financial data backups verified
Compliant
SOX Section 404
IT General Controls (ITGC) Testing Matrix
Management Assessment of Internal Controls over Financial Reporting
Audit Period: Q4 2024
24Controls Effective
8Control Deficiencies
3Material Weaknesses
156Tests Performed
Access to Programs and Data
Logical access controls, user provisioning, segregation of duties
2 Deficiencies42 tests
ITGC-AC-01
User Access Provisioning
Access to financial applications requires documented approval from data owner
12 ExceptionsSample: 25
Deficiency
ITGC-AC-02
Termination Access Removal
Access removed within 24 hours of employee termination
45 ExceptionsSample: 50
Material Weakness
ITGC-AC-03
Privileged Access Review
Quarterly review of admin/privileged access to financial systems
0 ExceptionsSample: 15
Effective
ITGC-AC-04
Segregation of Duties
Conflicting access combinations reviewed and remediated quarterly
2 ExceptionsSample: 30
Effective
Program Change Management
Change authorization, testing, approval, and implementation controls
1 Material Weakness38 tests
ITGC-CM-01
Change Authorization (CAB)
All changes to financial systems require CAB approval before deployment
23 ExceptionsSample: 45
Material Weakness
ITGC-CM-02
UAT Sign-off
Business owner sign-off required before production deployment
3 ExceptionsSample: 45
Effective
ITGC-CM-03
Segregation of Development
Developers cannot migrate changes to production
0 ExceptionsSample: 45
Effective
Computer Operations
Job scheduling, incident management, data backup and recovery
1 Deficiency35 tests
ITGC-OP-01
Incident Response SLA
P1 incidents affecting financial systems resolved within 4 hours
47 ExceptionsSample: 60
Deficiency
ITGC-OP-02
Backup Verification
Daily backup of financial databases with weekly restore testing
0 ExceptionsSample: 30
Effective
Program Development
System development lifecycle, testing standards, documentation
All Effective41 tests
ITGC-PD-01
SDLC Documentation
All new development follows documented SDLC methodology
1 ExceptionSample: 20
Effective
Management's Assessment of Internal Control
Based on the assessment performed, management has identified the following material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2024:
Access Control Weakness: Terminated employee access was not removed timely from 45 of 50 sampled terminations, representing a 90% exception rate.
Change Management Weakness: 23 changes to financial applications were deployed without required CAB approval, representing 51% of sampled changes.
Incident Response Weakness: 47 of 60 sampled P1 incidents affecting financial systems exceeded the 4-hour resolution SLA.
These material weaknesses existed as of December 31, 2024. Management is implementing remediation plans with target completion by Q1 2025.
Risk & Control Self-Assessment (RCSA)
IT Risk Assessment Matrix
Inherent vs Residual Risk after Controls
Critical (>80)High (60-80)Medium (40-60)Low (<40)
R-001
Unauthorized System Access
Inherent85
Residual65
AC-01AC-02AC-03
-20 pts
R-002
Unauthorized Changes to Production
Inherent90
Residual82
CM-01CM-02
-8 pts
R-003
Data Loss / Corruption
Inherent75
Residual28
OP-02OP-03
-47 pts
R-004
Service Unavailability
Inherent70
Residual62
OP-01
-8 pts
Risk Heat Map - Systems vs Categories
System / Category
SLA Breach
Recurring
Access
Change
Docs
Total Risk
Yardi Property Mgmt
89
156
12
5
45
307
Oracle Financials
34
28
24
18
23
127
Active Directory
18
45
32
8
12
115
Email Exchange
23
15
6
4
18
66
VPN Gateway
28
19
8
3
7
65
Critical (50+)High (30-49)Medium (15-29)Low (<15)
Risk Trend (6 Months)
Finding Distribution
🎯 Step 3: Detailed Evidence - This table shows every finding with supporting ticket evidence from your ITSM system. Click "View Tickets" to see the actual tickets proving each issue exists.
Audit Findings - Evidence from Database
Loading...
Severity
Category
Status
Active Filters:
Finding ID
Category
Description
Severity
Framework
Evidence
Action
AUD-001
SLA Breach
Critical P1 SLA breaches exceeding threshold
What This Means: 47 P1 (critical priority) tickets breached the 4-hour resolution Service Level Agreement. Average breach time: 6.2 hours (156% over SLA). This indicates systematic gaps in incident response capability, particularly during evening/weekend hours (8PM-8AM).
Business Impact:
🔴 Customer service disruption: Property management system down for residents in 3 developments (DAMAC Hills, DAMAC Marina, Crystals)
💰 Financial impact: ~$185K in estimated revenue loss from delayed unit sales/service disruptions
⚖️ Compliance risk: Violates ITIL SLA.01 control (DAMAC's own SLA commitments)
👥 Staff burnout: L2 support team working extended hours without overtime compensation
Root Cause: Only 2 L2 incident managers covering 24/7 schedule (should be 3-4). Evening shift (6PM-6AM) has only 1 person. No escalation procedure when queue exceeds 3 incidents.
How To Fix (30-day action plan):
Week 1: Implement incident triage workflow - P1 tickets routed to senior engineer first, no queue buildup
Week 1-2: Hire/contract 1 additional L2 support person for evening shift (6PM-2AM coverage)
Week 2: Establish escalation triggers: if P1 queue > 2 incidents, auto-escalate to manager
Week 3: Create P1 response playbook for Yardi (most breaches). Target: 15-min first response
Week 4: Review and verify no new SLA breaches. Track 24/7 for 2 weeks before closure
Owner & Timeline: VP Infrastructure (Decision maker) + L2 Manager (Executor). Decision needed this week. New hire by Jan 20. Full resolution by Feb 28.
Critical
ITIL SLA.01
AUD-002
Recurring
Yardi authentication failures - systemic root cause not addressed
What This Means: The same authentication error (Token Refresh Failure: Code ERR_TOKEN_EXPIRED) has occurred 156 times over 90 days. Each time it's fixed temporarily (token restarted), but the root cause is never addressed. This is a CRITICAL problem management failure - Problem MGMT controls are broken.
Business Impact:
🔴 Service instability: Property managers lose system access for 15-30 minutes, 156 times. Zero confidence in system reliability
💰 Financial impact: ~$320K in estimated lost productivity (156 incidents × 30 min × 15 property managers × $30/hour)
⚖️ Systemic risk: Problem Management control ITIL.PRB.02 is FAILED - indicates broken change/incident processes
👥 Operational burden: Same issue troubleshooted 156 times instead of solving it once
Root Cause Analysis: Yardi API token expires every 24 hours but refresh mechanism doesn't auto-renew properly. Restart clears error for 24h, but underlying code bug in token lifecycle isn't fixed. Problem originally reported Aug 2024 but never escalated for permanent fix.
How To Fix (45-day action plan):
Day 1-3: Create Problem ticket PRB-2024-YARDI-TOKEN with priority HIGH. Assign to Yardi system owner + DBA
Day 3-7: Root cause analysis: Debug Yardi API token lifecycle, identify why auto-refresh is failing
Day 7-14: Implement permanent fix: Deploy code patch for token refresh mechanism + test in UAT
Day 14-21: Deploy to production with 24-hour monitoring for any token errors
Day 21-45: Monitor 3 weeks. If no errors, close problem. If errors occur, escalate to vendor (Yardi support)
Action: Implement preventive measure: Auto-escalation if same error occurs 3x in one day (currently it's not escalated until manual notice)
Owner & Timeline: Yardi System Owner (Decision) + Database Team (Executor). Root cause analysis required by Jan 12. Fix deployed by Jan 25. Closed by Feb 15.
Critical
ITIL PRB.02
AUD-003
Change Mgmt
Emergency changes without CAB approval or documentation
What This Means: 23 changes marked as "Emergency" were deployed directly to production without going through the Change Advisory Board (CAB) review process. This bypasses approval controls. 8 of these affected financial systems (Oracle FICO, GL), 12 affected infrastructure (networking, databases). Only 5 had documented approval (email from manager - not formal). This is a CRITICAL control failure.
Business Impact:
⚠️ Risk exposure: 23 unauthorized changes with unknown impact. Could have introduced security vulnerabilities, data corruption, or operational issues
💰 Financial risk: If any change caused financial data corruption/loss, liability could exceed $500K+. No rollback documentation for 18 of 23 changes
🔐 Security risk: Changes bypass change management controls (ISO 27001 A.12.1.2). Could hide unauthorized modifications or backdoors
⚖️ Audit/Compliance: MATERIAL WEAKNESS in Change Management control. Must be reported to external auditors and management. Affects SOX compliance
👥 Accountability gap: No traceability. Don't know exactly what changed, who approved it, or rollback procedures
Root Cause: CAB process requires 5 days lead time. Teams use "Emergency" label to bypass this. VP Operations allows verbal approval. No automated control preventing emergency changes. No audit trail enforcement.
How To Fix (60-day action plan):
Week 1: Audit all 23 emergency changes: Document what changed, risk assessment, rollback plan. Get retroactive approvals where possible
Week 1-2: Define Emergency threshold: ONLY production outages (down >30 min) + security incidents qualify. All other changes go to CAB
Week 2: Create Fast-track CAB process: 24-hour approval for urgent changes (not emergency). Teams no longer have bypass option
Week 2-3: Implement technical controls: Change management system blocks emergency classification without VP sign-off + written justification
Week 3: Establish monitoring: Weekly CAB metrics. Alert if >2 emergency changes in same week
Week 4: Train all teams on new process. Remove "Emergency" as a general bypass option
Owner & Timeline: Chief Infrastructure Officer (Decision maker) + Change Manager (Executor). Must remediate within 30 days (audit expectation). Full control effectiveness by Day 60. Requires board-level sign-off on remediation timeline.
High
ISO A.12.1.2
AUD-004
Access Control
Privileged access granted without documented business justification
What This Means: 24 admin/privileged access requests to financial systems were approved in the last 90 days without proper authorization documentation. Most had only IT manager approval (no business owner sign-off). Only 6 of 24 had documented business justification. No evidence of segregation of duty reviews. This violates SOX IT General Controls requirements.
Business Impact:
🔐 Security risk: Privileged accounts could enable fraud, data theft, or unauthorized changes to financial records
💰 Financial/Audit risk: SOX non-compliance can result in material weaknesses & restatement. Auditor will require evidence of compensating controls
⚖️ Regulatory exposure: If a breach occurs from privileged account access, DAMAC could be liable for regulatory fines + shareholder liability
👥 Insider threat exposure: 24 staff now have financial system admin access with no documented business reason
📋 Audit findings: Material Weakness in Access Control (IT.AC.01). Will appear on SOX audit report
Root Cause: Access request form doesn't require business owner approval, only IT manager. No supervisor verification in workflow. IT automates approval based on template. No periodic access reviews to remove unnecessary privileges.
How To Fix (45-day action plan):
Week 1: Immediate action: Review 24 access grants, identify which are unjustified. Revoke at least 8-10 accounts with no documented need. Keep documentation of removal
Week 1-2: For remaining 14-16 accounts: Get retroactive business owner approval or plan revocation
Week 2: Update access request workflow: REQUIRE business owner sign-off + documented business justification (free-text reason)
Week 2-3: Implement technical control: Access system blocks approval until business owner field is filled
Week 3: Quarterly access review process: Every 90 days, all admins reviewed with managers + business owners. Unused access removed
Week 4: Train all requesters + approvers on new SOX requirements. Document in policy manual
Owner & Timeline: Chief Security Officer (Decision) + Identity Management Team (Executor). Critical remediation due by Feb 15 for SOX audit. Quarterly reviews must start by March 31.
What This Means: 312 of 1,115 tickets (28%) were closed without proper documentation. Specifically: 189 missing resolution notes, 156 missing root cause analysis, 98 missing workaround details. These gaps break the incident management audit trail and prevent knowledge reuse (causing repeated incidents). Violates ITIL INC.01 control requirements.
Business Impact:
🔄 Repeated incidents: Without documented root causes, same issues happen repeatedly (AUD-002 - Yardi auth - is partly due to this)
⏱️ Inefficiency: New team members can't reference past solutions. Resolve time is longer, costing ~$80K/year in extra labor
⚖️ Audit trail broken: Cannot trace what happened, when, why, or who did it. Fails audit requirement for incident management proof
💰 Knowledge loss: When staff leaves, their incident knowledge leaves with them. Zero organizational memory
📊 Business intelligence: Cannot analyze trends (which systems fail most, which teams are slowest, etc.) - decisions are guessed
Root Cause: Closing tickets is rush process - staff wants to mark "done" and move to next ticket. Incident management tool doesn't require resolution notes (fields are optional). Managers don't enforce documentation. No audit of documentation completeness before ticket closure.
How To Fix (30-day action plan):
Week 1: Immediate: Make "Resolution Notes", "Root Cause", "Workaround" REQUIRED fields in incident management tool. Cannot save/close ticket without them filled
Week 1-2: Retroactive action: Go back 30 days (318 recent tickets). Contact resolving engineer for missing documentation. Get it entered or reopen ticket
Week 2: Create documentation standards: Examples of good "Root Cause" (technical analysis, not just "fixed it"). Templates for common issue types
Week 2-3: Manager oversight: Every Friday, L1/L2 manager reviews closed tickets from their team. Checks for complete documentation. Sends back incomplete ones for rework
Week 3-4: Training: 1-hour workshop for all support staff. How to write good root cause analysis. Show examples of good/bad documentation
Week 4: Monitor: Weekly report of documentation completeness % by team. Target: 100% of new tickets. Publicize results
Owner & Timeline: Incident Manager (Decision maker) + IT Support Manager (Executor) + System Admin (technical changes). Documentation requirement must go live by Jan 20 (15 days). Retroactive work by Jan 27. Ongoing monitoring starts Feb 1.
Medium
ITIL INC.01
AUD-006
Escalation
Management escalation delays impacting business operations
What This Means: 89 tickets that required urgent escalation to management were delayed by an average of 18 hours from when the escalation request was made. Root cause: The escalation procedure is not documented clearly for night shift (6PM-8AM). L1 support team doesn't know who to call when manager is offline. Violates ITIL INC.05 escalation requirements.
Business Impact:
⏰ Extended downtime: 18-hour delay on critical tickets = problems stay broken longer. Average cost: $4,200 per 18-hour delay
💰 Financial impact: 89 tickets × $4,200 = ~$374K in cost from extended downtime
😤 Customer frustration: Residents can't reach help when problem occurs (evening/night). Feel abandoned. Complaint letters received from 3 building residents
👥 Staff stress: Night shift staff unsure what to do, so problems languish. Creates burnout and high turnover (2 resignations in last quarter)
⚖️ Compliance: ITIL INC.05 requires escalation path within 2 hours for critical issues. Current 18-hour delay is massive violation
Root Cause: Escalation process not documented for off-hours. Only day shift manager knows procedure. Night shift staff have no escalation runbook. On-call rotation exists but nobody knows how to trigger it. No automated escalation email/SMS sent when escalation is requested.
How To Fix (20-day action plan):
Day 1-3: Create escalation runbook: Who to call for what issue type, at what hour. Include home phone numbers for on-call rotation (encrypted). Distribute to all L1 staff
Day 1-3: Set up automated escalation: When L1 marks "Escalation Required" checkbox, automatically SMS + email on-call manager. Include ticket details
Day 3-5: Train night shift (6PM-8AM staff): 30-minute training on escalation process. Walk through 3 example scenarios
Day 5: Create quick-reference card: Print card with escalation contacts and procedures. Post in IT ops area + send to everyone
Day 5-10: Implement escalation SLA: Manager must acknowledge escalation within 15 minutes. Track and report weekly
Day 10-20: Monitor: Check first 10 escalations. Verify 15-min response time. If missed, immediate retraining
Owner & Timeline: IT Operations Manager (Escalation procedure owner) + System Admin (automation setup). Escalation runbook due by Jan 18. Automated SMS/email by Jan 22. Training done by Jan 25. Monitoring ongoing weekly.
Deploy real-time SLA tracking with automated alerts at 50%, 75%, 90% thresholds. Auto-escalate to Team Lead at 90% and Manager at 100%.
Est. 60% reduction in SLA breaches
Addresses: AUD-001, AUD-006
IT Operations ManagerServiceNow Admin
High Priority
Enforce Change Advisory Board Workflow
Implement mandatory CAB approval gates in ServiceNow. Emergency changes require documented justification and post-implementation review within 48 hours.
100% CAB compliance achievable
Addresses: AUD-003, ISO A.12.1.2
Change ManagerIT Director
Medium Priority
Root Cause Analysis Automation for Recurring Issues
Configure AI-powered pattern detection to automatically create Problem tickets when issues recur 3+ times. Link to knowledge base for permanent solutions.
Est. 40% reduction in recurring incidents
Addresses: AUD-002, Yardi issues
Problem ManagerApplication Team
✅
Phase 4: Solution & Action
Manager & Auditor
❓ What do we do?
Goal: Create your remediation action plan. See AI-recommended solutions, assign owners, set deadlines, and communicate findings to stakeholders. Transform findings into actionable fixes.
Review remediation recommendations
Create action items
Assign owners & deadlines
Generate audit reports
PHASE 4Create your action plan: The Action Center below provides one-click actions to move from findings to solutions. Generate an audit report for management, create ServiceNow remediation tasks, send executive summaries, or schedule a risk review meeting to discuss priorities and ownership.
🎯 One-Click Actions - Use the action cards below to execute on your findings. Each action integrates with your systems (PDF reports, ServiceNow task creation, email notifications) to streamline remediation.
Action Center - Take Immediate Action
One-Click Actions
Generate Audit Report
Create comprehensive PDF report with all findings, evidence, and recommendations for management review.
~30 secondsPDF Export
Schedule Risk Review Meeting
Auto-create calendar invite with key stakeholders and pre-populated agenda based on current findings.
5 stakeholdersOutlook
Create Remediation Tasks
Automatically create ServiceNow tasks for all critical findings with assigned owners and due dates.
6 tasksServiceNow
Email Executive Summary
Send one-page executive summary to IT Director and CIO with risk scorecard and key action items.
C-LevelEmail
Export All Data to Excel
Download complete findings, evidence tickets, compliance scores, and trends in Excel format.
5 worksheetsXLSX
Configure Risk Alerts
Set up automated alerts when risk thresholds are exceeded or new critical findings are detected.