2009 012 Resolution - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A _Vk. Nlational ?tate Audi???s Association ' Apri18, 2009 'The'Honorable Mary Taylor, CPA Qtiio Auditor of'State Office of Auditor of State 8$14st Broad StreeE, 5`h Floor ,Columbus; Oriio 43215' Dear 1VIs. Taylo.r: Vt7e liave reviewed the system of quality control of the Ohio Auditor of State (the office) in effect for the: period April l, 2008 through IVlareh 31, 2009. A system of quality control encompasses the office's organizational structure and the policies,adopted and pzoaedures established to provide it with reasonable assurance of coriforming witfi governmerit auditing standards. The design of the system and compliance wrth it:are.the.respon5ibility ofthe vffce. ;Qur responsibility is to express an opinion on the°'desigri of the systerri; ?and tlie`-office's compliariee with the system based on ouz review. We conducted our review in accordance with the poTieies and. procedures for external peer reviews establi-shed b.y the National State Auditors Association (NSAA). In perforrning our review, we obfained -an understanding of the office's system of quality control far engagements conducted in ac,cordariae with government auditing standartis. In. addiGion, we fested compliance with the oMae's quality control. p,olicies and procedures to tiI1e: extent we cansidered appropriate. These. tests covered the application. of the office's polrcies and procedures on selected, engagements: ThE engagements se.lecfed.representied a reas6nable:cross-section o:f the affice's engagemen.ts eonducted in accordanee with goverrimerit auditing standarcls. Vye believe that the procedures we performed provide a reasonable tiasis foi our opiriion: -Our'review was based on 5elective tests; therefote it would not necessarily d'isclose all weakriesses in the systern :of quality coritxol or all instances of lack af coinpliance witlx it. Also, there are inherent lirmitatioris in fhe effectiveness: of ;any sy"stern of quaIity control; therefore, noncomplianee with the systerri of q'uality;cantrol oeciii' aitd .iiot:be d'etected. Rrojectiori af any evatuation of a system af ;quality coritrol to futur.e perivds °is subject to the nsk that the.system of quality confrol may become madequaYe because of chariges in coriditions, or beeause the-degtee of compliance with the policies or -pr4cedures.may deteraorate. 'n our opinion, the systern of .quality eontrol oFthe Qhio Auditor of State in effect for the period April 1, 2008 thrdugh March 3.1,, 2009', has ;been suital?ly designed and was!eomplied with during- the period to pcovi°de easonable assurance of conforining with government`:auditing standards. ?- Tearri Leader. Cm ieumng Reuiewer National:State Auditors Assaciation National State Auditors Association External.Feer 1Zeview. Teain External Peer Review Team 449 L;mis Nargett Circle, Suit? 29% Lexitcptnn. Keriteicky 40503-3590, Telephorfc (859) 216•1147, Fax (859) 278-0307 4,44 N. CaP'rtat StTCCt: N11T, Sriite 234,1F"ashingtpn, I?C' 20001, 7'e1epE3nno (202) 624-545I, Fax (202) 624-5473 N4,ttW.rttts8cL01g