Corrective action plan
The recipient’s written response to each audit finding: what will change, who owns it, and by when. It is required for every finding, it is submitted with the audit, and it is what a repeat finding is judged against.
Part of the GrantTrove grant funding glossary — one entry for every field the catalogue stores.
Also called CAP · Management response
In detail
A plan that restates the finding and promises to be more careful is the version that produces a repeat finding next year. Naming a person and a date is the difference between a plan and an acknowledgement.
Agencies read them, and they are part of what a later risk assessment considers. So is whether last year’s plan was actually carried out.
Against the finding itself
The finding is the auditor’s. The plan is the recipient’s. They appear together in the same report and they are written by different parties with different obligations, which is why a plan that merely agrees with the finding has not done its job. Neither is a field on any record here.
How GrantTrove stores it
- We publish no compliance templates. The catalogue holds opportunities and the funders that publish them.
- Our equivalent discipline is internal and visible: a record that fails verification is not quietly patched, and the methodology page states how a failed check is handled before a record’s status changes.
Common questions
Who writes the corrective action plan?
The recipient’s management, not the auditor.
Does anyone read it?
The awarding agency, and the next auditor.
What makes a weak plan?
No named owner and no date. Those are what a repeat finding is measured against.