Low-priority jobs typically involve non-critical processes or tasks that do not immediately impact business operations. The best approach to handling such jobs is to schedule them subject to resource availability. This ensures that high-priority tasks can access resources when needed without being affected by the execution of low-priority tasks.
Avoiding Low-Priority Jobs (Option A)is not feasible because even low-priority tasks may be necessary for maintenance or support activities.
Including Major Functions in Low-Priority Jobs (Option B)contradicts the classification of " low-priority " because major functions are usually critical.
Allocating Optimal Resources to Low-Priority Jobs (Option C)is inefficient as resources should primarily be allocated to high-priority tasks.
Scheduling based on resource availability optimizes the use of resources, avoids unnecessary delays in high- priority activities, and ensures that low-priority tasks are executed without disrupting overall operations. This aligns with best practices in IT resource management and scheduling.
Reference:ISACA CISA Review Manual, Job Practice Area 3: Information Systems Operations and Business Resilience.

The primary factor to determine system criticality is the maximum allowable downtime (MAD), which is the maximum period of time that a system can be unavailable before causing significant damage or risk to the organization. TheMAD reflects the business impact and the recovery requirements of the system, and it can be used to prioritize the systems and allocate the resources for disaster recovery planning. The other options are not as important as the MAD, and they may vary depending on the system characteristics and the recovery strategy. The recovery point objective (RPO) is the maximum amount of data loss that is acceptable for a system. The mean time to restore (MTTR) is the average time required to restore a system after a failure. The key performance indicators (KPIs) are metrics that measure the performance and effectiveness of a system. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, page 468-469.

The audit charter is the document that defines the purpose, authority and responsibility of the IS audit function. It provides IS audit professionals with the best source of direction for performing audit functions, as it establishes the scope, objectives, reporting lines, independence, accountability and resources of the IS audit function. The IT steering committee is a governance body that oversees the strategic alignment, prioritization and direction of IT initiatives, but it does not provide specific guidance for IS audit functions. The information security policy is a document that defines the rules and principles for protecting information assets in the organization, but it does not cover all aspects of IS audit functions. Audit best practices are general guidelines and recommendations for conducting effective and efficient audits, but they are not binding or authoritative sources of direction for IS audit functions. References: CISA Review Manual (Digital Version) 1, Chapter 1: Information Systems Auditing Process, Section 1.1: Audit Charter.

Audit planning is the process of developing an overall strategy and approach for conducting an audit. Audit planning involves identifying the objectives, scope, criteria, and methodology of the audit, as well as the resources, schedule, and reporting requirements. Audit planning also involves performing a risk assessment to identify and prioritize the areas of highest risk and significance for the audit1.
Risk assessment is a systematic process of evaluating the potential risks that may be involved in a projected activity or undertaking. Risk assessment involves identifying the sources and causes of risk, analyzing the likelihood and impact of risk, and determining the level of risk and the appropriate response2.
During audit planning, the IS audit manager is considering whether to budget for audits of entities regarded by the business as having low risk. The best course of action in this situation is C. Validate the low-risk entity ratings and apply professional judgment.
This is because validating the low-risk entity ratings can help to ensure that the risk assessment is accurate, reliable, and consistent with the business objectives and expectations. Validating the low-risk entity ratings can also help to identify any changes or developments that may affect the risk profile of the entities since the last assessment. Applying professional judgment can help to determine whether the low-risk entities should be included or excluded from the audit plan, based on factors such as materiality, relevance, significance, and assurance needs3.