The convention for reporting internal audit findings (non-conformity/non-conformance) is (in general terms) the following: -
The source of the audit criteria (i.e. the quality manual, procedure # etc.)
The audit criteria requirement (i.e the statement of requirement from the above).
The source of the audit evidence (where the non-conformance was observed).
The audit evidence (what indicated the non-conformance)
Having said all that, does anyone use a different approach? - I’m not looking for a slight variation on the same theme - but an audit report which has a different method of conveying audit issues.