Agenda - 06-05-2001-9b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

30, 2002. The RFP was sent to the top four firms located in this area of the state most noted for the performance of governmental audits. The committee received responses from all four firms with fee quotes ranging from $57,500 to $71,500, exclusive of the charges for GASB 34. The charges for GASB 34 ranged from. a low of $4,500 to a high of $40,000,, depending an the assistance the County would require from the firm in the implementation phase. The committee chose to interview all four firms, requesting that each firm bring to the interview those individuals proposed to work on the County's audit. This step was extremely important in determining the quality of service and level of experience to be provided by each firm in the performance of the County's audit and the GASB 34 initiative. Evaluation criteria included, but were not limited to: • Experience levels of both the individuals and the firm with County audits; • Audits of Counties of comparable size and program type; • GASB 34 implementation and training experience; • Ability to provide services which are required by the county from time to time and may fall outside the audit process; and • Other factors, such as degree of automation, which would provide a more efficient means for producing the audit schedules and work papers, as well as the audit document. The Audit Committee agreed that the firm of Cherry, Bekaert & Holland would best meet the County's needs and is recommended for the following reasons: • Best overall experience with audits of County governments • The Firm's major focus overall is governmental accounting and other public finance issues • This firm demonstrated extensive knowledge regarding the new standards for GASB 34 implementation and training. In fact, this firm is was the only one of the four that has actually performed a GASB 34 implementation project. • Further, the firm has demonstrated the ability to provide automation capabilities that will provide more efficient financial statement and audit schedule preparation that will save the County staff time in the production of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. • While cost is not the major consideration in the selection of audit or other professional services, this firm was the low bidder for-audit services at $57,500 for the first year. This amount is approximately $9,000 less than the amount paid for this service for 2000. The Board is requested to approve a contract for cone-year engagement, with the intent to renew annually for three to five years. In addition, the Board is asked to approve an engagement with the firm far the assessment phase and initial implementation phase of GASB 34. As a matter of policy, the Audit Committee has recommended that the RFP process be repeated every three (3) to five (5) years, as in the past. FINANCIAL IMPACT: As mentioned above, the first year cast of the audit will be $57,500. The amounts proposed for years two and three ($64,000 and $64,000) will require approval by the Board each year for that year's audit. The amount proposed for the assessment and initial implementation phases of GASB 34 is $25,000. These amounts have been included in the Central Services Budget for the 2001-2002 fiscal year.