Risk treatment is the process of selecting and implementing the appropriate risk response strategy and actions to address the identified risks. Risk treatment can involve different strategies, such as avoiding, reducing, transferring, or accepting the risk. Risk owner is the person or group who has the authority and accountability to manage the risk and its response. Risk owner is accountable for risk treatment, as they are responsible for deciding, approving, and executing the risk treatment plan, and for monitoring and reporting the results and outcomes of the risk treatment. The other options are not accountable for risk treatment, as they have different roles or responsibilities in the risk management process:
* Enterprise risk management team is the group of risk managers and practitioners who support the enterprise-wide risk management program, and provide guidance and direction to the risk owners and stakeholders. Enterprise risk management team may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.
* Risk mitigation manager is the person who designs, implements, and monitors the risk mitigation actions or measures that reduce the likelihood or impact of the risk to an acceptable level, such as controls, policies, or procedures. Risk mitigation manager may advise or assist the risk owner in risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment.
* Business process owner is the stakeholder who is responsible for the business process that is supported by the IT system or application, such as the CRM system. Business process owner may be affected by or contribute to the risk, and may be involved in the risk treatment, but they are not accountable for risk treatment, unless they are also the risk owner. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, 7th Edition, Chapter 3, Section 3.1.1.1, pp. 95-96.

Conducting vulnerability scans is the best way for a risk practitioner to validate the effectiveness of a patching program. Vulnerability scans are automated tools that identify and report on the vulnerabilities in a system or network, such as missing patches, misconfigurations, or outdated software. Vulnerability scans can help the risk practitioner to verify that the patches have been applied correctly and consistently, and that there are no remaining or new vulnerabilities that need to be addressed. Conducting penetration testing, interviewing IT operations personnel, and reviewing change control board documentation are also useful methods to evaluate the patching program, but they are not as comprehensive, objective, or timely as vulnerability scans. References = Risk and Information Systems Control Study Manual, Chapter 2, Section 2.3.3, page 2-28.

A noncompliant control is a control that does not meet the requirements or standards of an audit, regulation, or policy. A noncompliant control can expose the organization to risks such as errors, fraud, or breaches.
When a noncompliant control is identified, the service provider and the client should work together to resolve the issue as soon as possible. However, sometimes the resolution may not be feasible or cost-effective, and the client may decide to accept the risk associated with the noncompliant control.
In this case, the service provider's most appropriate action would be to ask the client to document the formal risk acceptance for the provider. This means that the client should acknowledge the existence and consequences of the noncompliant control, and provide a written justification for accepting the risk. The risk acceptance document should also specify the roles and responsibilities of the service provider and the client, and the duration and conditions of the risk acceptance. The risk acceptance document should be signed by the client's senior management and the service provider's management, and kept as part of the audit evidence.
The other options are not appropriate actions for the service provider. Developing a risk remediation plan overriding the client's decision would be disrespectful and unprofessional, as it would ignore the client's authority and preference. Making a note for this item in the next audit explaining the situation would be insufficient and misleading, as it would imply that the issue is still unresolved and that the service provider is responsible for it. Insisting that the remediation occur for the benefit of other customers would be unreasonable and impractical, as it would disregard the client's business needs and constraints, and potentially harm the relationship between the service provider and the client. References =
* Risk Acceptance - Institute of Internal Auditors
* New Guidance on the Evaluation of Non-compliance with the Risk Assessment Standard and its Peer Review Impact - REVISED
* The Impact of Non-compliance: Understanding The Risks And Consequences

* Key risk indicators (KRIs) are metrics that provide information about the level of exposure to a specific risk or a group of risks.
* Reviewing KRIs is the most helpful way to determine the effectiveness of an organization's IT risk mitigation efforts. This means that the organization monitors and evaluates the actual results and outcomes of the risk responses, compares them with the risk appetite and tolerance of the organization, identifies any deviations or breaches that may require attention or action, and reports them to the appropriate parties for decision making or improvement actions.
* The other options are not the most helpful ways to determine the effectiveness of an organization's IT risk mitigation efforts. They are either secondary or not essential for risk management.
The references for this answer are:
* Risk IT Framework, page 15
* Information Technology & Security, page 9
* Risk Scenarios Starter Pack, page 7

Monitoring the average time to complete tasks and monthly reporting of the findings during the month-end close process aligns with the definition of a Key Performance Indicator (KPI).
* Understanding KPIs:
* Performance Measurement: KPIs are used to measure how effectively a company is achieving its key business objectives. Monitoring the average time to complete tasks during the month-end close process provides a performance metric.
* Tracking Efficiency: By reporting these findings monthly, management can track the efficiency and performance of the system load capabilities.
* Specific Measure:
* Task Completion Time: The average time to complete tasks is a specific, measurable indicator of performance. It helps in understanding how well the system handles load and identifies areas for improvement.
* Continuous Improvement: Regular monitoring and reporting encourage continuous improvement, which is a core aspect of using KPIs.
* References:
* According to ISACA's guidelines on performance measurement, KPIs are critical for tracking the efficiency and effectiveness of processes and systems. They provide tangible metrics that help in decision-making and performance improvement.