APS Sample Questions Answers

Fraudulent expense reimbursement schemes in T&E processes typically involve misrepresenting or manipulating expense reports to obtain unauthorized reimbursements. Common schemes include reporting personal expenses as business-related (Option A), forging or altering receipts (Option B), and submitting the same expense multiple times for reimbursement (Option C). Lapping schemes (Option D), which involve misappropriating funds and covering them with subsequent payments, are more associated with accounts receivable or cash management, not T&E expense reimbursements.

The web source from SAP Concur explains: “Common T&E fraud schemes include submitting personal expenses as business-related, altering or forging receipts, and requesting multiple reimbursements for the same expense.” Lapping schemes are not mentioned in the context of T&E fraud, as they pertain to different financial processes, such as diverting payments and covering them with later receipts, per the Corcentric source: “Lapping is a fraud scheme typically seen in accounts receivable, not expense reimbursements.”

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Travel and Entertainment (T&E),” including fraud prevention in expense reporting. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” includes identifying common T&E fraud schemes, supporting Options A, B, and C as prevalent, while excluding lapping schemes (Option D).

Expanding the use of procurement cards (P-cards) involves strategies to increase their adoption for business purchases while maintaining control and compliance. Issuing departmental cards for vendor payments (Option B), identifying more vendors that accept P-cards (Option C), and expanding purchase categories (Option D) are all effective methods to broaden P-card usage. However, eliminating spending limits (Option A) is not recommended, as it increases the risk of fraud, overspending, and non-compliance with internal controls.

The web source from SAP Concur explains: “To expand P-card usage, organizations can work with issuers to identify additional vendors, broaden eligible purchase categories, and issue cards to departments for specific payments… Maintaining spending limits is critical to ensure control and prevent misuse.” This confirms that Options B, C, and D are valid strategies, while Option A is an exception due to the need for spending controls.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including P-card program management. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” supports controlled expansion of P-card use while reinforcing the importance of internal controls, ruling out eliminating spending limits.

The three-way match is a critical accounts payable process that involves cross-referencing three documents: the purchase order (PO), the supplier invoice, and the receiving report (or goodsreceived note/delivery receipt). This process ensures that payments are made only for goods or services that were ordered and delivered, preventing errors and fraud. The question asks which document is typically the most difficult to obtain in a timely manner.

The receiving report is often the most challenging to obtain promptly because it depends on the physical or logistical confirmation of goods or services delivered, which involves coordination with receiving or inventory departments outside the accounts payable team’s direct control. Delays can occur due to manual processes, incomplete deliveries, or discrepancies in the quantity or quality of goods received, requiring additional verification. In contrast, the e-invoice is typically provided directly by the supplier, and the purchase order is an internal document generated by the purchasing department, both of which are generally more readily available. P-card statements and expense reports are not standard components of the three-way match, as they relate to different processes (procurement card transactions and employee reimbursements, respectively).

The source from NetSuite explains: “Three-way matching is an AP process used to verify a supplier invoice by checking it against its corresponding purchase order and order receipt. It reduces the chances of fraudulent invoices going undetected and, worse, being paid… A delivery receipt, or a receiving report, which confirms that the purchase was delivered, either in part or in full”. Additionally, the Ramp source notes: “Goods received note (GRN): Proof of what was delivered,” highlighting that this document requires verification from the receiving department, which can introduce delays.

No direct IOFM APS study guide extract specifically addresses the timeliness of obtaining the receiving report, but the general emphasis in IOFM materials on the importance of internal controls and process efficiency in the three-way match supports the conclusion that the receiving report’s dependency on external departments makes it the most difficult to obtain promptly. The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Invoices” and “Internal Controls,” which include best practices for managing the three-way match process, as noted in the IOFM course description: “Review peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process – from receipt of invoice, through processing and payment”.

A substitute check, created under the Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (Check 21), is a paper reproduction of the front and back of an original check, legally equivalent to the original for processing purposes. It is also known as animage replacement document (IRD), as it replaces the original check with a digital image-based substitute. This facilitates faster check clearing through electronic processing.

The web source from NetSuite states: “A substitute check, also known as an image replacement document (IRD), is a paper copy of the front and back of a check, legally equivalent to the original, created under Check 21.” This directly supports Option D. The other options are incorrect:

Electronic conversion order (A)is not a recognized term.

Surrogate financial instrument (B)is not a standard term for substitute checks.

Negotiated bank draft (C)refers to a different financial instrument.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including check processing and Check 21 regulations. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the definition of a substitute check as an image replacement document.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program emphasizes the strategic role of accounts payable (AP) specialists in managing vendor data and relationships, which directly benefits the organization. AP specialists contribute by ensuring timely payments to meet commitments, communicating operational challenges to management, and fostering positive supplier relationships, all of which enhance organizational efficiency and reputation.

Item I (Meet the organization’s commitments): AP specialists ensure invoices areprocessed and paid on time, meeting the organization’s financial obligations to vendors. This supports trust and operational continuity.

Item II (Communicate to management barriers to performance): AP specialists identify issues such as process bottlenecks, system inefficiencies, or vendor disputes and report them to management, enabling proactive solutions.

Item III (Maintain positive relationships with suppliers): By managing the vendor master file, resolving disputes, and ensuring timely payments, AP specialists foster strong supplier relationships, which can lead to better terms and reliability.

Option A (II and III only): Incorrect, as it excludes I, which is a core AP function.

Option B (I and III only): Incorrect, as it excludes II, which is also a key responsibility.

Option C (I, II, and III): Correct, as all three items represent ways AP specialists benefit the organization.

Option D (I and II only): Incorrect, as it excludes III, which is critical for vendor management.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “AP specialists add value by ensuring accurate vendor data, timely payments to meet organizational commitments, and strong supplier relationships.” It also notes that “communicating barriers to performance, such as delays or system issues, helps management optimize AP processes.” The training video reinforces that AP’s role extends beyond transactions to strategic contributions, including supplier trust and process improvement.

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)is a cloud-based software delivery model where applications are hosted by a provider and accessed over the internet, typically on a subscription basis. Another term for SaaS ison-demand software, as it allows users to access software as needed without on-premises installation. A perpetual software license (Option A) refers to a one-time purchase model, onsite vendor support (Option B) is a service, and consultant-specific applications (Option C) is not a standard term.

The web source from Tipalti states: “Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), also known as on-demand software, provides cloud-based access to applications, enabling flexible and scalable AP solutions.” This directly supports Option D.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Technology and Automation,” including cloud-based solutions like SaaS. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with recognizing SaaS as on-demand software for AP automation.

Payment cards, such as procurement cards (P-cards) or corporate credit cards, have significantly reduced the number of small dollar invoices processed by accounts payable departments. Byconsolidating small, recurring, or low-value purchases onto a single card statement, organizations can avoid processing individual invoices for each transaction, streamlining AP workflows and reducing administrative costs.

The web source from Corcentric states: “Payment cards, like P-cards, significantly reduce the number of small dollar invoices by consolidating multiple purchases into a single statement, minimizing AP processing efforts.” This directly supports Option D. The other options are less relevant:

Petty cash (A)is used for small cash transactions but does not reduce invoice volume, as it typically bypasses invoicing.

Evaluated receipt settlement (B)eliminates invoices for specific purchases but is not primarily focused on small dollar transactions.

Electronic data interchange (C)automates invoice data exchange but does not inherently reduce the number of invoices.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including the role of payment cards in optimizing AP processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process” aligns with the use of payment cards to reduce small dollar invoice processing.

A "direct spend" invoice pertains to expenditures directly tied to the production of goods or services, such as raw materials or inventory used in manufacturing or resale. In accounts payable, direct spend is distinguished from indirect spend, which covers operational expenses like supplies or repairs that support business operations but are not incorporated into the final product. The correct answer is "Inventory," as it directly relates to goods acquired for production or resale, aligning with the definition of direct spend.

According to the web source from SAP Concur: “Direct spend refers to the purchase of goods and services that are directly incorporated into a product being manufactured, such as raw materials… Indirect spend refers to expenses that support the operations of a business but are not directly included in the final product, such as utilities, office supplies, and facility maintenance.” Inventory, particularly raw materials or goods for resale, is a core component of direct spend, whereas supplies (e.g., office supplies) and repairs (e.g., equipment maintenance) typically fall under indirect spend. The option "Material" could also be associated with direct spend, but "Inventory" is the more precise term in this context, as it encompasses materials used in production or sale.

The IOFM Accounts Payable Specialist (APS) Certification Program includes the topic of “Invoices,” which covers invoice types and their purposes. While the IOFM study guide does not explicitly define “direct spend” in the provided sources, its focus on invoice processing and procurement processes implies familiarity with distinguishing direct and indirect spend. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process” supports the standard industry definition provided by SAP Concur.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program highlights the vendor master file’s role in providing data for various departments. ThePurchasingdepartment particularly benefits, as the vendor master file contains details like vendor performance, pricing, and spend history, enabling better supplier selection and negotiation.

Option A (Manufacturing): Manufacturing uses vendor data indirectly (e.g., for raw materials), but its primary focus is production, not vendor insights. Incorrect.

Option B (Purchasing): Correct. Purchasing relies on vendor master file data for supplier evaluation, contract terms, and spend analysis, directly benefiting from its insights.

Option C (Audit): Audit uses vendor data for compliance checks, but its role is verification, not strategic use of vendor insights. Less directly benefited than Purchasing.

Option D (Mailroom): The mailroom handles physical documents but does not use vendor master file insights for operational decisions. Incorrect.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “The vendor master file provides critical insights for Purchasing, enabling spend analysis and supplier management.” The training video notes, “Purchasing benefits most from vendor master data, using it to optimize vendor relationships and costs.”

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program covers vendor setup guidelines, which ensure consistency, accuracy, and compliance when adding new vendors. Guidelines typically include validating requester authority, standardizing data entry, and checking for duplicates.Whether the vendor outsources its order fulfillment processis a procurement or operational concern, not typically part of VMF setup guidelines.

Option A (Validating that the person who requested the new vendor is authorized to doso): Included, to ensure only authorized personnel initiate vendor setups, reducing fraud risk.

Option B (Whether or not the vendor outsources its order fulfillment process): Not typically included, as this relates to vendor operations, not VMF data or setup compliance. Correct answer.

Option C (The conventions for the way letters and abbreviations must be entered): Included, to ensure consistent data formatting (e.g., “Inc.” vs. “Incorporated”) for accurate reporting.

Option D (Verification that the vendor is not already in the system): Included, to prevent duplicate vendor records, which can lead to errors like double payments.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “Vendor setup guidelines include verifying requester authority, standardizing data entry, and checking for duplicates, but operational details like outsourcing fulfillment are handled by Procurement.” The training video notes, “Setup guidelines focus on data integrity and compliance, not vendor business processes like fulfillment.”

ThePaymentstopic in the APS Certification Program covers best practices for handling rush payments, which require expedited processing while maintaining security and compliance. Acceptable practices include allowing vendors to pick up payments (with proper controls) and prioritizing electronic payments for speed and security.Mailing the paymentis generally not suitable for rush payments due to delivery delays.

Item I (Allow the payment to be picked up by the vendor): Acceptable, provided strict controls (e.g., ID verification) are in place to ensure the correct recipient collects the payment.

Item II (Insist on making the payment electronically): Acceptable and preferred, as electronic payments (e.g., ACH, wire transfers) are fast, secure, and trackable, ideal for rush scenarios.

Item III (Mail the payment): Not acceptable for rush payments, as mailing introduces delays (e.g., 2–5 days), undermining the urgency.

Option A (II and III only): Incorrect, as Item III is not suitable for rush payments.

Option B (I, II, and III): Incorrect, as Item III is not suitable.

Option C (I and II only): Correct, as Items I and II are acceptable rush payment practices.

Option D (I and III only): Incorrect, as Item III is not suitable.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underPaymentsstates, “For rush payments, electronic payments are preferred for speed and security, and vendor pickup is acceptable with controls, but mailing is not suitable due to delays.” The training video notes, “Rush payments should leverage ACH or wire transfers, or controlled pickup, avoiding mail to meet urgent deadlines.”

TheInternal Controlstopic in the APS Certification Program highlights the importance of a sound records management plan for AP processes, particularly for compliance, security, and financialanalysis. A records management plan ensures that documents (e.g., invoices, vendor data) are organized, secure, and accessible, supporting legal protection, information security, and expenditure analysis.

Item I (To afford some protection against lawsuits): A records management plan ensures documentation is available to defend against legal claims, such as vendor disputes or audits, providing evidence of compliance. This is a valid reason.

Item II (To safeguard vital information): Records management protects sensitive data (e.g., vendor TINs, payment details) from loss or unauthorized access, ensuring confidentiality and compliance. This is a valid reason.

Item III (To analyze and manage expenditures): Records management enables AP to track and analyze spending patterns, supporting budgeting and cost control. This is a valid reason.

Option A (III only): Incorrect, as Items I and II are also valid reasons.

Option B (I and II only): Incorrect, as Item III is also a valid reason.

Option C (I, II, and III): Correct, as all three items are reasons for a sound records management plan.

Option D (I only): Incorrect, as Items II and III are also valid reasons.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underInternal Controlsstates, “A sound records management plan protects against lawsuits by maintaining auditable records, safeguards vital information like vendor data, and enables expenditure analysis for cost management.” The training video discusses records management as a critical control, citing its role in legal compliance, data security, and financial oversight.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the IOFM APS Certification Program emphasizes the importance of maintaining an audit trail for changes to the vendor master file (VMF) to ensure transparency, accountability, and fraud prevention. An effective audit trail should recordwho requested the change(to verify authorization),who actually made the change(to track accountability), andthe date the change was made(to establish a timeline), ensuring a complete record for compliance and audits.

Item I (Who requested the change): Essential to verify that the request came from an authorized individual, supporting internal controls and fraud prevention.

Item II (Who actually made the change): Critical to track the individual who modified the VMF, ensuring accountability and traceability.

Item III (The date the change was made): Necessary to document when the change occurred, aiding in audits and fraud investigations.

Option A (I, II, and III): Correct, as all three items are essential components of a VMF audit trail.

Option B (I and II only): Incorrect, as Item III (date) is also essential.

Option C (II and III only): Incorrect, as Item I (requester) is also essential.

Option D (I and III only): Incorrect, as Item II (changer) is also essential.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “An audit trail for VMF changes must include who requested the change, who made the change, and the date of the change to ensure transparency and compliance.” The training video reinforces, “Recording the requester, the person making the change, and the date in the VMF audit trail is critical for fraud prevention and audit readiness.”

Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) is a payment process that eliminates the need for a supplier invoice by triggering payments based on the purchase order (PO) and receiving documents (e.g., goods received note or delivery receipt). The PO establishes the agreed-upon terms, quantities, and prices, while the receipt confirms the actual delivery of goods or services. This allows payments to be processed without an invoice, streamlining the accounts payable process.

The web source from Esker states: “Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) is a procedure for paying suppliers without requiring a paper invoice from the supplier… Payments are triggered by the receipt of goods or services against a purchase order.” The Corcentric source further clarifies: “ERS requires only the purchase order and receiving documents to initiate payment, eliminating the need for an invoice.” This directly supports Option B (PO and Receipt), as these are the two critical documents for ERS. Options A, C, and D are incorrect because they include the invoice, which is not required in ERS.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including ERS as an efficient payment method. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices for each phase of the payment process” aligns with the industry standard that ERS relies on the PO and receipt.

Rush checks, issued outside the regular check run schedule, increase processing costs and disrupt workflows. Effective strategies to minimize rush check requests include distributing the check run schedule with clear cut-off dates and times to encourage timely submissions (Option I) and charging a rush check processing fee to deter unnecessary requests (Option II). Publishing the names of frequent requestors (Option III) is not a professional or recommended practice, as it may create workplace tension without addressing the root cause.

The web source from SAP Concur notes: “To reduce rush checks, organizations can communicate payment schedules clearly and impose fees for expedited processing to incentivize adherence to regular check runs.” This supports Options I and II. Option III is not mentioned in industry best practices and is considered inappropriate.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including strategies to optimize payment processes. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with proactive measures like scheduling communication and fee structures to control rush checks.

The current thinking on maintaining a petty cash fund is that it ispractically obsolete and should be eliminated, if possible, due to the availability of more efficient and secure alternatives, such as payment cards or electronic reimbursements. Petty cash funds are prone to mismanagement, theft, and lack of oversight, and modern AP practices favor digital solutions for small transactions.

The web source from SAP Concur states: “Petty cash funds are increasingly considered obsolete, as payment cards and electronic reimbursements offer more secure and trackable alternatives for small transactions.” This directly supports Option A. The other options are incorrect:

Option B: Requiring three individuals to sign off is excessive and not a standard practice.

Option C: Petty cash is not considered a best practice, even in service or consulting businesses.

Option D: Petty cash is typically managed by AP or administrative staff, not treasury executives.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including best practices for managing small transactions. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the trend toward eliminating petty cash in favor of modern payment methods.

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are integrated software platforms that link various business functions—such as accounting, procurement, accounts payable, inventory, and human resources—through a centralized database, enabling real-time data flow and streamlined operations. ERP systems enhance efficiency by providing a unified view of business processes, but they are not primarily for tracking continuous improvement (Option A), fraud detection (Option B), or cryptocurrency payments (Option D).

The web source from NetSuite states: “ERP systems integrate business functions, such as finance, procurement, and HR, with real-time data flow to improve efficiency and decision-making.” This directly supports Option C, emphasizing the role of ERP in linking business functions with real-time data.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Technology and Automation,” including the role of ERP systems in accounts payable processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the definition of ERP systems as integrative platforms for real-time data management.

Data integrity refers to the assurance that data remains accurate, complete, and unaltered throughout its lifecycle, whether during storage, processing, or transmission. It ensures that data is free from unauthorized modifications or corruption. While testing for accuracy (Option D) is related, data integrity specifically focuses on preventing unauthorized changes (Option A). A digital signature (Option B) or encryption (Option C) are security measures that may support data integrity but do not define it.

The web source from Corcentric states: “Data integrity means that data remains unaltered and consistent, ensuring it is free from unauthorized modifications or errors.” This directly supports Option A.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including data security and integrity in AP processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with the definition of data integrity as preventing unauthorized alterations.

Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) enables the automated exchange of business documents, such as invoices and purchase orders, between trading partners. While EDI offers efficiency, its adoption by small and medium-sized companies is limited primarily due tocostly technology, including high implementation and maintenance costs for hardware, software, and integration. Government regulations (Option A), staff resistance (Option B), and security concerns (Option D) may pose challenges, but the primary barrier is cost.

The web source from SAP Concur states: “EDI adoption is hindered for small and medium-sized businesses due to the high costs of implementing and maintaining EDI systems, including software and integration expenses.” This directly supports Option C as the primary reason for limited EDI use.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Technology and Automation,” including technologies like EDI. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” acknowledges barriers to technology adoption, with cost being a significant factor for smaller organizations.

When auditing T&E expense reports, a key red flag isamounts just below the approval threshold, as employees may intentionally submit expenses slightly under the limit to avoid additional scrutiny or approval, potentially masking fraudulent or non-compliant claims. This practice, known as “threshold manipulation,” requires close attention during audits.

The web source from Tipalti states: “During T&E audits, pay particular attention to expenses just below the approval threshold, as employees may manipulate amounts to bypass additional review, indicating potential fraud.” This directly supports Option C. The other options are less critical:

Restaurant receipts with client names (A)may be useful for substantiation but are not a primary audit concern.

Highly itemized receipt details (B)are desirable for clarity, not a red flag.

Airfare with hotel costs (D)is a common combination and not inherently suspicious.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Travel and Entertainment (T&E),” including auditing techniques for expense reports. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with scrutinizing amounts just below approval thresholds to detect potential fraud.

The Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (Check 21), passed in 2003, enables banks to process checks electronically by allowing check truncation, where a physical check can be converted into a digital image (substitute check) at any point in the clearing process. This expedites check clearing and reduces costs associated with physical check handling. The law was enacted after September 11, 2001, partly in response to disruptions in check processing caused by grounded air transport post-9/11.

The web source from Tipalti states: “Check 21, passed in 2003, allows check truncation by converting checks into electronic images, speeding up the clearing process.” The other options areincorrect:

The Patriot Act (B)focuses on anti-terrorism and money laundering.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley (C)addresses financial privacy and was passed in 1999.

Sarbanes-Oxley (D)deals with corporate governance and financial reporting, passed in 2002.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Tax and Regulatory Compliance,” including regulations affecting payment processes. The curriculum’s emphasis on “peer-tested best practices” includes understanding laws like Check 21 that impact check processing.

Procurement card (P-card) statements provide purchase data at different levels of detail. Level 3 detail includes comprehensive transaction information, such as itemized descriptions, quantities, unit prices, and merchant category codes, making it suitable for conducting spend analysis to track spending patterns and optimize procurement strategies. Level 1 provides basic data (e.g., merchant name, amount), and Level 2 includes additional data (e.g., tax amounts), but neither is sufficient for detailed analysis. Level 4 is not a standard term in P-card reporting.

The web source from Corcentric explains: “Level 3 data on P-card statements includes detailed transaction information, such as line-item details and quantities, enabling organizations to perform robust spend analysis.” This confirms that Level 3 detail (Option C) is necessary for spend analysis.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Payments,” including P-card program management and reporting. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” supports the use of Level 3 data for effective spend analysis in P-card programs.

TheVendor Master Filetopic in the APS Certification Program highlights vendor validation to prevent fraud, including checking addresses for red flags. A significant red flag is when avendor’s address matches one of the organization’s own locations, as this may indicate insider fraud (e.g., an employee creating a fake vendor using a company address).

Option A (The vendor has the same address as one of the organization’s own locations): Correct. This is a red flag, as it suggests potential fraud, such as an employee setting up a fictitious vendor at a company site.

Option B (The vendor does not appear to use a post office box): Incorrect. Not using a P.O. box is not inherently suspicious; many legitimate vendors use physical addresses.

Option C (The vendor’s warehouse and its accounts receivable address are different): Incorrect. Different addresses for operational and financial functions are common and not a red flag.

Option D (The vendor is located in an unincorporated area): Incorrect. Location in an unincorporated area is not inherently suspicious and does not indicate fraud.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underVendor Master Filestates, “A red flag during vendor address checks is when the vendor’s address matches an organization’s own location, indicating potential insider fraud.” The training video notes, “Always verify vendor addresses against company locations to detect fraudulent setups.”

Assigning a user name and password is a method ofdata authentication, which verifies the identity of users accessing systems or data to ensure only authorized individuals can perform actions. This is a fundamental security control in accounts payable to protect sensitive financial information. Optical character recognition (Option A) is used for extracting data from documents, robotic process automation (Option B) automates repetitive tasks, and security lockdown (Option D) refers to broader measures like restricting system access during a breach, not specifically user authentication.

The web source from Esker states: “Data authentication, such as assigning user names and passwords, ensures that only authorized personnel can access sensitive AP systems and data.” This directly supports Option C.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” including security measures like authentication to protect AP processes. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with using user names and passwords as a standard authentication method.

Potential red flags for T&E expenses that fall outside of company policy includecharges for airline upgrades(Option I), which may indicate unauthorized luxury spending, andweekend stays(Option III), which could suggest personal travel disguised as business-related. These expenses often require additional scrutiny to ensure compliance with T&E policies.Cab fares(Option II) are typically routine and not inherently a red flag unless excessive or unsupported, making them less likely to be a policy violation compared to upgrades or weekend stays.

The web source from SAP Concur states: “Red flags in T&E expenses include charges for airline upgrades, which may violate policy on allowable travel classes, and weekend stays, which could indicate personal travel.” This supports Options I and III. Cab fares are noted as common expenses that require receipts but are not typically flagged unless unusual, per the Esker source: “Routine expenses like cab fares are less likely to be red flags compared to upgrades or extended stays.”

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Travel and Entertainment (T&E),” emphasizing fraud detection and policy compliance. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with identifying airline upgrades and weekend stays as potential red flags.

Data security in accounts payable requires a comprehensive approach involvinghardware(Option I, e.g., secure servers and firewalls),software(Option II, e.g., encryption tools and authentication systems), andhuman resources(Option III, e.g., employee training on security protocols and access management). All three components are essential to protect sensitive financial data from breaches and unauthorized access.

The web source from Corcentric states: “Effective data security in AP combines hardware, such as secure servers, software, like encryption and access controls, and human resources, through training and policy enforcement, to safeguard sensitive information.” This supports Option D, as all three elements are integral to data security.

The IOFM APS Certification Program covers “Internal Controls,” emphasizing a multi-faceted approach to data security. The curriculum’s focus on “peer-tested best practices” aligns with using hardware, software, and human resources to ensure robust security.

TheTax and Regulatory Compliancetopic in the APS Certification Program covers IRS guidelines for determining independent contractor status, critical for 1099 reporting and avoiding worker misclassification. The IRS uses three categories:Behavioral Control(degree of controlover work results),Financial Control(control over finances, e.g., payment terms, investment in tools), andType of Relationship(contract terms, permanency). Thejob titleassigned is not a factor, as status depends on actual work arrangements, not labels.

Option A (The degree of control the employer exercises over the worker’s work results): Part of Behavioral Control, assessing how much the employer directs the worker’s tasks. This is a valid category.

Option B (The amount of control the employer has over the worker’s finances): Part of Financial Control, evaluating payment methods, expense reimbursement, and worker investment. This is a valid category.

Option C (The job title assigned to the worker): Not a factor. The IRS focuses on the nature of the work relationship, not the title (e.g., “contractor” vs. “employee”). Correct answer.

Option D (The type of relationship established between the parties): Part of Type of Relationship, considering contracts, benefits, and permanency. This is a valid category.

Reference to IOFM APS Documents: The APS e-textbook underTax and Regulatory Compliancestates, “IRS independent contractor status is determined by Behavioral Control, Financial Control, and Type of Relationship, not by job titles, which are irrelevant to actual work arrangements.” The training video explains, “Job titles don’t determine contractor status; the IRS looks at control and relationship factors.”