k. Contract approval
Laserfiche
>
Public
>
County Commission
>
2006
>
12-04-2006
>
Consent agenda
>
k. Contract approval
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/28/2006 12:03:15 PM
Creation date
11/28/2006 11:59:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />~ <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />J <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />. . <br />I <br />{ <br />I <br />l' <br />l <br />I' <br />I' <br /> <br /> <br />National State Auditors Association <br /> <br />May 19, 2005 <br /> <br />Mr. Robert R. Peterson <br />State Auditor <br />State Capitol Building <br />600 East Boulevard <br />Bismarck, North Dakota 58505 <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Peterson: <br /> <br />We have reviewed the system of quality control of North Dakota Office of State Auditor (the <br />office) in effect for the period April 1, 2004 to March 31, 2005. A system of quality control <br />encompasses the office's organizational structure and the policies adopted and procedures <br />established to provide it with reasonable assurance of conforming with government auditing <br />standards. The design of the system and compliance with it are the responsibility of the office. <br />Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the design of the system, and the office's <br />compliance with the system based on our review. <br /> <br />We conducted our review in accordance with the policies and procedures for external peer <br />reviews established by the National State Auditors Association (NSAA). In performing our review, <br />we obtained an understanding of the office's system of quality control for engagements <br />conducted in accordance with government auditing standards. In addition, we tested compliance <br />with the office's quality control policies and procedures to the extent we considered appropriate. <br />These tests covered the application of the office's' policies and procedures on selected <br />engagements. Because our review was based on selective tests, it would not necessarily disclose <br />all weaknesses in the system of quality control or all instances of lack of compliance with it. <br /> <br />Because there are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any system of quality control, <br />departures from the system may occur and not be detected. Also, projection of any evaluation of <br />a system of quality control to future periods is subject to the risk that the system of quality control <br />may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or because the degree of compliance <br />with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. <br /> <br />In our opinion, the system of quality control of State of North Dakota, Office of the State Auditor, <br />in effect for the period April 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005, has been suitably designed and was <br />complied with during the period to provide reasonable assurance of conforming with government <br />auditing standards. ~ ;J .;t~ <br /> <br />Team Leade <br />National State Auditors Association <br />External Peer Review Team <br /> <br />'--'y'V \ .4 :'i r \ <br />I) I lA/I, -:..;;(lr/ ,:; ,--1-, \ ,k j~ <br />Concurring :Reviewer <br />National State Auditors Association <br />External Peer Review Team <br /> <br />:~f)1 HC~":I1(,~ R\)~h.i. Suite Jo::. Lt.:\lrl);lil{L Kl'tllU..t:li):,II;.2ql-l Tckphl'lh.'I;".,-;q, :~h.i ij-. Fa\ 1"~YI ::;7~-()~1)-; <br />4.......t" C.:plh11 Sln."I.:'L ~ \\ . ~llll": ::>"-J.. \\ .t....tllll::tPtL i)C 2')\ II f\. L..'ki'I1(~n..." 2l 1,2, r<:'-':' ';'."';'';;!. Fax I :(j~ i ()::.1~."-1-; <br />\\ \\ \\ l1~i"",h, 1.\ II,:.: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.