2016 CFE Board Notes (September)

The Board was very thorough in reporting that they were disappointed with different case issues that writers failed to see or talk about in sufficient depth. I only take the time to read this report because they have the habit of revisiting items that writers missed during the previous year or two.

I have attempted to give some feedback below without revealing too much information about cases when you start writing them yourself.

• Extreme point form usage and typographical errors made it difficult to interpret writers’ meanings and intentions
• Writers failed to provide details of calculations, including assumptions. You must explain your train of thought to achieve competence
• Candidates did not allocate their time well between different issues, to the detriment of some AOs, in which depth and breadth couldn’t be met because of insufficient time
• Writers struggled at times to see the bigger issues within accounting, and instead misused the case facts to discuss other minor issues
• There were cases in which candidates did not provide useful assurance reports and explain why they would be useful
• Lack of understanding of cash flow vs. transactional (EDITBA) approach
• The typical notes about the reason that writers are terrible at taxation (haha)
• Can’t simply list case facts
• Engagement procedures were weak or generic

I don't recommend that current CFE writers read the entire report, as it will give away what is in the cases. However, if you really want to read it, you can download the full Day 1 CFE Board notes here and Day 2 & 3 CFE Board notes here.