Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESPONSE - BID - 7072 AUDIT SERVICES MPOPROPOSAL FOR AUDITING SERVICES N F R M P 0 NORTH FRONT RANGE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Anderson & Whitney, P.C. Certified Public Accountants 5801 West 1 lt" Street, Suite 300 Greeley, Colorado 80634-4813 (970) 3 52-7990 Contact: Alan Holmberg, CPA October 1, 2009 � I Similar Engagements with Other Government Entitie � I � I The most significant engagements in the last five years that are related to this proposal are Larimer County, City of Greeley, Town of Eaton, Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority, and the Colorado Renewable Energy Authority. They are discussed below in order of the number of total engagement hours. Timely and practical comments and recommendations have been provided after each audit regarding budgeting, internal control matters, federal grant regulations, fraud risks and upcoming accounting changes. ilk The firm has performed the 2005-2008 audits of LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO and also was auditor for various prior terms. The audit includes the County CAFR as well as the Retirement Plan. We assisted the County in earning a GFOA Certificate of Achievement. Consulting included debt issuance, continuing disclosure, and the new reporting model. This is a Single Audit. The audits require about 1,100 hours annually. Alan Holmberg is engagement shareholder with Melissa Craven the engagement manager. Carol Block, Finance Director (498-5931) is our primary contact. �Ik The CITY OF GREELEY was an audit client of Anderson & Whitney, P.C. from 2002-2006 and for several previous terms. The City has a Single Audit including the major program CDOT/Federal Highway Administration (20.205), similar to the MPO. The City's audit required about 700 hours annually. Alan Holmberg was engagement shareholder. Tim Nash, Finance Director (350-9730) is qualified to speak on the quality of staff and consistency of service over a long-term association. �Ik The TOWN OF EATON is another long-term audit client as we have audited their 1968-2008 financial statements. The Town provides a full -range of services and the audits included major water and wastewater improvement projects and federal loans. The audit of the Town's financial statements entails about 200 hours and is a Single Audit. Alan Holmberg serves as engagement shareholder, Gary Carsten, Town Administrator (454-3338) is our principal contact. �Ik LARIMER EMERGENCY TELEPHONE AUTHORITY (LETA) has been an audit client since 2000. Similar to the MPO, LETA is an example of an entity formed by intergovernmental agreement. Thus, we have assisted them in working through the budget and TABOR issues when there is no electorate. Their audit entails around 100 hours. Alan Holmberg is the engagement shareholder. Their administrator, Kimberly Culp, is our primary contact (212-3442). �Ik COLORADO RENEWABLE ENERGY AUTHORITY (2006-2008) is another example of a government formed by intergovernmental agreement. A joint venture between CU, CSU, and the School of Mines, we have also assisted them with their State budget law responsibilities. The audit requires about 50 hours. Alan Holmberg is the engagement shareholder. Laura Ragin, Director of Accounting at CU can be contacted at (303) 492-2109. north front range pro 2009 -8- S eeifie Audit A rose Following is a proposed work plan, including audit methodology and the various sources of information needed: ACTIVITY TIMING Entrance conference; audit planning Interim fieldwork to primarily review and evaluate the internal control structure, and perform tests of controls with the intent of being able to rely on those controls. Mailing of bank account confirmations and revenue confirmations. Final fieldwork to audit each of the funds of the MPO as well as the general areas of cash and investments, accounts payable, receivables, and operations. Information needed will include working trial balances and budget comparisons for each fund as well as copies of selected account analyses prepared by the MPO's finance staff. Audit work includes comparison of activity to prior year as well as tracing large transactions to supporting documentation. Unusual transactions or activity new to the MPO will be discussed with management and the contract, agreement, etc., reviewed for proper accounting. Review of Board minutes for indication of grants, contracts, or agreements not noted in the audit. Observation of records and inquiry of management of any commitments, contingencies, and subsequent events. Written communication with your Attorney for information on litigation, claims, and unasserted claims, if necessary. Review the first draft of the financial statements and footnotes. Conduct exit conference with audit committee. December January March March April Make final presentation of report and management letter to the MPO Council. May/June Following is additional requested information on the details of our audit approach: a. Our approach to understanding your major segments is to first obtain an understanding of the accounting system and internal controls. This may include review of MPO procedures or accounting manuals, interviews with key personnel, and walk-throughs of key transactions cycles. Audit test work over cash typically includes confirmation of balances and tests of ' bank reconciliations. Receivables are tested through written confirmation as well as review of subsequent receipts and grant billings. Fixed asset depreciation schedules are reviewed, and additions tested. ' Accounts payable are audited through tests of subsequent disbursements and review of payroll, payroll tax and accrued vacation accruals. Deferred revenue is considered I for any grant receipts received which have not been earned. I north front range pro 2009 - 9 - ' Grant revenue is tested through review of reimbursement requests and written confirmation. Program revenues are compared to prior periods. ' Expenditures are tested through disbursement testing and analytical review. ' b. A detailed time budget by staff level and proposed segment is as follows: Shareholder Manager In -Charge ' Planning 1 6 4 Client Conferences 3 3 2 Risk Assessment Procedures -- 6 14 Audit test work 1 15 36 Research and Supervision 1 1 Workpaper Review 2 4 -- ' Review Financial Statements and MD&A 2 4 4 Management Letter 1 1 ' Total 11 40 60 c. Audit sampling is anticipated to be used in the audit, particularly in transaction testing over payroll and purchasing/disbursements. We do not rely on sampling exclusively, as we consider it important to test large or unusual transactions or balances on a 100% basis, not a sample basis. Our firm's approach to sampling is usually that of "judgmental" sampling as opposed to "statistical" sampling. One area that absolutely requires additional audit samples is the Single Audit procedures over federal programs. Adequate samples must be selected in the major program for the auditor to report on internal controls and give an opinion on compliance with laws and regulations. We use sample sizes of 25-30 expenditures ' per major program, as long as controls are reasonable and there have not been significant exceptions in previous years. We would propose to select these transactions systematically from the population of all expenditures subject to full or ' partial federal reimbursement. Special care would be taken to ensure that a wide range of transactions was selected including payroll, benefits, capital outlay, payments to vendors, and payments to program participants, if any. d. Our firm has made a commitment to be up-to-date with the use of "paperless" audit software in the engagements. We facilitate this with notebook computers with several ' software applications on -site during the audit. We use these in conjunction with the client's system to the fullest extent possible to save our time and your time. ' For example, some clients prefer to give us account analyses on disk or by e-mail, and we can efficiently add our audit procedures. ' Our overall goal in "paperless" audit software is to work with clients to take advantage of the technology available from their systems and ours to produce a more efficient process. I north front range pro 2009 - 10 - e. Analytical procedures are first used in the planning of an engagement whereby unaudited financial information is reviewed to identify significant changes for further review. The most extensive analytical procedure planned for the audit is the comparison of current year account balances to the prior year account balances. Any significant variation among these factors is reviewed with MPO staff, and further evidence is examined to document the propriety of the change. The other primary source of analytical procedures involves the VanGo program. The number of riders and routes is analyzed in comparison to fare revenue. VanGo revenue is also compared to VanGo expense. ' f. The review and testing of internal controls is of added importance in the MPO audit. Internal control review is also very important because of the MPO's growing activities and potential growth. ' The first consideration is of the MPO's internal control environment. This includes analysis of such factors as management's philosophy and operating style, organizational structure, methods of assigning authority, and personnel policies and practices. The control environment reflects the overall attitude, awareness, and actions of the MPO Council and management concerning the importance of internal controls. The second phase of the internal control structure is the accounting system. This includes analysis of how transactions are initiated, processed and ultimately recorded in the general ledger. All significant cycles of transactions are reviewed through ' interviews with employees, inspection of documents used, and walk-throughs of transactions through the entire system. The results of this review is documented through checklists, flowcharts, and narratives. ' A final phase of control evaluation is the identification of the policies and procedures management has established to provide reasonable assurance that financial records t are accurate and assets are safeguarded. The existence and effectiveness of controls is a very important factor in designing audit tests to uncover material financial misstatements. g. There are many contracts, laws and regulations for which the MPO's auditor is responsible for testing compliance with. Most of these are financial in nature. The ' auditor does not have detection responsibility for general laws and regulations, such as civil rights statutes or environmental regulations. ' Our approach to this testing is to review the primary contracts, laws, and regulations applicable to the MPO, and determine which could directly affect the financial statements if noncompliance occurred. We then test these provisions in proportion to ' the likelihood and impact of noncompliance. The major potential source for laws affecting intergovernmental entities is the Colorado Revised Statutes. Remaining sources of laws and regulations include the MPO's policies, (e.g. purchasing and ' investment regulations), the provisions of federal grants, and others, such as arbitrage and continuing disclosure. Inorth front range pro 2009 - 11 - I' h. This section will discuss the approach to be taken in drawing audit samples for tests of compliance. Control/compliance tests will be primarily performed in the areas of purchasing, disbursements and payroll. Purchasing transactions will be selected from the range of check numbers issued during the year. Those checks selected will be tested in detail for purchase approval, receipt of goods, approval of invoice, purchasing policies, and compliance with contracts, if applicable. Payroll transactions will be selected from the range of payroll checks or direct deposit ' advices issued during the year. These will be tested for accuracy, pay rates, contract or timesheet, approval, payroll deductions, and legal requirements (W-4, I-9, etc.). ' Some types of laws, regulations, and contracts can be tested without selecting additional audit samples. For example, the purchasing policies of the MPO will be tested in conjunction with the test of controls over expenditures. Compliance with ' grants and contracts can best be determined in the audit by reviewing these documents to determine if any provisions would apply to transactions of the period. Ld"entifleation of Antiei ated Potential Audit Problem We are not aware of any anticipated audit problems regarding the 2009 audit of the MPO. Of course, there are always unexpected circumstances, different kinds of transactions, and changes in accounting standards that come up during the performance of an audit. Our method of dealing with these factors is to identify them as soon as possible and to immediately communicate with MPO officials to determine what efforts will be necessary to work through the situation. Typically, extra efforts are required of both the audit firm and the MPO staff. The professional attitude of the MPO staff, as well as our considerable audit experience, has given us an excellent track record in resolving unanticipated difficulties. 1 north front range pro 2009 - 12 - ttachments north front range pro 1009 - 13 ' a HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 10120 N. Oracle Road Tucson, Arizona 85704 (520)742-2611 Gary Heinfeld, CPA, CGFM Scott W. Kies, CPA Fax (520) 742-2718 Nancy A. Meech, CPA, CGFM Kimberly A. Robinson, CPA Jennifer L. Shields, CPA Kera Badalamenti, CPA www.heinfeldmeech.com ' Corey Arvizu, CPA To tht, Shareholders Anderson & Whitney, P.C. We have reviewed the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing practice of Anderson & Whitney, P.C. (the firm) in effect for the year ended March 31, 2007. A system of quality control encompasses the firm's organizational structure, the polices adopted and procedures established to provide it with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards. The elements of quality control are described in the Statements on Quality Control Standards issued by the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA). The firm is responsible for designing a system of quality control and complying with it to provide the firm reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards in all material respects. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the design of the system of quality control and the firm's compliance with its system of quality control based on our review. Our review was conducted in accordance with standards established by the Peer Review Board of the AICPA. During our review, we read required representations from the firm, interviewed firm personnel and obtained an understanding of the nature of the firm's accounting and auditing practice, and the design of the firm's system of quality control sufficient to assess the risks implicit in its practice. Based on our assessments, we selected engagements and administrative files to test for conformity with professional standards and compliance with the firm's system of quality control. The engagements selected represented a reasonable cross-section of the firm's accounting and auditing practice with emphasis on higher -risk engagements. The engagements selected included among others, audits of Employee Benefit Plans and engagements performed under Government Auditing Standards. Prior to concluding the review, we reassessed the adequacy of the scope of the peer review procedures and met with firm management to discuss the results of our review. We believe that the procedures we performed provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In performing our review, we obtained an understanding of the system of quality control for the firm's accounting and auditing practice. In addition, we tested compliance with the firm's quality control policies and procedures to the extent we considered appropriate. These tests covered the application of the firm's policies and procedures on selected engagements. Our review was based on selected tests therefore it would not necessarily detect all weaknesses in the system of quality control or all instances of noncompliance with it. There are inherent limitations in the effectiveness of any system of quality control and therefore noncompliance with the system of quality control may occur and not be detected. Projection of any evaluation of a system of quality control to future periods is subject to the risk that the system of quality control may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or because the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. In our opinion, the system of quality control for the accounting and auditing Y Q Y a D practice of Anderson & Whitney, P.C. in effect for the year ended March 31, 2007, has been designed to meet the requirements of the quality control standards for an accounting and auditing practice established by the AICPA and was complied with during the year then ended to provide the firm with reasonable assurance of conforming with professional standards. ' (0. e HEINFELD, MEECH & CO., P.C. Certified Public Accountants July 27, 2007 1, The name of the firm submitting this cost proposal is as follows: Anderson & Whitney, P.C. Certified Public Accountants 5801 West 11t' Street, Suite 300 Greeley, Colorado 80634-3813 Contact: Alan Holmberg, CPA 2. The person signing the transmittal letter of this proposal is entitled to represent the firm, empowered to submit this bid, and authorized to sign a contract with the North Front Range Transportation and Air Quality Planning Council. 3. The all-inclusive price for the 2009 audit is $10,500. - 15 - 1 NORTH FRONT RANGE MPO SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES ' FOR THE AUDIT OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Standard Quoted Hourly Hourly ' Hours Rates Rates Total ' Shareholder 11 Manager 40 $ 260 140 $ 200 105 $ 2,200 4,200 In -Charge Auditor 60 85 65 3,900 Subtotal N/A N/A $ 10,300 Out-of-pocket expenses 200 ' Total for 2009 all-inclusive maximum price audit $ 10,500 II J -16- TABLE OF CONTENTS TRANSMITTAL LETTER.............................................................................................................1 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL Independence...............................................................................................................................2 License to Practice in Colorado...................................................................................................2 Firm Qualifications and Experience............................................................................................2 Shareholder, Supervisory, and Staff Qualifications and Experience..........................................3 Similar Engagements With Other Governmental Agencies........................................................8 SpecificAudit Approach.............................................................................................................9 Identification of Anticipated Potential Audit Problems............................................................12 Attachments...............................................................................................................................13 Peer Review Report DOLLARCOST BID....................................................................................................................15 north Front range pro 2009 SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES Nature of Service to be Provided Maximum All -Inclusive Total Price 2009 Audit of North Front Range MPO $ 10,500 2010 Audit of North Front Range MPO 10,900 2011 Audit of North Front Range MPO 11,300 2012 Audit of North Front Range MPO 11,700 2013 Audit of North Front Range MPO 12,100 -17- SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL FEES AND EXPENSES FOR ADDITIONAL SERVICES NOT SPECIFIED IN APPENDIX F Standard Hourly Rates Quoted Hourly Rates Shareholder $ 260 $ 200 Manager 140 105 Supervisory Staff 85 65 Staff 75 56 Other (specify) Out of pocket expenses: Meals and lodging (amount per person per day) $ 10 (lunch) Transportation (cents -per -mile) 550 Other (specify) -- -18- I 1 ANdERSON MWIiITNEY 00000 North Front Range MPO % James O'Neill II Director of Purchasing, City of Fort Collins 215 North Mason. 2°d Floor Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 Dear Mr. O'Neill: A Professional Corporation of Certified Public Accountants October 1, 2009 We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal for auditing services to the North Front Range MPO and are enthusiastic about providing services to the MPO. Their commitment to quality in financial reporting is well-known by our firm. We have made that same commitment to quality in our practice and look forward to continuing our work with their professional staff. We believe that we can provide unique benefits to the MPO from this relationship: �+ Our experience includes three clients formed solely by intergovernmental agreement. Thus, we can help with the budget and accounting issues that arise. For example, we concur with your federal fiscal year budget also serving as your calendar year budget (some firms may not). °y Federal Single Audit requirements are continually growing in the area of internal control testing. Thus, the audit plan includes expanded procedures to assist the MPO to remain in compliance with federal requirements. This has increased the cost somewhat. °y We have the resources and the track record to meet your timing requirements. Also, our team will include a Certified Fraud Examiner. Our understanding is that you are requesting an audit of the MPO's basic financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2009, including an "in -relation -to" report on the supporting schedules. The audit is to be conducted in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. This proposal is a firm and irrevocable offer for ninety days for 2009, with the option of four subsequent years. We also commit to perform the work within the time frame contained in the request for proposal. ' We believe this proposal demonstrates the commitment we make to you, as we make to each of our clients, that you can rely on us to meet your professional accounting and auditing requirements. We welcome the opportunity to discuss our proposal further with you. ' Respectfully submitted, ' Alan Holmberg, CPA ' 5801 West 11th Street • Suite 300 (970) 352-7990 Greeley, Colorado 80634-4813 FAX (970) 352-1855 Inde endenc ' Anderson & Whitney, P.C. is independent of the North Front Range MPO and any component units as that term is described by auditing standards generally accepted in the United States. ' The firm's professional relationship with the MPO for the past five years has been limited to providing auditing services for the annual financial statements as well as miscellaneous consulting. This relationship does not contstitute a conflict of interest. We agree to give the MPO written notice of any professional relationships entered into ' with the MPO or its component units over the period of this proposed agreement. 'ILieense to praetiee in Colorad ' Anderson & Whitney, P.C. and the proposed engagement shareholder, manager, and key personnel are properly licensed to practice as Certified Public Accountants in the State of Colorado. ' irm ualifleations and Ex eriene Anderson & Whitney, P.C. located in Greeley is one of the largest local CPA firms in Colorado. Founded in 1968, the firm has experienced steady growth and has attracted talented professional individuals who have developed a solid track record of service to our clients. ' In addition to a considerable accounting and auditing practice, we are able to provide numerous other services to our clients through three other specialization groups: taxation, computer consulting, and financial services. The resources from each of these groups are ' available to assist the MPO whether with questions on various issues or more involved technical projects. ' We have a deep desire to be more than an auditor to our governmental clients. Thus, we have considerable experience and expertise in consulting services, including assistance with: Federal Program Requirements -► Debt and Continuing Disclosure Requirements Computer System Conversion and Networking ' �► Budget Preparation Payroll Taxes, W-2's and 1099's Employee Benefits Pension Issues °-► Legal Requirements for Investments » TABOR north front range pro 2009 - 2 - I I A summary of our personnel is as follows: i I � I TOTAL Shareholders 7 Managers 2 In -Charge Accountants 4 Professional Staff 6 Support Staff 5 Total 22 AUDIT Shareholders 2 Managers 2 In -charge Auditors 4 Staff Auditors 2 Total 10 ' The firm's governmental audit staff consists of one shareholder, one manager, two in - charge auditors and two staff auditors. All of these individuals are CPAs or CPA candidates and ' have experience in auditing large, multi -faceted governments. They are assigned full-time to audit and accounting engagements. We anticipate utilizing an in -charge auditor full-time on the engagement. The engagement manager will be assigned approximately half-time during the primary fieldwork and report preparation stages of the audit. The engagement shareholder will be utilized on -site for key parts of the engagement. Anderson & Whitney, P.C. has undergone ten triennial peer reviews of our auditing ' practice. These reviews test our level of professional competence and quality control, and helps insure that we are meeting all professional standards. We are proud to have received unmodified reports in each of our reviews (page 14; there was no letter of comment). ' As a peer review is required to cover the firm's major types of clients and include a Single Audit engagement, our peer reviews have included several specific government ' engagements. All Single Audit engagement reports are reviews by grantor agency officials, normally ' the Office of Inspector General. Anderson & Whitney has performed 21 Single Audit engagements in the past three years. No reports or opinions have been returned for modification, nor have any changes been recommended or suggested for subsequent audits. ' Anderson & Whitney, P.C. has never been named on any type of professional or regulatory disciplinary action. Shareholder, Supervisory, and Staff Qualifleations and Experieneel The primary personnel assigned to your engagement have been selected based on their ' technical skills, management capabilities, and previous experience in the governmental area. Alan Holmberg, CPA, will serve as the engagement shareholder and will be ' responsible for overall planning, performance, and review of the audit. He will provide technical assistance in auditing, accounting, and financial reporting. As such, he will perform an on -site review of the financial statements and key ' working papers. Alan is licensed to practice in the State of Colorado and is a member of GFOA and CGFOA. He was also chairman of the CSCPA's Governmental Issues Committee for 2000-2002. Alan has 25 years of north front range pro 2009 - 3 - government audit experience on engagements listed on page 6, including City of Greeley, North Front Range MPO, Larimer County, University of Northern Colorado, and Town of Eaton. Melissa Craven, CPA, will serve as the audit manager and will oversee the day- to-day performance of the audit. This includes planning, supervision, audit work in certain areas, contractual compliance, review of working papers, review of the financial statements, and preparation of reports and letters. She will coordinate these areas with MPO staff and consult with staff on accounting and financial reporting matters. Melissa is licensed to practice in the State of Colorado and is a member of CSCPA and CGFOA. She is also a Certified Fraud Examiner. Melissa has six years of government audit experience on engagements listed on page 7, including North Front Range MPO, Larimer County, Town of Berthoud, and the University of Northern Colorado. Alanna Moses will be assigned as in -charge auditor. She will assist in the planning and performance of the audit and will be primarily in charge of internal control review and testing and will perform much of the audit work. Her two years of experience includes work as in -charge auditor for Jefferson County Juvenile Assessment Center and the Colorado Renewable Energy Authority, both governments organized by intergovernmental agreement. Continuing professional development has always been emphasized at Anderson & Whitney. Many of our staff receive well over the forty hours per year benchmark. The engagement shareholder, manager, and in -charge have met or exceeded the standard of 24 hours of government -specific CPE. Alan Holmberg 09/09 AICPA Governmental Conference 09/09 ARRA of 2009 04/09 GAQC Annual Webcast 11/08 CSCPA Governmental Conference 08/08 Single Audit Update 04/08 GAQC Annual Webcast 1 1 /07 CDHS Training for County Auditors 1 1/07 CSCPA Governmental Conference 07/07 Yellow Book Update Melissa Craven 09/09 ARRA of 2009 07/09 GAQC Annual Webcast 06/09 IDEA Training (Data Extraction) 1 1/08 CDHS Training for County Auditors 06/08 ACFE Auditing for Internal Fraud 1 1/07 AICPA Governmental Update 10/07 AICPA Risk Assessment 03/07 ACFE Exam Preparation Alanna Moses 09/09 Introduction to GAS and Single Audit 1 1/09 CDHS Training for County Auditors 07/09 GAQC Annual Webcast 06/09 Governmental Issues Update 09/08 Audit Two Staff Training Anderson & Whitney was a charter member in 2005 of the Government Audit Quality Center (GAQC), a voluntary division of the AICPA. The Center's primary purpose is to promote the importance of quality governmental audits and the value of such audits to purchasers of governmental audit services. The Center also offers resources to enhance the quality of the firm's governmental audits. For example, we have participated in webcasts regarding the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Inorth front range pro 2009 -4- We keep current with governmental issues and trends through professional memberships. The firm also holds associate membership in the Government Finance Officers Association and Colorado Government Finance Officers Association. We participate in their training sessions and conferences. ' Part of our service tradition to audit clients is due to continuity of personnel. As our personnel turnover is relatively limited, we anticipate that many of the same individuals will return to serve the MPO in subsequent years. Due to our substantial audit practice, which includes several multi -year engagements with small and large governments, our commitment to governmental auditing will not be discontinued over the anticipated length of this proposal. There are six other members of our auditing team who are not utilized in this proposal. Most have experience with other Single Audits. I 1 north front range pro 2009 - 5 - HOLMBERG9 CP University of Nebraska (BS) Major: Mathematics, 1978 University of Nebraska (MA) Major: Accounting, 1982 ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE Twenty four years experience with Anderson & Whitney, P.C., governmental and commercial audits, including: North Front Range MPO (five years shareholder) University of Northern Colorado (five years shareholder) Metro State College (five years shareholder) Town of Eaton and Housing Authority (eight years shareholder) Larimer County (eight years shareholder) Larimer Emergency Telephone Authority (seven years shareholder) Larimer County Retirement Plan (five years shareholder) Weld County (five years shareholder) City of Greeley (five years shareholder) Weld County School District RE-3(J) (eight years shareholder) Quality Control Peer Review Team Member — 1990-2008 PROFESSIONAL American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) ' Colorado Society of Certified Public Accountants (CSCPA) CSCPA Government Issues Committee Colorado Government Finance Officers Association ' Chair, 2001 CSCPA Governmental Conference Chair, 2008 CSCPA Peer Review Board CIVIC ' Loaned Executive, Weld County United Way Leadership Weld County ' President, Eaton Sertoma Club working on various I north front range pro 2009 - 6 - i ELISSA CRAVENq CP ACADEMIC I■ University of Northern Colorado (BS) ' Major: Accounting, 2002 ' EXPERIENCE Six years experience with Anderson & Whitney, P.C., working on various governmental and ' commercial audits, including: North Front Range MPO (2004-2008) Larimer County (2005-2008) ' Metropolitan State College of Denver (2004-2008) Town of Berthoud (2003-2006) Weld School District RE-3(J) (2003-2009) ' University Schools (2003-2009) University of Northern Colorado (2003, 2009) PROFESSIONAL American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Colorado Society of Certified Public Accountants (CSCPA) Colorado Government Finance Officers Association (CGFOA) Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) I north front range pro 2009 - % -