|
|
Susan Montee, CPA |
YELLOW SHEET |
Report No. 2007-22
May 2007
IMPORTANT: The Missouri State Auditor is required by state law to conduct audits once every four years in counties, such as Iron, that do not have a county auditor. In addition to a financial audit of county funds, the State Auditor's statutory audit covers additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials, as required by the Missouri Constitution.
The county does not have adequate procedures in place to track federal awards for the preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA), and as a result, the county's SEFA contained several errors and omissions. Expenditures were understated by $382,901 and $64,607 for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
The county�s documentation regarding procurement decisions was not always sufficient or retained. Some expenditures did not appear to be allowable uses of restricted county funds. In addition, evidence of receipt of goods or services was not always required prior to approving expenditures.
The County Commission�s procedures for holding and documenting closed meetings need improvement. Open session minutes did not always indicate that the meeting was being closed or provide the specific reason for closing the meeting. Votes or final actions taken by the commission during closed meetings were not always documented in the open meeting minutes. Finally, minutes were not available for all closed meetings.
Property tax system procedures and controls are not sufficient. The County Clerk does not prepare or verify the tax books or maintain an adequate account book with the County Collector, and neither the County Clerk nor the County Commission adequately review the County Collector's annual settlements.
Errors were noted with the county�s property tax rollback calculations for sales tax revenues. In addition, while the County Commission was aware of excess property tax collections when making the 2006 calculations, reasons for not further reducing the property tax levy were not documented. However, due to distribution errors made by the state, it is likely the county's rollback for 2006 was sufficient.
The county does not have adequate written policies and effective monitoring procedures regarding county vehicle usage. Also, county vehicles are used for commuting by several road and bridge employees and this benefit is not recorded on the employees� W-2 forms.
Budgets were not prepared for several county funds and financial information related to some projects was not presented in the county�s overall budget document. Also, the county's monitoring procedures did not prevent actual disbursements from exceeding budgeted amounts for several funds.
The County Collector does not perform month-end reconciliation procedures to ensure the bank account balances are in agreement with partial pay records and other identified liabilities. Partial pay ledgers and reconciliation procedures need improvement.
Circuit Court procedures to monitor and collect accrued costs due the court need improvement, and there may be costs that have not been properly billed to the state. Manual receipt slips are not properly accounted for and the court maintains old bank accounts containing unidentified or unclaimed monies.
Accounting duties are not adequately segregated in the Ex Officio Recorder of Deeds� office and no independent reviews of accounting records are performed.
Accounting duties are not adequately segregated in the Associate Circuit Court and no independent reviews of accounting records are performed. Manual receipt slips are not properly accounted for. In addition, information for some cases was not properly updated to reflect judicial orders.
In the Prosecuting Attorney�s office some receipt records could not be located and month-end reconciliation procedures are not performed to ensure that the bank account balance is sufficient to cover the related liabilities.
Controls and procedures of the Sheriff�s office need improvement. Receipt records do not contain adequate details and discrepancies were noted for several 2005 deposits. Proper month-end reconciliations and disbursements were not performed for March through September 2005. Bond forms are not adequately accounted for. In addition, records and procedures related to board of prisoner billings to other political subdivisions need improvement to ensure all outstanding amounts are received. Subsequent to September 2005, the Sheriff retained a bookkeeper and it appears that several key controls were implemented.
Health Center budgets presented some incorrect information. Also, the Health Center had no banking service agreements and collateral securities pledged were not sufficient.
Weaknesses with computer system controls, including passwords not being used and backup procedures not being performed, were identified in some county offices.
