YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri Claire McCaskill

Report No. 2005-95

December 2005

IMPORTANT:  The Missouri State Auditor is required by state law to conduct audits once every 4 years in counties, like Dallas, 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 Dallas County included additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials.  The following concerns were noted as part of the audit:

• The county does not have adequate procedures in place to track federal awards for the preparation of the SEFA.  For the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, the county's SEFA did not include expenditures related to some of its federal grants which resulted in total expenditures being overstated by approximately $222,798 and $91,039, respectively.

• The controls and procedures over county expenditures need improvement.  The county did not always solicit bids or retain bid documentation for various purchases, the commission minutes did not document that the Presiding Commissioner abstained from voting on concrete bids when necessary, supporting documentation for some travel expenditures was not retained, and the county did not fully comply with its written agreement to share office expenses with the Prosecuting Attorney.  Improvements are also needed in the county's controls over mileage and fuel usage and written agreements.

• Various concerns were noted regarding payroll procedures for the Sheriff's office including the accuracy of timesheets and leave records and ensuring compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). 

• The Assessor's office is allowed access to the assessment data during periods when changes to the data are not allowed by state law.  In addition, employees of the County Assessor and County Collectors' offices do not utilize confidential passwords to limit access to the property tax computer system, and there was no evidence the County Commission examined and approved the County Collector's annual settlements.

• Actual expenditures exceeded the original budgeted amounts in various county funds, and as a result of inadequate monitoring procedures, the County Commission amended various county budgets after expenditures had already

exceeded the original budget. In addition, an annual maintenance plan for county roads and bridges has not been prepared, and minutes were not prepared to document the matters discussed in closed meetings.

• Controls and procedures need improvement in the Sheriff's office.  Seized property controls and procedures need improvement. In addition, accounting duties are not adequately segregated and controls over receipts and DARE funds need improvement.  Also, vehicle logs for county owned patrol cars were not adequate, and the Sheriff's office does not calculate the average cost of meals served to prisoners.

• Improvements are needed in the controls and procedures over Emergency 911 expenditures, including credit cards, payroll procedures, general fixed asset procedures and vehicle usage.

• The Health Center needs to improve procedures over receipting and general fixed assets, and controls over expenditures including supporting documentation, bidding and payroll.

Also included in the report are recommendations related to general fixed assets.  The audit also suggested improvements in the procedures of the Prosecuting Attorney, Circuit Clerk, County Clerk, and Assessor.

Complete Audit Report