Skip to Main Content

insightsarticles

AI accounting prompts: How government finance professionals can improve results

10.23.26 /

Who this applies to: Read this if you are a state or local government finance professional and want to use generative AI more effectively while maintaining appropriate review, documentation, and data safeguards.

Government finance professionals are increasingly exploring generative AI to save time, organize information, and improve efficiency. However, the usefulness of an AI-generated response depends largely on the instructions provided. A vague prompt can produce incomplete, irrelevant, or misleading results, while a well-structured prompt can help organize complex accounting information, surface important questions, and identify areas requiring further analysis and professional judgement. To help government accountants get better AI results, this article outlines five elements for effective accounting prompts and shares practical guidance for using AI responsibly.

Important considerations before using AI

Organizations should establish an approved AI-use policy before employees use AI for government finance work. Before entering organizational, confidential, personal, or third-party information into an AI tool, coordinate with IT, information security, legal counsel, and other appropriate stakeholders. It’s important to remember that AI-generated output may be incomplete, inaccurate, or unsupported, and should supplement rather than replace professional judgement, independent verification, established internal controls, or required approvals.

Recognizing when to use AI and what questions to ask are two important considerations. Imagine it is the middle of the year-end close process. You have a bank reconciliation with several old reconciling items, a list of prior-year audit adjustments, and a meeting with the finance director later that afternoon. An organization-approved AI tool may help you organize the issues and prepare questions, but only if it receives useful instructions. “Review this reconciliation” leaves too much undefined. Ask yourself key questions to help determine what is needed to create an effective prompt:

  • Which balances should agree?
  • Which reporting period is involved?
  • How old must an outstanding item be before it receives attention?
  • Does the user want possible errors, follow-up questions, or proposed entries?

Writing a useful prompt is like assigning work to someone who is new to your finance department. You need to:

  • Explain the background
  • Define the task
  • Identify the available evidence
  • Describe the expected deliverable
  • Set boundaries around the analysis

Five elements of an effective accounting prompt

A practical prompt generally includes:

  • Context: The government, fund, reporting period, accounting basis, and purpose of the work
  • Task: The specific review, comparison, summary, or analysis requested
  • Evidence: The records and authoritative sources the AI should use
  • Output: The format and level of detail expected
  • Guardrails: The assumptions the AI should avoid and the matters that require professional review

The amount of direction should reflect the complexity and risk of the assignment. Rewriting a routine email requires less context than reviewing a year-end reconciliation or federal grant expenditure.

Context: Explain the governmental accounting environment

Context is particularly important in governmental accounting because the same transaction may be treated differently depending on the financial statement being prepared. For example, governmental fund statements are prepared using the current financial resources measurement focus and modified accrual basis of accounting. Government-wide statements use the economic resources measurement focus and accrual basis. A capital purchase recorded as an expenditure in a governmental fund may need to be reported as a capital asset addition at the government-wide level.

A prompt asking AI to review a government-wide conversion entry should therefore identify:

  • The applicable governmental fund or activity
  • Whether the analysis relates to fund-level or government-wide reporting
  • The accounting basis and measurement focus
  • The reporting period
  • The purpose of the entry
  • The supporting schedules provided

Without this context, AI may apply a generally correct accounting concept to the wrong reporting level.

Task: Be specific about the work requested

Broad instructions such as “review,” “analyze,” or “summarize” do not explain what a successful result should contain.

Weak prompt: Review this bank reconciliation and tell me whether anything is wrong.

Stronger prompt: Review the attached June 30 bank reconciliation for the pooled cash operating account. Compare the bank balance, general ledger balance, and listed reconciling items. Identify mathematical inconsistencies, unexplained differences, duplicate items, deposits or checks outstanding for more than 90 days, and items without adequate descriptions. Present the results in a table showing the issue, amount, source reference, and recommended follow-up question. Do not propose a journal entry or conclude that an item is an error without sufficient support.

The stronger prompt defines the scope and focuses the review on specific risk areas. The 90-day threshold is an example for the exercise, not a recommended standard. Each government should use criteria appropriate for its policies and circumstances.

Even with well-crafted prompts, AI tools can still make calculation errors, overlook spreadsheet formulas, and produce inaccurate page, tab, or cell references. Always recalculate totals independently and trace every significant observation back to the original record.

Capabilities also vary by tool and configuration: some tools cannot reliably read attachments, complex spreadsheets, or scanned PDFs, and the same prompt may produce different responses across multiple runs. Long-outstanding checks may also raise unclaimed property or escheatment considerations, which should be evaluated under applicable policies.

Evidence: Identify the records and authorities to use

Government finance conclusions should be traceable to reliable evidence. Tell the AI which files it may use and request a reference for each significant observation. This can be especially useful when developing an inventory of agreements that may require additional accounting analysis.

Agreement-review prompt: Review the attached agreement and extract the commencement date, end date, renewal and termination provisions, payment terms, underlying assets, rights to use or operate an asset, software or hosting components, implementation services, and other provisions that may be relevant to an accountant’s evaluation under GASB Statements 87 or 96. Cite the page and section supporting each item. Identify missing or unclear information as a question. Do not determine whether the agreement meets the definition of a lease or SBITA; the government’s accounting team will make that determination after reviewing the agreement and applicable authoritative guidance.

This separates document review from the accounting conclusion. AI can help locate and organize relevant terms, but the accountant remains responsible for determining the applicable standard and treatment. The same approach applies to technical research. Instruct the AI to use specified authoritative sources, such as GASB pronouncements or federal award documents, and then verify quotations, citations, and paragraph references directly.

Output: Describe the deliverable

A useful analysis can become difficult to use if it arrives in the wrong format. Tell the AI whether you need a table, checklist, memorandum, list of questions, or plain-language summary.

For audit preparation, a government might use an organization-approved tool, consistent with any confidentiality terms in the audit engagement, to review prior-year adjustments and prepared-by-client (PBC) lists:

Prompt: Using the attached prior-year audit adjustment summary and PBC list, prepare a current-year planning table with the following columns: financial statement area, prior-year issue, support previously requested, current-year owner, current-year support needed, due date, and follow-up question. Consolidate duplicate requests. Do not assume that a prior-year adjustment is required again this year.

In my own work, I have found that asking for an approved AI tool to organize prior-year adjustments and open requests into a structured current-year tracker produces a far more useful starting point than asking for a general summary. The structure makes recurring issues easier to spot, reduces duplicate requests, and helps focus follow-up where it matters most.

Other helpful output instructions include:

  • Separate confirmed observations from open questions.
  • Rank items by urgency or potential financial reporting impact.
  • Limit the executive summary to five bullets.
  • Identify the source supporting each observation.
  • Place unresolved matters in a separate follow-up section.

Guardrails: Explain how uncertainty should be handled

Generative AI may respond confidently even when information is incomplete. A prompt should address uncertainty directly.

Consider including instructions such as:

  • Use only the records and authoritative sources provided.
  • Do not invent missing balances, transaction details, policies, or citations.
  • Separate facts shown in the records from interpretations.
  • Label unsupported items “Requires additional support.”
  • Draft a question when the cause of a difference cannot be determined.
  • Do not make final decisions about standard applicability, allowability, materiality, accounting treatment, or journal-entry approval.
  • Identify conclusions that require higher-level review.

These guardrails improve the reviewability of the response, but they do not guarantee accuracy. A finance professional should validate the source references, calculations, and conclusions before using the work.

Break complex assignments into stages

Large assignments are often more manageable when divided into sequential steps. Consider the review of expenditures charged to a federal award:

  • Ask AI to summarize the award’s purpose, period of performance, allowable-cost provisions, and any specific or special conditions.
  • Review and correct that summary.
  • Ask AI to compare selected expenditure descriptions with the summarized criteria.
  • Have it identify items requiring invoices, payroll records, procurement support, or program clarification.
  • Evaluate the flagged items against the award terms and the Uniform Guidance.

AI can help organize the review, but it should not make the final allowability determination. That decision depends on the complete transaction record, award terms, applicable federal requirements, government policies, and professional judgment. A staged approach is also helpful when reconciling governmental fund statements to government-wide statements. Begin with identifying conversion categories, then review the supporting schedules, and finally develop questions about unresolved differences. Do not ask AI to solve the entire reporting conversion in a single step.

Protect sensitive government information

Use only organization-approved AI tools and follow applicable policies governing confidential information, acceptable use, and records retention.

Before entering information, consider whether it contains:

  • Employee or payroll data
  • Banking or payment information
  • Taxpayer or utility-customer information
  • Protected health or personally identifiable information
  • Confidential legal matters
  • Procurement-sensitive information
  • System configurations or cybersecurity information
  • Information belonging to auditors, consultants, or other third parties

Remove, mask, aggregate, or replace sensitive information with representative data when appropriate. Approval to access information does not automatically mean approval to enter it into an AI system. Governments should also consider their public records and retention obligations. Depending on applicable state law and how the material is created, used, or retained, prompts and AI-generated outputs related to public business may be subject to disclosure and retention requirements.

Examples of AI prompts

Reuseable prompt template

Context

I am reviewing [accounting area] for [government, fund or activity, reporting period, and accounting basis]. The purpose is to [objective]. 

Task

Using the records identified below, please [specific review, comparison, or analysis]. 

Evidence

Use [files and authoritative sources]. Reference the page, tab, section, or transaction supporting each significant observation. 

Output

Present the result as [table, checklist, memorandum, or questions] and include [required fields or sections]. 

Guardrails 

Separate confirmed facts from interpretations. Identify missing information and matters requiring professional review. Do not make unsupported accounting, compliance, materiality, or standard-applicability conclusions. 

  

Examples of strong vs. weak prompts

Budget-to-Actual Analysis

Weak Prompt

Analyze these budget variances. 

Stronger Prompt

Compare fiscal-year-to-date expenditures with the amended budget and the same period in the prior year. Identify departments with unfavorable variances greater than $100,000 or 10%. For each item, describe the transactions contributing to the variance and draft a follow-up question when the cause cannot be determined. Do not infer a cause that is not supported by the records. Present the results in a table followed by a five-bullet summary for the finance director.

  

Accounts Receivable (AR)

Weak Prompt 

Review this AR aging report.

Stronger Prompt

Review the attached June 30 AR aging report. Identify credit balances, accounts outstanding for more than 90 and 180 days, balances without recent activity, and amounts that do not agree with the general ledger control account. If subsequent receipt information is provided, identify which balances appear to have been collected after year-end. Present questions and recommended follow-up procedures, but do not conclude that an amount is uncollectible or recommend a write-off. 

  

Capital assets and construction in progress

Weak Prompt

Find the capital assets in this general ledger detail. 

Stronger Prompt

Compare the attached expenditure detail with the government’s capitalization policy. Identify transactions that exceed the capitalization threshold or contain descriptions suggesting equipment purchases, construction, improvements, land acquisition, or project-related professional services. Separately identify repairs, maintenance, and other items that may require further analysis. Do not make the final capitalization determination. Present each flagged transaction with its date, vendor, amount, account, description, source reference, and reason for follow-up. 

  

Subsequent disbursements and expenditure accruals

Weak Prompt

Find any expenses we need to accrue.

Stronger Prompt

Review the attached disbursements recorded during the first 60 days after fiscal year-end. Identify transactions whose invoice dates, service periods, receiving dates, or descriptions indicate that the goods or services may relate to the prior fiscal year. Present the results by fund and department, identify the supporting documentation needed, and distinguish confirmed dates from assumptions. Do not determine the final accounting period or prepare an entry without sufficient support.

  

Keep professional responsibility with the finance team

AI can identify an unusual balance, extract terms from an agreement, or organize questions from prior-year audit files. It cannot accept responsibility for an accounting conclusion. Management remains responsible for the government’s records, internal controls, financial statements, and compliance decisions. An AI-generated observation should therefore be treated as a starting point for review, not by itself as support for an accounting entry, authorization, or approval. A strong prompt will not turn AI into an accountant. It can produce a more focused first review that helps the finance team spend less time organizing information and more time investigating issues and applying judgment.

Optimizing AI as a support tool

Effective prompting can help government finance professionals use AI as a practical support tool while keeping judgment and accountability with people. By providing clear context, reliable source material, specific instructions, and appropriate guardrails, finance teams can obtain more useful results without compromising verification, security, or internal controls. AI may accelerate the work, but the accountant remains responsible for the conclusion.

Key takeaways

  • Structure prompts with clear context, a specific task, supporting evidence, the desired output, and appropriate guardrails.
  • Define the government, fund, reporting period, accounting basis, and purpose to help AI apply accounting concepts correctly.
  • Verify AI-generated calculations, citations, source references, and conclusions against original records and authoritative guidance.
  • Protect sensitive information by using approved AI tools and following organizational policies for confidentiality, security, and records retention.
  • Keep accounting decisions, approvals, and professional judgment with the finance team rather than relying on AI-generated conclusions.

About BerryDunn

BerryDunn’s governmental accounting team approaches each new engagement with an open mind, assessing client needs objectively to inform clear, powerful, and actionable recommendations. We partner with clients to establish compliance practices, optimize processes, and enhance the overall financial reporting process. Learn more about our team and services.

Related Industries

Related Services

Accounting and Assurance

Related Professionals

Leaders

BerryDunn experts and consultants

Who this applies to: Read this article if your organization receives charitable donations. 

As summer gives way to autumn and year-end draws closer, many individuals turn their attention to charitable giving. With donations often increasing during this time of year, we want to share some best practices and considerations to help nonprofit organizations navigate the season of giving.

Donor acknowledgment letters

It is important for organizations receiving gifts to consider the following guidelines, as doing some work now may save you time (and maybe a fine or two) later.

Charitable (i.e., 501(c)(3)) organizations are required to provide a timely donor acknowledgment letter to all donors who contribute $250 or more to the organization, whether it be cash or non-cash items (e.g., publicly traded securities, real estate, artwork, vehicles) received. The letter should include the following:

  • Name of the organization
  • Amount of cash contribution
  • Description of non-cash items (but not the value)
  • Statement that no goods and services were provided (assuming this is the case)
  • Description and good faith estimate of the value of goods and services provided by the organization in return for the contribution

Additionally, when a donor makes a payment greater than $75 to a charitable organization partly as a contribution and partly as a payment for goods and services, a disclosure statement is required to notify the donor of the value of the goods and services received in order for the donor to determine the charitable contribution component of their payment.

If a charitable organization receives noncash donations, it may be asked to sign Form 8283. This form is required to be filed by the donor and included with their personal income tax return. If a donor contributes noncash property (excluding publicly traded securities) valued at over $5,000, the organization will need to sign Form 8283, Section B, Part IV, acknowledging receipt of the noncash item(s) received.

For noncash items such as cars, boats, and even airplanes that are donated, there is a separate Form 1098-C, Contributions of Motor Vehicles, Boats, and Airplanes, which the donee organization must file. A copy of the Form 1098-C is provided to the donor and acts as acknowledgment of the gift. For more information, you can read our article on donor acknowledgments.

Gifts to employees

Many employers also find themselves in a giving spirit, wishing to reward employees for another year of hard work. While this generosity is well-intended, gifts to employees can be fraught with potential tax consequences organizations should be aware of. Here’s what you need to know about the rules on employee gifts:

First and foremost, the IRS is very clear that cash and cash equivalents (specifically gift cards) are always included as taxable income when provided by the employer, regardless of amount, with no exceptions. This means that if you plan to give your employees cash or a gift card this year, the value must be included in the employees’ wages and is subject to all payroll taxes.

There are, however, a few ways to make nontaxable gifts to employees. IRS Publication 15 offers a variety of examples of de minimis (minimal) benefits, defined as any property or service you provide to an employee that has a minimal value, making the accounting for it unreasonable and administratively impracticable. Examples include holiday or birthday gifts, like flowers, a fruit basket, or occasional tickets for theater or sporting events.

Additionally, holiday gifts can also be nontaxable if they are in the form of a gift coupon and if given for a specific item (with no redeemable cash value). A common example would be issuing a coupon to your employee for a free holiday ham or turkey redeemable at the local grocery store. For more information, please see our article on employee gifts.

Other year-end filing requirements

As the end of the calendar year approaches, it is also important to start thinking about Form 1099 filing requirements. There are various 1099 forms, including 1099-INT to report interest income, 1099-DIV to report dividend income, 1099-NEC to report nonemployee compensation, and 1099-MISC to report other miscellaneous income.

Form 1099-NEC reports non-employment income, which is not included on a W-2. Organizations must issue 1099-NECs to payees (there are some exclusions) who receive at least $2,000 in non-employment income during the calendar year. This $2,000 threshold is new for 2026—up from the previous $600 limit, which was in place for years. In future years, the threshold will be increased annually (adjusted for inflation). A non-employee may be an independent contractor or a person hired on a contract basis to complete work, such as a graphic designer. Payments to attorneys or CPAs for services rendered that exceed $2,000 for the tax year must be reported on a Form 1099-NEC. However, a 1099-MISC would be sent to an attorney for payments of settlements. For additional questions on which 1099 form to use, please contact your tax advisor.

While federal income tax is not always required to be withheld, there are some instances when it is. If a payee does not furnish their Tax Identification Number (TIN) to the organization, then the organization is required to withhold taxes on payments reported in box 1 of Form 1099-NEC. There are other instances, and the rates can differ, so if you have questions, please reach out to your tax advisor. 1099 forms are due to the recipient and the IRS by January 31.

While the seasons may change, tax reporting and compliance remain reliably consistent. We hope the information above is helpful to organizations as we approach the year's end. As always, BerryDunn’s nonprofit tax team is ready to offer support and guidance. 

Article
Preparing for year-end: Tax and giving reminders for nonprofits

Benchmarking doesn’t need to be time and resource consuming. Read on for four simple steps you can take to improve efficiency and maximize resources.

Stop us if you’ve heard this one before (from your Board of Trustees or Finance Committee): “I wish there was a way we could benchmark ourselves against our competitors.”

Have you ever wrestled with how to benchmark? Or struggled to identify what the Board wants to measure? Organizations can fall short on implementing effective methods to benchmark accurately. The good news? With a planned approach, you can overcome traditional obstacles and create tools to increase efficiency, improve operations and reporting, and maintain and monitor a comfortable risk level. All of this can help create a competitive advantage — and it  isn’t as hard as you might think.

Even with a structured process, remember that benchmarking data has pitfalls, including:

  • Peer data can be difficult to find. Some industries are better than others at tracking this information. Some collect too much data that isn’t relevant, making it hard to find the data that is.
     
  • The data can be dated. By the time you close your books for the year and data is available, you’re at least six months into the next fiscal year. Knowing this, you can still build year-over-year trending models that you can measure consistently.
     
  • The underlying data may be tainted. As much as we’d like to rely on financial data from other organization and industry surveys, there’s no guarantee that all participants have applied accounting principles consistently, or calculated inputs (e.g., full-time equivalents) in the same way, making comparisons inaccurate.

Despite these pitfalls, benchmarking is a useful tool for your organization. Benchmarking lets you take stock of your current financial condition and risk profile, identify areas for improvement and find a realistic and measurable plan to strengthen your organization.

Here are four steps to take to start a successful benchmarking program and overcome these pitfalls:

  1. Benchmark against yourself. Use year-over-year and month-to-month data to identify trends, inconsistencies and unexplained changes. Once you have the information, you can see where you want to direct improvement efforts.
  2. Look to industry/peer data. We’d love to tell you that all financial statements and survey inputs are created equally, but we can’t. By understanding the source of your information, and the potential strengths and weaknesses in the data (e.g., too few peers, different size organizations and markets, etc.), you will better know how to use it. Understanding the data source allows you to weigh metrics that are more susceptible to inconsistencies.
  1. Identify what is important to your organization and focus on it. Remove data points that have little relevance for your organization. Trying to address too many measures is one of the primary reasons benchmarking fails. Identify key metrics you will target, and watch them over time. Remember, keeping it simple allows you to put resources where you need them most.
  1. Use the data as a tool to guide decisions. Identify aspects of the organization that lie beyond your risk tolerance and then define specific steps for improvement.

Once you take these steps, you can add other measurement strategies, including stress testing, monthly reporting, and use in budgeting and forecasting. By taking the time to create and use an effective methodology, this competitive advantage can be yours. Want to learn more? Check out our resources for not-for-profit organizations here.

Article
Benchmarking: Satisfy your board and gain a competitive advantage

Read this if you are responsible for cybersecurity or are a member of a board of directors for a company or a nonprofit organization.

I recently joined the board of directors of a local nonprofit organization that addresses homelessness and food insecurity in our community. While it is a larger, well-established organization, it still needed cybersecurity support. For me, it is a meaningful way to give back using my expertise while improving the risk posture and security practices of the organization. In my opinion, the most critical area any board of directors should be addressing, along with establishing and mitigating risk, is incident preparedness. The board should require and receive reports on incident management programs, and if they are in place, they should be tested on a frequent basis. 

The board’s role in the oversight of organizational risk is increasingly complicated by cybersecurity concerns. Cybersecurity risk is pervasive and will affect companies and nonprofit organizations in a variety of ways. The responsibility for detailed cyber risk oversight within the board should be well documented and communicated, and may often touch various committees across the board, including but not limited to risk, audit, and compliance. With the increasing complexity surrounding cybersecurity, it is also important for the board to evaluate existing experience and skills, identify gaps, and address those gaps through succession planning or leveraging advisors.

For nonprofit boards, having an expert with cybersecurity skills as a board member may bring in needed guidance and expertise to an organization that may have limited resources, but is impacted by cybersecurity risks. It can be a valuable way to bring in advisory and oversight where it may be needed.

Additionally, all directors need to maintain continual knowledge about evolving cyber issues and management’s plans for allocating resources with respect to preparedness in responding to cyber risks. Such knowledge helps boards assess the priority-driven and investment decisions put forth by management needed in critical areas.

Here are some critical questions that boards and management should be considering with respect to mitigating cybersecurity risks for their organizations. They may be useful as a starting point for boards to use in their discussions and as a guide when looking at their oversight of management’s plans for addressing potential cyber risks.

General

  • What is the threat profile and risk tolerance of our organization based on our business model and the type of data our organization holds?
  • Is the cyber risk management plan documented, including the identification, protection, and disposal of data?
  • Has the cyber risk management plan been tested?
  • Does our organization’s cybersecurity strategy align with our threat profile and risk tolerance?
  • Is our cybersecurity risk viewed as an enterprise-wide issue and incorporated into our overall risk identification, management, and mitigation process?
  • What percentage of our IT budget is dedicated to cybersecurity?
  • Does that allocation conform to industry standards?
  • Is it adequate based on our threat profile?
  • What are the stakeholder demands and priorities for cybersecurity? Data privacy? Data governance? What interactions has the company or board had with shareholders regarding cybersecurity?
  • What is the interaction model between senior management and the board for communications regarding cybersecurity?
  • Has the regulatory focus on the board’s cybersecurity responsibility been increasing? If so, what is driving that focus?

Board cybersecurity oversight

  • How is oversight of cybersecurity structured (committee vs. full board) and why? Is this structure well documented in the appropriate governance charters?
  • Is cybersecurity an area considered and reported as a director competency? If so, have skill/experience gaps been identified together with plans to resolve those gaps?
  • Is there a cybersecurity expert on the board?

Overall cybersecurity strategy

  • Does the board play an active part in determining an organization’s cybersecurity strategy?
  • What are the key elements of a good cybersecurity strategy?
  • Is the organization’s cybersecurity preparedness receiving the appropriate level of time and attention from management and the board (or appropriate board committee)?
  • How do management and the board (or appropriate board committee) make this process part of the organization’s enterprise-wide governance framework?
  • How do management and the board (or appropriate board committee) support improvements to the organization’s process for conducting a cybersecurity assessment?

Risk assessment: risk profile

  • What are the potential cyber threats to the organization?
  • Who is responsible for management oversight of cyber risk?
  • Has a formal cyber assessment been performed? Does it need to be updated?
  • Do management and the board understand the organization’s vulnerabilities and how it may be targeted for cyber-attacks?
  • What do the results of the cybersecurity assessment mean to the organization as it looks at its overall risk profile?
  • Is management regularly updating the organization’s inherent risk profile to reflect changes in activities, services, and products?

Risk assessment: cyber maturity oversight

  • Who is accountable for assessing, managing, and monitoring the risks posed by changes to the business strategy or technology, and are those individuals empowered to carry out those responsibilities?
  • Is there someone dedicated full-time to our cybersecurity mission and function, such as a Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)?
  • Is our cybersecurity function properly aligned within the organization? (Aligning the CISO under the CIO may not always be the best model as it may present a conflict. Many organizations align this function under the risk, compliance, audit, or legal functions, while others make it a direct or “dotted line” reporting to the CEO.)
  • Do the inherent risk profile and cybersecurity maturity levels meet risk management expectations from management, the board, and shareholders? If there is misalignment, what are the proposed plans to bring them into alignment?

 Cybersecurity controls

  • Do the organization’s policies and procedures demonstrate management’s commitment to sustaining appropriate cybersecurity maturity levels?
  • What is the ongoing practice for gathering, monitoring, analyzing, and reporting risks?
  • How effective are the organization’s risk management activities and controls identified in the assessment?
  • Are there more efficient or effective means for achieving or improving the organization’s risk management and control objectives?
  • Are there controls in place to ensure adequate, accurate, and timely reporting of cybersecurity-related content?
  • How does the company remain apprised of laws and regulations and ensure compliance?
  • What cloud services does our organization use and how risky are they?
  • How are we protecting sensitive data? Do we know what types of data the organization maintains? 

Threat intelligence and collaboration

  • What is the process for gathering and validating inherent risk profile and cybersecurity maturity information?
  • Does our organization share threat intelligence with law enforcement?
  • What third parties does the organization rely on to support critical activities and does the organization regularly audit their level of access?
  • What is the process to oversee third parties and understand their inherent risks and cybersecurity maturity?

Cybersecurity metrics

  • Have we defined appropriate cybersecurity metrics, the format, and who should be reporting to the board?
  • How regularly should a board obtain IT metric information?
  • Is the information meaningful in a way that invokes a reaction and provides a clear understanding of the level of risk willing to be accepted, transferred, or mitigated?
  • How is the board actively monitoring progress or lack of progress and holding management accountable?

Cyber incident management and resilience

  • How does management validate the type and volume of cyber-attacks?
  • Does the organization have a comprehensive cyber incident response and recovery plan? Does it involve all key stakeholders—both internal and external? Does it include a business disaster recovery communication process?
  • How does an incident response and recovery plan fit into the overall cybersecurity strategy?
  • Is the board’s response role clearly defined?
  • Is the cyber incident response reviewed and rehearsed at least annually? Do rehearsals include cyber incident exercises?
  • Is there a culture of cyber awareness and reporting at all levels of the company?
  • Is the company adequately insured and is coverage reviewed at least annually?

Cybersecurity education

  • How does the board remain current on cybersecurity developments in the market and the regulatory environment?
  • Currently, how does the board evaluate directors' knowledge of the current cyber environment and cybersecurity issues impacting their organizations?
  • Do boards currently have the skill sets necessary to adequately oversee cybersecurity? How is the board identifying and evaluating the necessary director skills and experience in this area?
  • Are directors provided with educational opportunities in this area?
  • Is regular cybersecurity education provided to the entire organization?

Cybersecurity disclosure

  • Has oversight of cybersecurity reporting been defined for management and the board?
  • Are company policies and procedures to identify and manage cybersecurity risk, management’s role in implementing cybersecurity policies and procedures, board of directors’ cybersecurity expertise, and its oversight of cybersecurity risk being included within the financial statement and proxy disclosures?
  • Does the company have a mechanism for timely reporting of material cybersecurity incidents?
  • Have updates about previously reported material cybersecurity threats and incidents been included in the financial statements?

If you have any questions about cybersecurity programs, communicating with your board about cybersecurity, or have a specific question about your company or organization, please contact our IT security experts. We're here to help. 

Article
Board oversight of cybersecurity: Questions to ask

Read this if you are interested in building a thriving workforce.

As businesses across the country continue to struggle to find and keep employees, it is time to build a workplace that sends a clear message to employees: “We care about you as a person. Your well-being matters.” 

Many leaders will send communications that emphasize the importance of people and the value of well-being. Despite this messaging, many organizations are missing opportunities to make well-being a natural part of the employee experience. The resulting disconnect between messaging and reality can result in frustration, disengagement, and cynicism. We’ve compiled a list of some of the most common workplace factors that can disrupt an organization’s intentions to build a strong well-being culture. 

Are you missing the mark with employee well-being? 

The chart below illustrates common ways that employers may be missing the mark on providing a supportive environment to employees. As you’ll see, they can be both large things like compensation and benefits, but they can also be small, potentially easy-to-fix things such as providing healthy snacks in the office instead of junk food. Look at this chart holistically for ways you may be able to change some negative influences into positive ones.


Overcoming the challenges to your well-being goals takes time. And while it is natural for organizations to think of employee well-being as the responsibility of human resources and leadership, in reality, well-being is a product of every part of the employee experience. In other words, it’s part of everyone’s job.

Well-being program considerations

Understanding the pain points for employees is an essential element of any successful well-being program, even if those pain points exist outside the domain of traditional well-being and wellness programs. Here are some things to consider:

  • Find out what matters to your employees, as every organization is different. Use surveys, interviews, and focus groups to understand priorities and do something substantive with what you learn.
  • Make a plan to address operational challenges. Put simply, outdated technology and inefficient business processes stress employees out.
  • Assess your well-being approach to identify strengths, gaps, and opportunities for improvement.
  • Develop, document, and implement a well-being plan that aligns with your organizational culture and goals. 
  • In the midst of planning a big system implementation of organizational change? Consider ways to integrate well-being as part of high-stress initiatives. 

How mature is your organization’s well-being program?

Understanding the maturity level of your organization’s well-being program can help you benchmark, assess progress, and gain leadership support by showing a clear path to improvement. This maturity model can help you assess where you are now and how to incrementally improve.

Have questions or need ideas about your specific situation? Contact our well-being consulting team. We’re here to help.

Article
Workplace well-being: Common ways organizations miss the mark

Read this if your CFO has recently departed, or if you're looking for a replacement.

With the post-Covid labor shortage, “the Great Resignation,” an aging workforce, and ongoing staffing concerns, almost every industry is facing challenges in hiring talented staff. To address these challenges, many organizations are hiring temporary or interim help—even for C-suite positions such as Chief Financial Officers (CFOs).

You may be thinking, “The CFO is a key business partner in advising and collaborating with the CEO and developing a long-term strategy for the organization; why would I hire a contractor to fill this most-important role?” Hiring an interim CFO may be a good option to consider in certain circumstances. Here are three situations where temporary help might be the best solution for your organization.

Your organization has grown

If your company has grown since you created your finance department, or your controller isn’t ready or suited for a promotion, bringing on an interim CFO can be a natural next step in your company’s evolution, without having to make a long-term commitment. It can allow you to take the time and fully understand what you need from the role — and what kind of person is the best fit for your company’s future.

BerryDunn's Kathy Parker, leader of the Boston-based Outsourced Accounting group, has worked with many companies to help them through periods of transition. "As companies grow, many need team members at various skill levels, which requires more money to pay for multiple full-time roles," she shared. "Obtaining interim CFO services allows a company to access different skill levels while paying a fraction of the cost. As the company grows, they can always scale its resources; the beauty of this model is the flexibility."

If your company is looking for greater financial skill or advice to expand into a new market, or turn around an underperforming division, you may want to bring on an outsourced CFO with a specific set of objectives and timeline in mind. You can bring someone on board to develop growth strategies, make course corrections, bring in new financing, and update operational processes, without necessarily needing to keep those skills in the organization once they finish their assignment. Your company benefits from this very specific skill set without the expense of having a talented but expensive resource on your permanent payroll.

Your CFO has resigned

The best-laid succession plans often go astray. If that’s the case when your CFO departs, your organization may need to outsource the CFO function to fill the gap. When your company loses the leader of company-wide financial functions, you may need to find someone who can come in with those skills and get right to work. While they may need guidance and support on specifics to your company, they should be able to adapt quickly and keep financial operations running smoothly. Articulating short-term goals and setting deadlines for naming a new CFO can help lay the foundation for a successful engagement.

You don’t have the budget for a full-time CFO

If your company is the right size to have a part-time CFO, outsourcing CFO functions can be less expensive than bringing on a full-time in-house CFO. Depending on your operational and financial rhythms, you may need the CFO role full-time in parts of the year, and not in others. Initially, an interim CFO can bring a new perspective from a professional who is coming in with fresh eyes and experience outside of your company.

After the immediate need or initial crisis passes, you can review your options. Once the temporary CFO’s agreement expires, you can bring someone new in depending on your needs, or keep the contract CFO in place by extending their assignment.

Considerations for hiring an interim CFO

Making the decision between hiring someone full-time or bringing in temporary contract help can be difficult. Although it oversimplifies the decision a bit, a good rule of thumb is: the more strategic the role will be, the more important it is that you have a long-term person in the job. CFOs can have a wide range of duties, including, but not limited to:

  • Financial risk management, including planning and record-keeping
  • Management of compliance and regulatory requirements
  • Creating and monitoring reliable control systems
  • Debt and equity financing
  • Financial reporting to the Board of Directors

If the focus is primarily overseeing the financial functions of the organization and/or developing a skilled finance department, you can rely — at least initially — on a CFO for hire.

Regardless of what you choose to do, your decision will have an impact on the financial health of your organization — from avoiding finance department dissatisfaction or turnover to capitalizing on new market opportunities. Getting outside advice or a more objective view may be an important part of making the right choice for your company.

BerryDunn can help whether you need extra assistance in your office during peak times or interim leadership support during periods of transition. We offer the expertise of a fully staffed accounting department for short-term assignments or long-term engagements―so you can focus on your business. Meet our interim assistance experts.

Article
Three reasons to consider hiring an interim CFO

Read this if you are a care provider that receives Medicaid Waiver Payments.

The IRS has recently issued guidance related to the taxability of certain payments to individual care providers of eligible individuals under a state Medicaid Home and Community-Based Services waiver program described in section 1915(c) of the Social Security Act (Medicaid Waiver Payments). Such payments, treated as difficulty of care payments, are excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes under section 131 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Notice 2014-7, issued on January 3, 2014, provided guidance that deemed the difficulty of care payments as not subject to federal income tax. However, the notice was silent regarding implications related to employment taxes, specifically FICA and FUTA. Additional guidance issued in the fall of 2022 concludes that difficulty of care payments are subject to FICA and FUTA taxes unless an exemption applies.

Generally, if a service provider receiving difficulty of care payments is an employee of the organization providing the payments, then such payments will be considered wages subject only to FICA withholding (but not income tax), and FUTA will be assessed on those wages. If the service provider is an independent contractor, then the organization does not have any withholding obligations and does not need to prepare a Form 1099.

More information on Medicaid Waiver Payments can be found at Certain Medicaid Waiver Payments May Be Excludable From Income | Internal Revenue Service.

If you have any questions on these payments or your specific situation, please contact our Not-for-profit Tax team. We’re here to help.

Article
Difficulty of care payments and employment taxes

Read this if you are interested in GASB updates. 

The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issued GASB Statement No. 99, Omnibus 2022 on May 9, 2022. The statement enhances comparability in accounting and financial reporting and improves the consistency of authoritative literature by addressing (1) practice issues that have been identified in previous GASB Statements, and (2) adding guidance on accounting and financial reporting for financial guarantees.

We’ve reviewed the statement in its entirety, and broken down key components for you to know. Here are the highlights.  

Accounting and financial reporting for exchange or exchange-like financial guarantees

Financial guarantees is a guarantee of an obligation of a legally separate entity or individual, including a blended or discretely presented component unit, that requires the guarantor to indemnify a third-part obligation holder under specified conditions, in an exchange or exchange-like transactions. 

An entity that extends an exchange or exchange-like financial guarantee should recognize a liability and expense related to the guarantee when qualitative factors and historical data indicate that is it more than likely not a government will be required to make a payment related to the guarantee.

Statement 99 excludes guarantees related to special assessment debt, financial guarantee contracts within the scope of Statement 53, or guarantees related to conduit debt obligations. 

Certain derivative instruments that are neither hedging derivative instruments nor investment derivative instruments

Derivative instruments that are within the scope of Statement 53, but do not meet the definition of an investment derivative instrument or the definition of a hedging derivative instrument are considered other derivative instruments. These “other derivative instruments” should now be accounted for as follows:

  1. Changes in fair value should be reported on the “resource flows statement” separately from the investment revenue classification.
  2. Information should be disclosed in the notes to financial statements separately from hedging instruments and investment derivative instruments.
  3. Governments should disclose the fair values of derivative instruments that were reclassified from hedging derivative instruments to other derivative instruments. 

Leases

If your entity has leases please review the following as Statement 99 clarifies numerous issues from Statement 87, specifically:

  • Lease terms as it relates to options to terminate and option to purchase the underlying assets, in paragraph 12 of Statement 87 has been clarified;
  • Short-term leases in paragraph 12 of Statement 87 has been clarified as it relates to an option to terminate the lease;
  • Lessee and lessor recognition and measurement for leases other than short-term leases that transfer ownership has been clarified, and
  • Lease incentives in paragraph 61 of Statement 87 has been further defined.

Public Private and Public-Public Partnerships (PPPs)

If your entity has PPPs, Statement 99 clarifies the following: 

  • PPP terms
  • Receivable for installment payments (transferor recognition)
  • Receivable for the underlying PP Asset (transferor recognition)
  • Liability for installment payments (operator recognition)
  • Deferred outflow of resources (operator recognition)

Subscription-Based Information Technology Arrangements (SBITAs)

Subscription terms and definitions have been clarified, specifically as it relates with options to terminate, short-term SBITAs, and measurement of subscription liabilities.

If your entity has SBITAs, review the provisions of each SBITA to ensure compliance with Statement 99 paragraphs 23–25.

Replacement of LIBOR

Check with your banking institutions to confirm when they have phased out of LIBOR. Confirm with your banking institutions what specifically has replaced LIBOR and update Financial Statement disclosures as needed. 

SNAP

State governments should recognize distributions of benefits from Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as a nonexchange transaction. Review Financial Statement disclosure and determine if a disclosure is needed. 

Disclosure of Nonmonetary Transactions

If you engage in one or more nonmonetary transactions during the fiscal year, you will need to disclose those transactions in the notes to the financial statements the measurement of attribute(s) applied to the assets transferred, rather than basis of accounting for those assets.

Pledges of future revenues when resources are not received by the pledging government

When blending the financial statement of a debt-issuing component unit into the financial statements of a primary government pledging revenue for the component unit’s debt, the primary government should reclassify an amount due to the component as an interfund payable and an interfund transfer out simultaneously with the recognition of the revenues that are pledged.

Focus of the government-wide financial statement

Statement 99 reiterates that there should be a total overall government-wide column within the MD&A, Statement of Net Position, and Statement of Activities. This column should exclude all fiduciary activities, including custodial funds. 

Terminology updates

No action is needed. Terminology has been updated in previous pronouncements, for terminology as it relates to Statements 63 and 53. 


Effective dates

The requirements related to the extension of the use of LIBOR, accounting for SNAP distributions, disclosures of nonmonetary transactions, pledges of future revenues by pledging governments, clarification of certain provisions in Statement 34 and terminology updates related to GASB 53 and 63 are effective upon issuance.

The requirements related to leases, PPPs, and SBITAs, are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2022.

The requirements related to financial guarantees and the classification and reporting of derivative instruments within the scope of Statement 53 are effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2023.

Earlier application is encouraged and permitted for all.

If you would like more information regarding Statement 99, please contact our Audits of Governmental Component Units team. We’re here to help.

Article
Key considerations from GASB Statement No. 99 

Read this if you work in finance or accounting or rely on financial reporting information.

Does your financial close process provide the information you need to make educated business decisions? 

Timely reporting of financial results is key to stakeholder decision making. As a result of market and regulatory obligations, companies and organizations are confronted with increasingly strict guidelines for the delivery of timely, accurate reports. Enormous amounts of information on transactions must be processed in a limited timeframe. This requires a great deal of effort on the part of your accounting and finance teams. 

The typical financial close process can be broken down into the following segments:

While this workflow seems straightforward enough, the financial close is not a single flat process, but the combination of many interrelated and often codependent processes—each with its own stages. The closing and reporting process is complex, and involves many different data suppliers and dependencies. Think your billing department, accounts payable, cash receipt, procurement, and more. All of these areas are likely to have data inputs that go into your financial close.
 

It often ends up looking like this when you consider each task:


 
To make the situation more challenging, as companies and organizations grow, the closing process can become more onerous and take longer to complete. Tasks in the financial close process are often added to an existing process—a process that may be more reactionary and based in historical practice, and may not have been well thought-out or planned for the current environment. Adding these tasks and increasing data inputs and outputs adds additional pressure to an incredibly important, but often forgotten task: analysis.

The majority of finance departments spend the bulk of their time on the financial close itself. Unfortunately, this can lead to delays, uncovering mistakes well after the fact, and reports lagging behind current business operations. The later the analysis is performed and the reports are distributed, the less useful they become for decision making. 

Financial close optimization

The good news? There is a strategy to optimize your financial close process, called financial close optimization, or fast closing. Fast closing is the periodic and structured closing and reporting process, in which all knowledge about the financial facts is collected and distributed to stakeholders more quickly.

There is an emerging trend for more frequent financial reporting, which allows companies and organizations to be more nimble and responsive to financial results, especially when facing an unprecedented crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic. Optimizing the financial close process allows for quicker reporting of business results to give stakeholders a more timely financial picture.

We understand the scarcity of human and financial resources continues to prove challenging to financial teams. Creating a culture of continuous improvement is a challenging task for almost any finance team—but given the benefits of a fast closing and the increased costs of a longer close, is this something that can be ignored any longer?

Look out for our next article on tips and strategies to optimize your financial close, which can lead to:

  • Freeing up resources to provide finance teams more time for a deeper analysis of operating performance and other strategic objectives
  • Providing more accurate and timely reporting
  • Improving the organization’s audit readiness 
  • Lessening the need for traditional routine tasks 
  • Increasing focus on clients, patients, and customers by spending more time looking ahead to possible opportunities. 

If you have any questions on how to improve your financial close, please contact us. We’re here to help.

Article
Financial close: Increasing complexity calls for improving processes