A load balancer is a tool or application that distributes incoming network traffic among multiple servers in a server farm, so that no server is overwhelmed and the performance of the system is optimized1. A load balancer can help the agency to handle the large influx of traffic to a regional office by balancing the workload among the available servers and preventing service disruptions. A load balancer can also provide high availability and fault tolerance by rerouting traffic to online servers if a server becomes unavailable2.
A virtual firewall is a software-based firewall that protects a virtual network or environment from unauthorized access and malicious attacks. A virtual firewall can enhance the security of the agency's network, but it does not improve the performance of its servers.
A proxy server is an intermediary server that acts as a gateway between the client and the destination server, hiding the client's IP address and providing caching and filtering functions. A proxy server can improve the security and privacy of the agency's network, but it does not improve the performance of its servers.
A virtual private network (VPN) is a secure connection between two or more devices over a public network, such as the internet. A VPN can encrypt and protect the data transmitted over the network, but it does not improve the performance of the agency's servers.

The necessary condition for effective risk management in IT governance is that risk evaluation is embedded in management processes. Risk evaluation is the process of comparing the results of risk analysis with risk criteria to determine whether the risk and/or its magnitude is acceptable or tolerable. Risk evaluation should be integrated into the management processes of planning, implementing, monitoring, and reviewing the IT activities and resources. This will ensure that risk management is aligned with the business objectives, strategies, and values, and that risk responses are timely, appropriate, and effective. References:
* CISA Review Manual (Digital Version)
* CISA Questions, Answers & Explanations Database

Function point analysis (FPA) is the best methodology to use for estimating the complexity of developing a large business application. FPA is a technique that measures the functionality of a software system based on the user requirements and the business processes that the system supports. FPA assigns a numerical value to each function or feature of the system, based on its type, complexity, and relative size. The total number of function points represents the size and complexity of the system, which can be used to estimate the development effort, cost, and time.
FPA has several advantages over other estimation methods, such as:
* It is independent of the technology, programming language, or development methodology used for the system. Therefore, it can be applied consistently across different platforms and environments.
* It is based on the user perspective and the business value of the system, rather than the technical details or implementation aspects. Therefore, it can be performed early in the project life cycle, before the design or coding phases.
* It is objective and standardized, as it follows a set of rules and guidelines defined by the International Function Point Users Group (IFPUG). Therefore, it can reduce ambiguity and improve accuracy and reliability of the estimates.
* It is adaptable and scalable, as it can handle changes in the user requirements or the system scope.
Therefore, it can support agile and iterative development approaches.
References:
* 1: Function Point Analysis - Introduction and Fundamentals
* 2: Software Engineering | Functional Point (FP) Analysis

The primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates is that it establishes accountability for the action plans. Accountability means that the individuals or groups who are responsible for implementing the action plans are clearly identified and held liable for their completion within the specified time frame. Accountability also implies that the action plans are monitored and evaluated to ensure that they are effective and efficient in addressing the audit findings and mitigating the associated risks1. Accountability helps to ensure that the audit recommendations are taken seriously and implemented properly, and that the audit value is realized by the organization2. The other options are less relevant or incorrect because:
* A. It facilitates easier audit follow-up is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a secondary or indirect benefit. Audit follow-up is the process of verifying whether the action plans have been implemented and whether they have resolved the audit findings3. While having clear action plans, owners, and target dates may facilitate easier audit follow-up by providing a basis for tracking and reporting the progress and status of the action plans, it does not necessarily guarantee that the action plans will be implemented or effective.
* B. It enforces action plan consensus between auditors and auditees is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of a prerequisite or condition for such an approach. Action plan consensus means that the auditors and auditees agree on the audit findings and recommendations, and on the action plans to address them4. While having action plan consensus may enhance the credibility and acceptance of the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective.
* D. It helps to ensure factual accuracy of findings is not the primary benefit of an audit approach that requires reported findings to be issued together with related action plans, owners, and target dates, as it is more of an outcome or result of such an approach. Factual accuracy of findings means that the audit findings are based on sufficient, reliable, relevant, and useful evidence5. While having factual accuracy of findings may increase the confidence and trust in the audit approach, it does not necessarily ensure that the action plans will be implemented or effective. References: Accountability - ISACA, Audit Value - ISACA, Audit Follow-up - ISACA, Action Plan Consensus - ISACA, Factual Accuracy of Findings - ISACA

A post-implementation review (PIR) is a process to evaluate whether the objectives of the project were met, determine how effectively this was achieved, learn lessons for the future, and ensure that the organisation gets the most benefit from the implementation of projects1. A PIR is an important tool for assessing the success and value of a project, as well as identifying the areas for improvement and best practices for future projects.
One of the key elements of a PIR is to measure the benefits of the project against the expected outcomes and benefits that were defined at the beginning of the project. Measurable benefits are the quantifiable and verifiable results or outcomes that the project delivers to the organisation or its stakeholders, such as increased revenue, reduced costs, improved quality, enhanced customer satisfaction, or compliance with regulations2.
Measurable benefits should be aligned with the organisation's strategy, vision, and goals, and should be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound).
The finding that measurable benefits were not defined is of greatest significance among the four findings, because it implies that:
* The project did not have a clear and agreed-upon purpose, scope, objectives, and deliverables
* The project did not have a valid and realistic business case or justification for its initiation and implementation
* The project did not have a robust and effective monitoring and evaluation mechanism to track its progress, performance, and impact
* The project did not have a reliable and transparent way to demonstrate its value proposition and return on investment to the organisation or its stakeholders
* The project did not have a meaningful and actionable way to learn from its achievements and challenges, and to improve its processes and practices Therefore, an IS auditor should recommend that measurable benefits are defined for any project before its implementation, and that they are reviewed and reported regularly during and after the project's completion.
The other possible findings are:
* A lessons-learned session was never conducted: This is a significant finding, but not as significant as the lack of measurable benefits. A lessons-learned session is a process of capturing and documenting the knowledge, experience, and feedback gained from a project, both positive and negative. A lessons- learned session helps to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the project management process, as well as the best practices and lessons for future projects. A lessons-learned session should be conducted at the end of each project phase or milestone, as well as at the end of the project. However, even without a formal lessons-learned session, some learning may still occur informally or implicitly among the project team members or stakeholders.
* The projects 10% budget overrun was not reported to senior management: This is a significant finding, but not as significant as the lack of measurable benefits. A budget overrun is a situation where the actual cost of a project exceeds its planned or estimated cost. A budget overrun may indicate poor planning, estimation, or control of the project resources, or unexpected changes or risks that occurred during the project implementation. A budget overrun should be reported to senior management as soon as possible, along with the reasons for it and the corrective actions taken or proposed. However, a budget overrun may not necessarily affect the quality or value of the project deliverables or outcomes if they are still within acceptable standards or expectations.
* Monthly dashboards did not always contain deliverables: This is a significant finding, but not as significant as the lack of measurable benefits. A dashboard is a visual tool that displays key performance indicators (KPIs) or metrics related to a project's progress, status, or results. A dashboard helps to monitor and communicate the performance of a project to various stakeholders in a concise and clear manner. A dashboard should include deliverables as one of its components, along with other elements such as schedule, budget, quality, risks, issues, or benefits. However, even without deliverables in monthly dashboards, some information about them may still be available from other sources such as reports or documents.
References: 1: The role & importance of the Post Implementation Review 2: What is Post-Implementation Review in Project Management?