Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Forensic Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neosho County commissioners consult forensic auditors about bank reconciliations, next steps
Summary
Commissioners discussed hiring a forensic accounting team to review recent bank reconciliations and related records for the county treasurer and other offices. No hiring decision was made; the firm proposed a phased engagement and said work could be remote or on-site depending on scope.
Neosho County commissioners met Feb. 4 with a forensic accounting firm to discuss a possible review of bank reconciliations and other financial records covering recent years, especially 2023 and 2024.
The discussion centered on whether the county should ask an outside firm to investigate concerns raised after turnover in key elected offices. Commissioners said they wanted to understand if errors in bank reconciliations were due to sloppy accounting or to intentional misuse of funds and to identify a scope that would give answers without expending unnecessary county funds.
A forensic auditor identified in the meeting as Matt described how a forensic review differs from a standard financial audit. He said a typical approach is phased and flexible: start with the most recent year(s) that provide the most “bang for the buck,” use analytics to isolate high‑risk transactions, then expand the review if necessary. “A forensic audit ... is way more agile than, like, a financial audit,” Matt said, describing steps such as analysis of bank statements, payroll, vendor payments and imaging of computers and email if warranted.
Commissioners asked whether the firm would need an audit already completed to start work; Matt said auditors could begin by examining transactions and bank records without waiting for an external audit, and noted the firm could work remotely or come on-site for interviews and evidence collection as needed. He also discussed technology-driven methods — analytics dashboards, computer imaging and targeted email searches — that can reduce manual review time.
The commissioners raised specific items they want reviewed, including the county attorney diversion fund and records from several recently vacated elected offices. The firm recommended beginning with 2023 and 2024 records and expanding the timeframe only if the review found indicators that warranted deeper investigation.
No formal contract or vote to retain the firm was taken at the meeting. Commissioners agreed to ask the firm to draft an engagement letter outlining a proposed scope, steps and estimated fees for discrete phases of work. The county said it would prepare an organizational chart and compile a list of priority accounts and questions for the firm to use in preparing the engagement materials.
Next steps: the firm will provide a draft engagement letter and examples of the work plan; the commissioners will review that scope, refine priorities and then decide whether to proceed with an engagement.
