Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audit And Procurement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Joint finance committee presses review of pre-audit costs and forensic findings
Summary
Members said a recent forensic audit uncovered problems that annual audits missed and questioned the county’s reliance on a pre-auditor and the structure and cost of audit contracts; the committee instructed staff to benchmark nearby counties and bring options to the board.
The Joint Finance Committee of Northumberland County on May 23 pressed staff to re-examine audit procurement and pre-audit practices after a forensic audit revealed accounting and control weaknesses that prior annual audits did not flag. Committee members said the county is paying pre-audit and audit firms tens of thousands of dollars and should evaluate whether both contracts are still necessary.
Committee members described a pattern in which the county’s pre-auditor has billed beyond contracted hour blocks in recent years, leaving the finance office to spend an estimated 50–60% of staff time supporting pre-audit work during audit season. Members said that repeated overages and apparent duplication between the pre-audit and audit work warrant a review of scope and contracting practices.
"We probably need another set of eyes," one member said, calling for benchmarking against comparable Northern Neck counties to identify reasonable contract models. Staff estimated pre-audit work at roughly $30,000–$40,000 and the full audit around $50,000 or higher when extra work is necessary; members said those figures have risen and that contract language placing time-and-material exposure on the county has contributed to cost escalation.
The committee also stressed that some longstanding management-letter issues were not escalated by prior auditors and pointed to unexplained ledger entries and a set of management findings that, once aggregated, indicated systemic control breakdowns. Members discussed whether the county still needs a pre-auditor now that some ledger practices and digital systems are in place, or whether temporary staff or a narrower scope would be more cost-effective.
Next steps include staff research into neighboring counties’ audit contracts and preparing options for the Board of Supervisors to consider before the FY27 procurement cycle. The committee also flagged that corrective-action work tied to the forensic audit will be presented in July and said the outcome should inform any change in audit approach.
The committee adjourned with direction for staff to compile benchmarking data and contract alternatives for board consideration.
