Report No. 2007-40
September 2007

Complete Audit Report

IMPORTANT:  The Missouri State Auditor is required by state law to conduct audits once every four years in counties, such as Dunklin, that do not have a county auditor.  In addition to a financial 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 the Missouri Constitution.

Budgetary procedures are in need of improvement. Budgets were not prepared for several county funds, actual disbursements exceeded budgeted amounts for several funds, and budgets for some funds did not include budgeted beginning and ending fund balances. In addition, the county budget documents contained incorrect amounts and numerous misclassifications. The county’s annual published financial statements did not include financial information for several county funds. Similar conditions were noted in our prior audit report; however, the county has not taken the necessary actions to improve these areas.

Dunklin County is required by federal regulations to prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) each year. The county still does not have adequate procedures in place to track federal awards for the preparation of the schedule and the SEFA contained several errors.

The county’s controls and procedures for the Help America Vote Act Requirements Payments program were not adequate to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Monies were not paid out on a timely basis, equipment purchased was not added to the county’s capital asset records, interest earned on monies was not tracked and credited to the program, the level of effort requirements were not calculated and monitored, disbursements were not tracked by grant categories, program reports were not accurate and timely, equipment purchased was not properly bid, and the county did not ensure the vendor complied with federal guidelines.

Concerns regarding the property tax system noted in prior reports still exist. The County Collector-Treasurer has not prepared or filed annual settlements in compliance with state law for the last eight years. An annual settlement for the year ended February 28, 2006, was prepared upon our request but was inaccurate. In 2007, the County Collector-Treasurer will be collecting all county property taxes, due to the elimination of township collectors. For the County Clerk and County Commission to properly verify tax collections, it is imperative that the Collector-Treasurer file accurate and timely annual settlements. In addition, the Collector-Treasurer is unable to reconcile the liabilities to the reconciled cash balance. At February 28, 2007, the bank balance exceeded liabilities by $36,592. It appears that $22,400 of this balance has been carried since the prior audit report, but part of the difference may be due to tax collections deposited but not abstracted and distributed. The Collector-Treasurer does not reconcile daily deposits to the daily abstract of taxes entered into the computer and does not reconcile these amounts to the monthly abstract used to distribute monies.

The County Assessor does not maintain adequate records to account for monies received and some receipts were not transmitted to the county timely and intact. It appears that between April 2004 and August 2005 four checks totaling $96 may have been deposited into the Assessor’s personal account and thirteen additional checks totaling $643 were not deposited into the county funds and may have been cashed. The Assessor indicated these monies were used for various supplies for the office; however, no records of these purchases were maintained or available. In August 2005, the County Commission and Prosecuting Attorney questioned these issues and the Assessor indicated she subsequently changed her procedures. The amount of transmittals to the county increased from 2005 to 2006 by 59 percent from $3,184 to $5,053. Other problems noted concerning the Assessor’s office included not issuing prenumbered receipts for all monies received, not noting the method of payment for all receipts, not reconciling receipts to the actual transmittals to the county, not transmitting monies on a timely basis, and not maintaining adequate records for outstanding copy and fax fees.

The county did not always solicit bids or retain bid documentation for some purchases. The county did not have written contracts with some vendors and adequate supporting documentation was not obtained for some disbursements.

Improvements are needed to the records and procedures of the commissary account maintained by the Sheriff for personal monies of inmates and commissary purchases. Accounting duties are not adequately segregated and monies received were not deposited in a timely manner. Differences on bank reconciliations are not investigated and cleared and no monthly listing of open items is prepared. At December 31, 2006, the open items listing prepared at our request exceeded the reconciled bank balance by $1,704. Various fees are charged to prisoners and are not paid to the county. The Sheriff’s Revolving Fund was maintained by the Sheriff contrary to state law.

The county is subsidizing the cost to house other political subdivisions’ prisoners. The county was charging the cities in the county $4 per day per prisoner, except the city of Kennett which was charged a flat $600 per month. These fees are insufficient to recover all jail costs.

The audit also includes recommendations to improve records and procedures for transfers between, and balances of certain funds, payroll records and procedures, meeting minutes and agendas, computer access, and capital assets. Additional concerns regarding controls were noted for the Health Center, Senate Bill 40 Board, Circuit Clerk, Prosecuting Attorney, Public Administrator, and Juvenile Office.

Complete Audit Report