Browse
Search
2006 S Finance - Audit Contract for the June 30, 2006 Fiscal Year
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Contracts and Agreements
>
General Contracts and Agreements
>
2000's
>
2006
>
2006 S Finance - Audit Contract for the June 30, 2006 Fiscal Year
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/4/2011 9:16:13 AM
Creation date
8/26/2010 2:26:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/16/2006
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Contract
Agenda Item
5i
Document Relationships
Agenda - 05-16-2006-5i
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2000's\2006\Agenda - 05-16-2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~~ GU~riCinel''3O11 LLP <br />Certified Public ArcountanL 6 Can~ulianb <br />October 21, 2004 <br />To the Partners of <br />Cherry Bekaert & Holland L.L.P. <br />and the Center for Public Company Audit Finns Peer Review Committee <br />F;ECEIVED <br />MAY 2 ~ 2006 <br />O.AL GOVERNMENT <br />~;OMMISSIOP! <br />We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of <br />Cherry Bekaert & Holland L.L.P. (the firm) applicable to non-Sec issuers in effect for the year <br />ended April 30, 2004 and have issued our report thereon dated October 21, 2004. The matters <br />described below were not considered to be of sufficient significance to affect the opinion <br />expressed in that report, which should be read in conjunction with this letter. <br />Engagement Performance <br />Finding -The firm's quality control policies and procedures require the completion of a <br />financial statement disclosure checklist for its full disclosure engagements. However, on several <br />engagements reviewed we noted inappropriate answers on the Checklists in the areas of <br />investments and debt disclosures. As a result, several financial statements did not disclose all the <br />disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles for these two items. None of <br />the missing disclosures were of such significance to cause the financial statements to be <br />misleading. <br />Recommendation -The .firm should carefully review the proper use of i#s financial statement <br />disclosure checklist as part of the final financial statement review. In addition, a training session <br />should be held to review the questions on the checklist with regard to investments and debt <br />disclosures and establish procedures for resolving issues when questions about such disclosures <br />arise. <br />Finding -The firn~'s audit programs outline steps for performing and documenting audit <br />procedures far determining fair value of investments, reliance on SAS 70 Type II letters, <br />determining reporting entities and component units, and reviewing budgetary versus actual <br />information. However, our review disciosed several instances where the fum's working papers <br />did not include documentation for these areas. Through discussion with engagement personnel, <br />we were able to satisfy ourselves that the procedures were performed but not adequately <br />documented. <br />lntrrioclien Durinert Purl{ <br />3'70 /xterluelen Burrlrtnrd, Suite 3OU <br />!l roan Feld, Colur~dn 8003! <br />rrl: 3Q3A6C.SB2? <br />faa:303.4GG.9797 ~~ a <br />www.cliftoncpa.com 013 ices in i-I stares :rod \~r:rshing:un, DC ® , Intcrn~tional <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.