YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri Claire McCaskill

Report No. 2005-66

September 2005

IMPORTANT:  The Missouri State Auditor is required by state law to conduct audits once every 4 years in counties, like Stoddard County, that do not have a county auditor.  In addition to a financial and compliance audit of various county operating funds, the State Auditor's statutory audit covers additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials, as required by Missouri's Constitution.

This audit of Stoddard County included additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials.  The following concerns were noted as part of the audit:

Several of the recommendations in this report are repeated from prior audits including findings related to the county’s federal grants, budgetary practices and financial reporting, property records, computer controls, and procedures in the Sheriff’s, Treasurer’s, Prosecuting Attorney’s, and Recorder’s offices.  In prior reports county officials indicated they would implement many of the recommendations; however, no significant improvements were noted.

The County Commission did not adequately monitor the townships and road districts receiving grants for bridge replacement and rehabilitation to ensure the monies were spent in compliance with federal guidelines.  The county did not obtain any documentation that the contractors performing the work were actually paid and did not retain copies of invoices and supporting documentation for payments. 

The county prepared a schedule of expenditures of federal awards for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003; however, the schedule contained a number of errors and omissions with expenditures under reported by $83,295 for 2004 and over reported by $70,248 in 2003.  Without an accurate schedule, federal financial activity may not be audited and reported in accordance with federal audit requirements which could result in future reductions of federal awards.

Formal budgets were not prepared for several funds in the county.   Disbursements for these funds totaled $104,650 and $340,266 in 2004 and 2003, respectively.  In addition, the County Commission budgeted a deficit of $529 for the Archives Fund in 2004 and paid expenses in excess of available monies in the Miscellaneous Fund, resulting in a negative $4,018 cash balance at December 31, 2003. 

The county did not retain bid documentation or adequate supporting invoices for several purchases and property records and procedures were inadequate. 

Mileage reimbursements prepared by the prior Sheriff and two deputies lacked adequate documentation.  The county paid approximately $101,000 to these officers during the two years ended December 31, 2004.   Although the county indicated they would begin recording odometer readings after we reported similar findings in our audit for the two years ended December 31, 2000, no such records were maintained and the descriptions of places to and from which the officer traveled were vague.  A former deputy obtained mileage reimbursements totaling over $14,000 for mileage which was not incurred.  This deputy was charged with theft, found guilty and made restitution to the county.   Several additional problems with the Sheriff’s records and procedures continue including receipts not deposited timely, duties not adequately segregated, and monthly listings of inmate open items not reconciled to cash balances. 

Duties in the Ex-Officio Collector's Office are not adequately segregated and receipts entered into the cash register and subsequently voided were not adequately reviewed.  A deputy collector was able to misappropriate tax receipts totaling approximately $47,000 between January 2001 and April 2004 before the Ex-Officio Collector discovered the problem.  Charges were filed, the deputy was found guilty and terminated from her position, and has been ordered to pay restitution and serve five years probation.  Additional concerns were noted with the Ex-Officio Collector’s procedures including the method of payment is not always indicated on paid tax receipts, composition of paid tax receipts and monies deposited cannot be reconciled, monthly bank reconciliations are not reviewed by the Collector, and interest received from township collectors has not been distributed for more than eight years. 

The Prosecuting Attorney collects monies on some criminal cases as part of the determination of charges to be filed.  Adequate records of these monies are not maintained and some monies collected were transmitted to a not-for-profit.  The amount of funds transmitted was unknown as records were not maintained of these monies.  The Prosecuting Attorney could provide no legal authority for the collecting and transmitting of these payments. 

The audit also suggested improvements in the record keeping of the Treasurer, Juvenile Officer, Recorder of Deeds, and Circuit Clerk. 

Complete Audit Report