A supervisory examination is not litigation, and treating it as adversarial is usually counterproductive. It is an assessment of whether the institution understands and manages its own risks.
Before. Know the scope and the period. Assemble the requested materials completely and on time — incomplete or late production shapes the examiners’ view of the control environment before they have looked at anything substantive. Refresh policies so the written policy matches actual practice; a gap between the two is itself a finding.
Self-identify. Issues the institution has found, documented and is remediating are treated very differently from the same issues discovered by an examiner. A credible internal audit function and a tracked issues log are the single most valuable things to have.
During. One coordinator, one channel, consistent answers. Brief the staff who will be interviewed on the subject matter, not on what to say. Answer what is asked and correct anything given in error promptly and in writing.
After. Respond to findings with a plan that has owners, dates and evidence of completion — and then meet them. Repeat findings from a prior examination are the most damaging thing in a report, because they say the institution’s remediation cannot be relied on.