RFP - addendum 3.pdf

Madison County, Iowa – FY25 Audit & Forensic Audit RFP

The following are actual questions and answers of all Firms that submitted questions:

GENERAL

The Auditor’s Office records are complete to the best of my knowledge – I took office in September 2025. There was a

9-month gap where significant monthly, quarterly filing was not done to State and Federal entities. We have been playing catch up ever since. We will report that we have on our system; we agree that to get to the bottom of concerns born by Madison County we are going to need a deep dive.

o What is the most important criteria when selecting a firm for Part A and B? The RFP lists numerous items you will consider but we’re wondering if one is more important than others. Impartiality, thoroughness, experience & cost.

o Who will be making the decision? The Board of Supervisors with input from the Auditor and Treasurer.

o What level of onsite presence would the Board consider ideal throughout the engagement? Is the Board comfortable with most team members participating remotely? The Board is okay with remote after a foundational meeting;

the Treasurer requires two weeks, and the Auditor one week. We also would like pricing as an a la carte for additional on-site presence if needed.

o Is the county open to bidders, including an addendum of alternative services the county may find valuable in assisting with the challenges outlined? Currently the Auditor and Treasurer do not feel alternative services are warranted.

Having said that, the Board indicated they are fine with an addendum for optional services so long as there is no cost and subsequent to the main directive of the audits.

• Consulting/FS/Internal Control (Part B in RFP) o Given the broad scope of Part B and the December 31, 2026 completion requirement, has the County Board identified a target budget range for these services that it considers reasonable and sustainable that they would be willing to share?

The Board has not identified a budget.

• Forensic (Part B in RFP) o Do you have any specific suspicion of fraud or have there been any credible allegations of fraud? Yes, the previous

Treasurer was arrested in January 2025. The Board indicated that ongoing bank reconciliation issues for past several years, as well as other findings in FY24 audit have led to lack of confidence in books and fear of fraud.

Although the Treasurer was arrested for matters unrelated to the books, the public deserves to have confidence that taxpayer money has not been misappropriated.

o We understand County staff will need to pull our requested files but how much assistance from County staff can we expect to receive with reconstruction and other similar procedures? Unsure but as much as needed.

o In the RFP, Part B c(1) says to “Review FY2023, FY2024, and FY2025 records” – can you provide clarification of what records we should expect to review? No.

o In the RFP, Part B c(3) says to “Reconcile all material bank accounts” – can you provide clarification of how many bank accounts and for how many months we would need to reconcile? 36 months since the last reconciliation was done (May 2023); they remain unreconciled. There are 16 Accounts; 4 are closed CDs and 4 are small accounts that will be closed.

o In the RFP, Part B c(4) say to “Validate Fund Balances” – can you provide clarification on what your expectations are for this procedure? Please also clarify whether you are referring to accounting (fund) balances, or bank balances. We are referring to both.

o In the RFP, Part B c(5) says to “Review Treasurer operations” – can you provide clarification on what your expectations are for this procedure? This is as it relates to FY 23 and FY 24 findings.

o In the RFP, Part B c(6) says to “Review property tax reconciliations” – please clarify the objective of this evaluation.

Is it to ensure the county’s settlement was recorded properly, amounts paid to other taxing jurisdictions were calculated and paid properly, or both? All of the above.

o In the RFP, Part B c(7) says to “Review receipts, deposits, transfers, and disbursements” – are there any transactions or type of transactions that you would like us to focus on? Do you have any idea of how many transactions we should expect to review? Focus should be on those deficiencies identified in previous audits; lack of bank reconciliations; and intergovernmental fund transactions.

o In the RFP, Part B c(10) says to “Determine whether balances can be substantiated” – are there any balances that you feel may be currently unsubstantiated? Please also clarify if there is a specific fund or bank account you are requesting to be evaluated. Yes, and this information will be divulged to the successful bidder.

o In our call with Heather, she mentioned that payroll may also be an issue – can you provide more details on your concerns? What documents would you expect us to review if we were to perform procedures over payroll and do you have access to those files? The Board would like to verify that payroll matches appropriations.

• Audit (Part A in RFP) o Given the scope and timing of the forensic audit and financial reconstruction work described in Part B, when do you anticipate the County's records and schedules will be sufficiently reconciled and ready for the FY2025 financial statement audit to begin? We are ready now. We assume the better approach would be to start on the Forensic

Audit first, which would make FY25 more fruitful. We would be open for the two to be done simultaneously.

o Please provide the total audit fees paid for the FY2023 and FY2024 audits, including any additional billings for audit-related services, federal compliance testing, or other special procedures. We are not providing details of payment or hours spent.

o Will the County designate a primary audit liaison responsible for coordinating the engagement, managing information requests, and facilitating communication across departments, or should the audit team expect to coordinate directly with individual departments and personnel throughout the audit? It is the preference of the Auditor that a primary contact be the Auditor for the A/P side and the Treasurer for the A/R side.

o What corrective actions have been implemented since the FY2024 audit? Please refer to the answers provided in the Findings.

o What level of assistance is the County seeking in preparation of the Annual Financial Report? Specifically, are you looking for support with the cash-basis AFR required by Iowa Code § 331.403, accrual-based financial statement preparation, or both? Not at this time.

Background & Objectives

1) What is the experience level of the following individuals (at County and previous experience): County Auditor, County

Treasurer; County Auditor has an MBA and worked in Asset and Property Management for over 30 years. Auditor was Board clerk from Jun 2023 to March 25; was downsized and ran for Auditor in Special Election 2025.

2) The Madison County Memorial Hospital is not part of this RFP, correct? Correct

3) What were the audit fees for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 audits? How much out of scope items were billed each year? We can provide copies of invoices and correspondence from the State to the successful bidder.

4) What were the hours spent by auditors for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 audits as noted in your annual news release? We can provide copies of invoices and correspondence from the State to the successful bidder.

5) What is the most important thing you look for in a relationship with your auditor? That primary contact is kept with the

Auditor’s and the Treasurer’s office. We want to provide an open door and good communication. We want to ensure that whomever the successful bidder is they understand that the Auditor and Treasurer are elected offices and have their own authority and independence from other Elected Offices.

Financial Records

6) What accounting software does the County use? Solutions.

7) Does the County record audit entries in it’s general ledger and the general ledger reflects financial statement balances? Yes

8) Does the County keep all departments activity recorded in it’s general ledger or are there any off ledger accounts? All departments are accounted for; there are some off – book accounts.

9) Who is currently responsible for completing bank reconciliations and how up to date are they? Treasurer’s Office; according to FY24 Audit and finding – bank reconciliations have not been completed since May, 2024.

10) Did they County have any large capital projects in 2025, 2026 or planned for 2027? There was ARPA money obligated by end of CY24 – projects are complete and reporting satisfied.

11) Is all of the activity of the Madison County Covered Bridge Preservation Association, Inc and the Madison County Foundation for Environmental Education, Inc accounted for with the County or is separate data provided? These are separate.

12) Was any new debt taken out in 2025 and 2026 or any planned for 2027? Yes – a bridge loan with Maturity date of October

2026.

13) Does the County maintain it’s capital asset listing or do it rely on the auditors for this? County

14) What is the federal grant spending estimated for 2025 through 2027 and what federal programs is the money coming from?

Federal Grants are concluded with regard to FY25; Secondary Roads would have project specific Federal Grants.

Internal controls

15) Does the County have documented processes and controls for key accounting cycles such as: Cash disbursements, payroll, cash receipting? We have documented processes for Payroll (Auditor’s Office). We have receipt book for monies received in our office; transmittal forms that accompany those receipts to the Treasurer Office for Deposit. We do not do Cash

Disbursements on our side. The Treasurer likewise has processes and controls in place.

REPORTING

16) What has been the past practice for submission of the Annual Financial Report?

a. Who prepares and submits the cash version? Auditor

b. Who prepares and submits the GAAP version? Auditor

ACCESS AND LOGISITICS

17) What accounting software does the County use? Solutions

18) How has the State Auditor conducted the audit in the past?

a. Onsite or remote? Both; Several days on site.

b. Number of individuals involved? One to two people on site and perhaps one more remote.

19) What is the County’s ideal timing for completing fieldwork? Would like the FY25 Audit to start by November 30, 2026;

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES

Beyond the matters identified in the FY2023 and FY 2024 Auditor of State reports, are there additional concerns, allegations, departments, funds, accounts, or transaction types the County expects the selected firm to address under Part B?

Bank reconciliations done through May 2023 / June 24 (there is disagreement here).

Balancing between Auditor and Treasurer – month of October 31, 2025.

The Auditor’s Office records are complete to the best of my knowledge – I took office in September 2025. There was a 9-month gap where significant monthly, quarterly filing was not done to State and Federal entities.

Found that employees received workman’s compensation or short-term disability while claiming leave benefits.

Basically, there was a duplication in payment – this has been resolved. But we welcome a second set of eyes.

Yes. Need to look at annual payroll appropriations, workers compensation payouts to ensure not duplicated with payroll, billing aligned with bids, valid contracts for services signed by BOS or budgeted for, all bank accounts accounted for and under oversight of Treasurer and Auditor

Which specific findings from the State Auditor’s report are expected to be addressed as part of the Part B engagement? Lack of bank statement reconciliation and fund balancing between Capital Expenditures and funding TIF.

Does the County expect the selected firm to independently validate and reconstruct all account balances, or only those impacted by the identified discrepancies? It is my understanding that a forensic audit included both.

Are there particular departments, funds, transactions, or reporting periods that are of greatest concern? We would like to go back to when there were no bank reconciliation findings to see what was done then vs. now and make sure that expenditures do not go over appropriations.

What outcomes or decisions is the County hoping this engagement will support? The Auditor’s perspective is that independent audit is an audit. It is factual, any anomalies should be reported, and we will forward to the proper authorities if malfeasance is found. The Board would like to have a clean set of books.

Does the County anticipate that additional irregularities may be identified beyond those already documented in the State

Auditor’s reports? Yes, we fully expect that there will be additional irregularities FY25.

Are there anticipated legal, regulatory, or law enforcement considerations that may influence the scope or reporting requirements? See #5.

PRIOR FINDINGS

Which findings from the FY2023 and FY2024 Auditor of State reports remain unresolved, partially remediated, or otherwise within the anticipated scope of Part B and which does the County consider the highest priority? Balancing, Deposits, Reconciliation.

Beyond the State Auditor’s reports, have any additional reviews, investigations, or remediation efforts been performed that should be considered in developing our proposed approach? Both the Auditor and Treasurer’s office have been correcting anomalies and putting systems in place.

FINANCIAL RECORDS

Based on the findings identified by the State Auditors, are there additional accounting records or financial reporting concerns the County expects the selected firm to address beyond those identified in the published reports? No.

Which accounting systems, financial applications, and bank accounts are currently used by the County? Solutions. We will provide a list of bank accounts if awarded the bid.

What known limitations exist regarding the completeness, reliability, or accessibility of the general ledger, banking records, deposit records, cancelled checks, property-tax records, and other supporting documentation for the period under review? No known limitations.

To what extent have bank reconciliations and account reconciliation already been completed for the period within scope? Bank reconciliations done through May 2023 / June 2024. Balancing between Auditor and Treasurer – month of

October 31, 2025. There is discrepancy as to whether this date is May 2023 or June 2024.

Has the County prepared a complete inventory of all operating, investment custodial, departmental, petty-cash, change-fund, and other accounts maintained during the review period, including accounts maintained outside the County Treasurer’s record? No.

SCOPE OF RECONSTRUCTION

Does the County expect the selected firm to reconstruct and reconcile all County funds and bank accounts for FY2023 through

FY2025, or to apply a risk-based approach focused on the specified funds, departments, accounts, transaction cycles, or periods? It is our understanding that a forensic audit included both.

Is the expectation to independently reconcile balances to supporting documentation, or are there known discrepancies that require investigation? Independently.

Should the selected firm independently recreate bank reconciliations and validate reconciling items from source documentation, or may it rely on reconciliations or remediation work already completed by County personnel or other parties? Start from scratch.

Is the selected firm expected to trace receipt activity from source records through deposit and general-ledger recording, including testing whether cash, checks and other receipts were recorded and deposited timely and intact? We know they were not.

INTERNAL CONTROLS

Are there specific internal control deficiencies or operational processes the County would like the selected firm to prioritize?

Yes. Bank reconciliation, payroll, workman’s comp, warrant payment accuracy.

Have any control weaknesses been identified outside of the annual audit process? Yes. Workman's comp & payroll payment duplication, contractor employment documentation. In answer to the duplication of payment, we have identified three individuals who have had this happen. All but one has been reconciled. We welcome a second set of eyes.

For corrective actions that the County represents have already been implemented, does the County expect the selected firm to assess design only, test operating effectiveness, or both? See above.

FRAUD AND IRREGULARITIES – SEE ANSWERS FOR FY25

Is the County aware of any allegations of fraud, misuse of assets, or financial irregularities that should be considered within the scope? Yes.

Does the County expect the selected firm to perform procedures specifically designed to identify potential misappropriation, management override, concealed or unrecorded activity, unsupported transactions, or other irregularities beyond the procedures necessary to reconstruct and reconcile financial records? Yes.

REPORTING

Does the County anticipate interim presentations or updates to the Board beyond the milestones outlined in the RFP? The

Auditor and Treasurer would like regular updates and progress on a weekly basis (dependent upon the length of the scope of work).

If the work identifies previously unknown accounts, missing records, unexplained reconciling items, unsupported transactions, or potential misconduct, what process does the County envision for authorizing expanded procedures and communicating those matters to the County, legal counsel, or other appropriate parties? Through regular updates would be the time to disclose concerns or expansion in scope and cost. Any information of legal or questionable nature will be forwarded to the County Attorney, Stephen Swanson, who would intern process those concerns from there.

ACCESS AND LOGISITICS

Approximately how many bank accounts, funds, departments and financial systems are anticipated to be included? Bank accounts will be disclosed to the successful bidder, however there are approximately 16 of which are 4 CDs that have been closed and 4 smaller accounts that will be closed. All should be evaluated.

To what extent are source records (bank statements, deposit records, receipts, cancelled checks, general ledger data, and supporting documentation) available for the period under review? Yes.

Are there know gaps or missing records that the selected firm should anticipate when developing its approach? Unsure.

The Auditor’s office records are complete to the best of my knowledge – I took office in September 2025. There was a 9-month gap where significant monthly, quarterly filing was not done to State and Federal entities. We have been playing catch up ever since.

Will electronic accounting data and banking records be made available in native format? Yes

Forensic Audit, Financial Reconstruction, and Internal Control Review

1. What specific findings, unresolved conditions, or concerns from the FY2023 and FY2024 audits prompted the County to request forensic services? Previous Treasurer was arrested January 2025; Bank Reconciliations have not been done since

May 2023/June 2024 – there is disagreement on this. Internal Balancing remains a struggle.

2. Can the County provide prior audit reports, management letters, management responses, corrective-action plans, and the current status of each prior finding? Yes.

3. Has the County identified any specific funds, bank accounts, departments, balances, reconciliations, transactions, employees, or vendors that should receive priority? The Capital and TIF on the Auditor Side. Bank accounts will be disclosed to the successful bidder, however there are approximately 16 accounts; 4 of which are Closed CDs and 4 smaller accounts that will be closed. All should be evaluated.

4. Does the County expect a reconstruction of all funds and financial activity for FY2023 through FY2025, or should the selected firm use a risk-based approach focused on material or unsupported balances? All.

5. Can the County provide approximate information regarding the number of funds and material bank accounts, the periods for which reconciliations are incomplete, and the overall volume of financial activity to assist firms in estimating staffing, hours, and fees? The bank accounts will be provided upon award.

6. What accounting, treasury, property-tax, payroll, banking, and document-management systems were used during FY2023 through FY2025, and were there any system conversions or significant personnel changes during that period? We use Solutions and have for many years. There were no accounting system conversions however:

a. Auditor Kaczinski took office on January 2nd, 2025.

b. Treasurer DeVoss was arrested in January 2025.

c. Board Clerk’s Resigned March 2025.

d. First Deputy Auditor and Elections Deputy resigned; new staff were brought on.

e. IT Director/Department outsourced effective June 30, 2025.

f. Auditor Kaczinski resigned in July 2025.

g. Interim Auditor Schwartz appointed July 3rd, lost special election August 26, 2025.

h. Auditor Brant sworn into office September 3rd, 2026.

i. Auditor’s Office experienced staff turnover 25-26; First Deputy Auditor released March 2026.

j. Treasurer’s Office experienced staff turnover 25-26; First Deputy has resigned.

7. Are complete electronic records available, including general ledgers, bank statements and check images, reconciliations, receipts, deposits, transfers, disbursements, property-tax records, supporting documentation, and system audit trails? If not, what known record gaps exist? On the Auditor side I do not know of any gaps; audit trails would be obtained from our

IT Solutions Software Company. We will be fully cooperative in anything needed.

8. Will the selected firm have timely access to current and former County personnel, prior auditors, financial institutions, system administrators, and other parties with knowledge of the County’s records and processes? Possibly.

9. What level of detail does the County expect in the interim and final reports, including reconstructed balances by fund, quantification of discrepancies, identification of unsupported transactions, and recommendations for corrective action?

Depending on the duration of the project I would like weekly updates. The Board would like enough detail to identify issues, explain what happened, and apply a fix.

10. Will the county consider extensions if significant undocumented balances or missing records are discovered? Within reason.

11. Given the requirement for final delivery by December 31, 2026, has the County completed any preliminary assessment of record availability and readiness? I am familiar with where everything is, but no “list of documents” have been compiled.

12. What level of detail is expected in the Corrective Action Roadmap? In my prior experience, I found that flowcharts and procedures worked well. However, we would be looking for examples and recommendations.

13. In what format are the County's accounting records and supporting documents maintained, and will the selected firm receive direct electronic exports from the applicable systems rather than reports provided only in PDF or paper format? Primarily

PDF & paper. There are some export csv files we upload to the State.

14. Will the County assist the selected firm in obtaining records or information from former employees, banks, software providers, third-party administrators, and other external parties when the selected firm cannot obtain the information directly? Yes.

15. Are there any pending investigations, litigation matters, insurance claims, law-enforcement inquiries, or other proceedings that could restrict access to records, personnel, or information relevant to the engagement? A formal letter of pending litigation has been provided as a part of the FY23 & 24 audits. This is confidential.

16. Who will serve as the County's primary engagement liaison, and what County personnel will be available to assist with document retrieval, data exports, account confirmations, explanations of historical transactions, and other engagement requests? Auditor and/or Treasurer.

17. If delays in receiving County records, obtaining third-party information, interviewing necessary personnel, or receiving County responses affect the engagement schedule, will the applicable milestone dates be adjusted accordingly? Yes.

18. Page 1 states that firms must submit 'three sealed (4) hard copies' and one digital copy. Please confirm the required number of hard-copy proposals. Four (4) sealed hard copies.

1. When does the County expect to award the Forensic Audit, Financial Reconstruction, and Internal Control Review

Services contract? At conclusion of RFP, mid-September potentially October. The Board has approved a 2 week extension for vendor bid response date (Sept 8th due to holiday)

2. Are there any business licenses or certifications required for the selected Firm that are not necessarily specified in the RFP? You do need to be licensed with the State of Iowa to perform accounting and auditing services.

3. Are there any requirements for the selected Firm or Firms to have a local or state presence? There are not any requirements other than licensing.

4. Is the forensic work required to be performed in person, virtually, or hybrid? Onsite is expected for two weeks with the Treasurer, the Auditor feels that one week may be sufficient. An initial onsite meeting initially is preferred by the County.

5. Does the County have a specific budget in mind that they would expect the estimated fees to fall within? We are not going to provide a budget number.

6. Are non-CPA consulting firms that employ CPAs, CFEs, and other professionals and who have experience performing the type of work that is called for in the scope eligible to perform the forensic work described in Part B? Should any assignment of scope or tasks be made by a given company, that should be disclosed in the Response and Bid;

we require information such as DBAs, Personnel, and Business Entity information if any or all of this RFP will be subcontracted.

1. What accounting systems were used during FY23–FY25? Solutions Software; Excel.

2. Approximately how many bank accounts and investment accounts existed during FY23–FY25? 16 Accounts; of which are 4 CDs that are now closed and 4 smaller accounts that will be closed.

3. Approximately how many financial transactions in number and dollar value occurred during the scope period? Our annual budget ranges from 7M to 10M

4. Will the financial records, accounting records, and supporting documentation be available electronically? Yes.

5. Will transaction exports be available in Excel or CSV format? Typically, in CSV – but we would have to work with our Software

Support team for confirmation.

6. Are the balances as of the end of FY22 reliable? We believe so.

1. Can the County provide additional details regarding the known or suspected misappropriation, including the period involved, offices impacted, amounts identified to date, and whether any investigative procedures have already been performed by the

Iowa Auditor of State, DCI, County Attorney, insurers, legal counsel, or other parties? If so, will those reports be made available to respondents? There have been referrals to the State Auditor, DCI, County Attorney and to the Attorney General’s office for various reasons. We are unsure of current status and would be unable to provide any information on anything not yet concluded. The BOS is aware of Treasurer issue, but no detail if there is any misappropriation; not clear beyond property taxes/tags & unaware if investigation is still ongoing.

2. Other than the County Treasurer, have any other county officials or employees resigned or been terminated? If so, what department were they in and what were their duties?

a. Auditor Kaczinski took office January 2nd, 2025.

b. Treasurer DeVoss was arrested in January 2025.

c. Dedicated Board Clerk’s position to be removed effective June 30, 2025; Resigned March 2025.

d. First Deputy Auditor and Elections Deputy resigned; new staff were brought on.

e. IT Director/Department outsourced effective June 30, 2025.

f. Auditor Kaczinski resigned in July 2025.

g. Interim Auditor Schwartz appointed July 3rd, lost special election August 26, 2025.

h. Auditor Brant sworn into office September 3rd, 2026.

i. Auditor’s Office experienced turn over 25-26; First Deputy Auditor released March 2026.

j. Treasurer’s Office experienced staff turnover 25-26; First Deputy has resigned.

3. Has the County identified specific accounts, funds, or reconciliations that are currently considered unreliable or unsupported, and can a preliminary list be provided? There are 16 accounts; of which are 4 CDS that have since been closed. There are

4 more that will be closed.

4. Can the County provide a summary of all bank accounts, investment accounts, and fiduciary accounts maintained during

FY2023-FY2025, including whether reconciliations exist for each period? Bank reconciliations have not been completed past

May 2023. Yes

5. Are there any departments within the County that have bank accounts that are not reconciled by the treasury department. If so, please provide a listing of those accounts and who is responsible for reconciling them. No.

6. What level of access will be available to the selected firm for historical Solutions data, including transaction detail, audit logs, user permissions, images, and archived records? We would provide reports as requested. The Auditor on the AP side and

Treasurer on the AR side.

7. Does the County expect the selected firm to quantify potential losses beyond the amounts currently identified, including preparation of information that may be used for insurance recovery, restitution, or legal proceedings? Unsure. What I hope to achieve is a firm that can come in and reconcile bank accounts so that we have a clean slate. If in the process you discover anomalies, I fully expect to be informed with specifics in the final report.

8. Can the County provide an estimate of the volume of records requiring reconstruction and identify any records known to be unavailable, incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise unsupported, including bank statements, cancelled checks, deposit records, tax settlement records, supporting schedules, or subsidiary ledgers? The Auditor’s office cannot; our records are complete to the best of my knowledge – I took office in September 2025. There was a 9-month gap where significant monthly, quarterly filing was not done to State and Federal entities. We have been playing catch up ever since.

9. Is the County seeking a complete reconstruction of property tax activity for FY2023 through FY2025, or only validation of balances and reconciliations currently reflected in the accounting records? Are property taxes by parcel available in excel for FY 2022-FY2026? Only balance and reconciliation of bank accounts is necessary. All Valuation, Property Tax and

Real Estate functions have been completed.

10. Does the County expect the selected firm to perform transaction-level testing of Treasurer receipts, deposits, transfers, and disbursements, or is the expectation primarily to evaluate reconciliations and internal controls? Please provide an example of what you mean by a Transaction-Level Test.

11. Is the County's primary objective to identify and quantify potential misappropriations, to reconstruct reliable financial records, or both? If both, how does the County prioritize those objectives? First would be reconciliation of bank accounts; second would be misappropriations.

12. Does the County anticipate the need for expert testimony, litigation support, insurance recovery support, bond claim support, or other legal proceedings related to matters identified during this engagement? Unsure currently – not likely.

13. Which County personnel are expected to be available to support the engagement, and approximately what level of assistance can the selected firm expect with records retrieval, system access, and historical research? Unsure, most likely second or first deputies or the Auditor and Treasurer.

14. Does the County’s version of Solutions allow for exporting of files and supporting schedules in Excel format including a trial balance, a general ledger detail showing all transactions that were posted in Solutions from FY2023-FY2025? Yes.

15. Does the County maintain the accounting records for the 5 internal service funds within solutions or is this information maintained elsewhere? Can you elaborate what you mean by 5 internal service funds? 1. Central Stores Fund; 2. Central

Garage (Motor pool); Fund; 3. Data Processing Fund (Information Technology); 4. Printing & Reproduction Fund; 5.

Self-Insurance Fund.

16. Does the County currently have any documentation or processes and controls that are in place for account performing account reconciliations, processing and recording cash inflows and outflows, processing and recording payroll? Yes

17. Can the County provide an estimate of the total number of vendors in its vendor master file? Yes

18. Can the County provide an estimate of the total number of employees? Yes.

19. Do any of the County’s employees have access to or use County issued purchasing cards? Yes; through a checkout system of the Auditor’s office; I believe Secondary Roads also has purchasing cards handled through their claims.

20. What accounting/ERP system(s) are used by the County? Are all County departments/entities on the same accounting/ERP system(s)? Yes, Solutions.

21. Will the selected Firm for this RFP have access to the State Auditor to discuss previous audits as well as access to the State’s

2023 and 2024 audit files? That would be my (Auditor’s) preference.

22. Does the County need services to help draft the 2025 financial statements once the reconciliations are completed? Yes.

23. Does the County have a method to track which organizations that they’re financially responsible for? Are these records maintained in Solutions? Please define Organizations.

24. Are all custodial funds maintained in Solutions? On the AP side yes.

25. Explain the County’s process and controls around grant management and tracking of grants? This needs work and I am familiarizing myself with this. Grant management has been done via resolution then recording, then tracking via excel spreadsheets as our software program is limited on this. We can build sub projects on Solutions.

26. Does the County utilize software to maintain capital asset records? Are there concerns around existence, accuracy or completeness of capital assets and/or project accounting? I do think there was a fall down in the past. We do not utilize

Solutions for this, but rather an excel program provided by the State Auditor that works very well.

27. Do all expenditures get approved through the Board of Supervisors? If so, how does the Board know that this is a complete listing? Expenditures are approved by the board as a part of the claims process at regular meetings and with their signatures the disbursement report.

A. General

1. The top of page 1 indicates the proposal is due on August 24th at 5pm and Section I Purpose indicates it is due at 3pm.

Please clarify which time is correct. 3pm is correct.

2. Section II. General Information, bullet #3 states that the audit shall be in accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing

Standards set forth by the AICPA and standards for financial audits contained in the US General Accounting Office’s

Government Auditing Standards.

a. Is this requirement only for Part A, the financial statement audit? Both – however please check with the State of

Iowa Auditor’s Office for Guidance of what they require.

b. For firms proposing on Part B only, these standards are used for financial audits, attestation engagements, and performance audits. As Part B is a forensic audit, standards applied as required by the American Institute of

Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) are the Statement on Standards for Forensic Services (SSFS) which applies to members of the AICPA. Our firm is a forensic accounting firm with partners and practitioners that are licensed

CPAs and members of the AICPA with many years of government specific experience (including meeting

Yellowbook education requirements). Would the County still consider proposals that recommend using AICPA’s

Statement on Standards for Forensic Services rather than GAGAS/GAAS due to the nature of this engagement being a forensic audit? As our team’s proposal decision depends on this information, we would greatly appreciate your prompt response to this specific question. See Answer a.

B. Scope, Objectives, and Decision Drivers

1. Are there specific concerns, risks, or known issues that prompted this forensic audit and financial reconstruction effort?

Yes

2. Are there known allegations, whistleblower complaints, audit findings, media inquiries, board concerns, or regulator questions that should inform our scope? Yes.

3. For awareness purposes, what, if any, sensitive political, governance, board, or stakeholder dynamics may impact this forensic audit? Yes.

4. Has the County determined the need to coordinate this engagement through the County Attorney or outside legal counsel?

Any findings questionable in nature will be directed to the County Attorney per Iowa Code.

5. Does the County expect judgmental sampling, statistically valid sampling, or 100% review of the data population using data analytics? 100% reconstruction of accounts and reconciliation of bank accounts with county records.

6. Beyond FY2023–FY2025, should the engagement include review of earlier periods if necessary to substantiate beginning balances or resolve prior audit findings? If findings warrant it, we would expect to be advised, discuss and cost provided.

7. Can the County provide a list of all prior audit findings that are expected to be reviewed under this engagement? Yes.

8. Is the County seeking validation of all funds and accounts, or only those considered material? All bank accounts and

Capital, TIF Funds in addition.

9. How does the County define "material" bank accounts and fund balances for purposes of this engagement? All should be evaluated.

10. Are there any County departments, functions, funds, or activities that should be considered outside the scope of this engagement? No.

11. How many policies and procedures are anticipated to be reviewed as part of the project scope?

12. Are there any anticipated restrictions on access to County personnel or documents that would impact the project’s success?

13. Does the County permit the use of AI-enabled analytical tools, including generative AI and machine-learning applications, in connection with this engagement? No. If so, are there any restrictions regarding data inputs, hosting environments, confidentiality safeguards, human review requirements, or disclosure obligations?

14. Has the County established a target budget range for the overall project? No.

15. Will bidders who do not submit two manually signed copies of the proposed contract (bottom of pg.4) with the proposal be disqualified? Unsure why you would ask this question, however, I would direct you to follow the guidelines set forth in the RFP.

C. Financial Records and Reconstruction

1. Are there known gaps, missing records, incomplete reconciliations, or unreliable accounting records that the County is currently aware of? No.

2. What accounting, treasury, tax, and financial systems were used during FY2023–FY2025? Solutions; Web Portals;

Department of Management; Treasury Reporting.

3. Will the selected firm have direct access to accounting records, banking records, and supporting documentation, or will information be provided through County personnel? County Personnel.

4. Are electronic records available for all periods under review, or are certain records maintained only in paper format?

Both.

5. Does the County expect the selected firm to reconstruct balances only where records are incomplete, or to independently validate all reconstructed and existing balances? All.

D. Bank Reconciliations and Fund Balance Validation

1. Approximately how many bank accounts are expected to be reconciled? 16 Accounts exist/existed; 4 are closed, and 4 smaller ones will be closed.

2. Have any bank reconciliations already been completed for FY2023–FY2025, and if so, will those reconciliations be made available? The last reconciliation for the banks was May 2023 / June 2024 – there is discrepancy here; internal balancing between the Auditor and Treasurer is done through October 31, 2025.

3. Approximately how many governmental, proprietary, fiduciary, or other funds will require validation?

Approximately 12 – 15.

4. Are there any known unreconciled bank accounts or fund balances currently identified by the County? Several.

E. Treasurer Operations and Property Tax Review

1. What specific aspects of Treasurer operations does the County expect to be evaluated? See RFP

2. Are there known concerns regarding Treasurer processes, cash management, tax collections, reconciliations, or reporting? The previous Treasurer was arrested in January 2025; a majority of the findings for 23 & 24 were in the Treasurer’s Office.

3. What systems and records support the County's property tax reconciliation process?

4. Have any prior audit findings been reported related to Treasurer operations or property tax reconciliations? See

Findings.

F. Internal Control Assessment

1. Does the County expect the selected firm to evaluate both design and operating effectiveness of internal controls?

Operating effectiveness of changes that have been implemented thus far.

2. Are there specific control areas of concern that should receive additional focus? Cash and receipt handling.

3. Does the County expect benchmarking of controls against governmental best practices or only assessment of existing

County controls? Both will be relevant.

G. Deliverables

1. What level of detail is expected in the Interim Findings Report? Perhaps just status of where you are; any significant finding that would generate the need to go back farther or involve law enforcement would take priority.

2. Does County management expect to have an opportunity to review and comment on draft findings before issuance of the Final Forensic Report? Yes.

3. Does the County expect findings and recommendations to be prioritized or risk-ranked? Bank reconciliations; correct budget expenditures based on appropriations; fund balance confirmations.

4. Should the Corrective Action Roadmap include recommended implementation timelines and responsible parties?

We are expecting results to be shared and implemented such that when the project is concluded, we have balanced books.

5. Is presentation to the Board of Supervisors anticipated to occur in a public meeting, closed session, or another forum? If there is to be a presentation, we would expect a draft exit conference with final publication in an open meeting.

H. Workpaper Ownership and Use

1. Are there preferred formats for delivery of workpapers, reconciliations, schedules, and electronic work products that will become County property and available to the public? Soft Copy.

2. Does the County have any specific document retention, security, or chain-of-custody requirements for workpapers and supporting documentation? The Auditor is custodian of the records. Open to discussion.

1. How many bank accounts are needing reconciled: 16 accounts existed; 4 of them were CDs that are now closed. There are four accounts that are smaller and will be closed. All accounts need to be evaluated.

2. What general ledger ERP system is being used? Solutions