Month-end closing: cash, bank reconciliation and review of supporting documents

Theoretical balance: 2,450,000 + 3,000,000 + 2,000,000 − 5,812,500 = 1,637,500. Cash count: 1,200,000 + 150,000 + 40,000 + 10,000 + 2,500 = 1,402,500. Difference: 1,402,500 − 1,637,500 = − 235,000 (shortfall).

Treatment: (a) fuel 150,000: valid document, to be recorded as an expense on the correct budget line. (b) receipt for 60,000: inadmissible document; do not record it as an expense; record the amount in a suspense account, ask the cashier and the person who allegedly received the funds for a written explanation; if no valid supporting document is produced, the amount is a cash loss to be handled according to the policy (recovery, incident report). (c) note for 40,000: this is not an expense but an advance, to be recorded in the driver's advance account, to be cleared or repaid.

Residual difference: after (a) and (c), theoretical balance 1,637,500 − 150,000 − 40,000 = 1,447,500, i.e. a shortfall of 45,000. If (b) were accepted, the balance would be 1,387,500 and there would be a surplus of 15,000. There are therefore two problems: 60,000 unsupported and an unexplained surplus of 15,000 (receipt not recorded, expense recorded but not paid, data entry error). The surplus is recorded in a suspense account and analysed; it is never kept "to offset".

Other anomalies: opening balance of 2,450,000, above the ceiling of 1,500,000; withdrawal of 3,000,000 on 05/10 bringing the cash box to about 5,450,000: risk of theft and breach of the rule. Documents kept without being recorded: cash book not updated daily.

Cheque 1125 was recorded as 270,000 instead of 720,000: a transposition of digits. The difference (450,000) is divisible by 9, a classic sign of transposition. The invoice confirms 720,000: the error is in the book. Entries: bank charges 35,000; additional 450,000 for cheque 1125 on the same budget line as the invoice. The unpresented cheques and the deposit require no entry: they will be followed up the next month. Cheque 1127 (November rent) is a prepaid expense to be allocated to November. The reconciliation is signed by the person who prepares it and checked by another.

• PV-214: compliant (quotations, contract, approval, traceable payment).
• PV-215: breach of segregation of duties: the same person requests, approves and receives. Have the receipt cross-checked by another person, remind staff of the rule, correct the workflow.
• PV-216 and PV-217: same supplier, same date, same purpose, 2 × 950,000 = 1,900,000: splitting to avoid the 3 quotations. Report to the manager, check market prices and actual receipt of the cement (quantities, construction sites), review past purchases from this supplier.
• PV-218: 9 similar signatures out of 30: risk of ghost participants (up to 9 × 15,000 × 2 = 270,000). Cash payment by the trainer without each recipient signing at the time of payment. Check by sampling (calls, invitations, home organisations), report to the anti-fraud focal point if doubts are confirmed; in future, individual signed payment, ideally by mobile money, with an identity document.
• PV-219: misallocation: 40% × 1,100,000 = 440,000 must be reclassified to project B. Correct the entry before reporting to donor A.

1. Compliance with the cash ceiling and cash withdrawals split according to planned needs (finance manager).
2. Surprise cash count at least once a month by an independent person, with signed minutes (base manager, under the oversight of country finance).
3. Procurement workflow with segregation of request / approval / receipt and systematic checks for splitting in the purchase register (logistics and finance).
4. Payment of per diems and activity costs by mobile money or against individual signature with an identity document (programme and finance).
5. Signed monthly timesheets and salary allocation based on them (HR and finance). Daily cash book entries and monthly bank reconciliation reviewed by a second person.

I refuse both requests. An accommodation invoice is a false document: using it to justify an expense to a donor is fraud, for which I and the organisation are liable. Keeping a surplus off the books creates a slush fund, which all procedures prohibit and which encourages embezzlement.

I calmly explain the correct solution to the base manager: 60,000 in a suspense account with a request for a written explanation from the cashier, then, depending on the outcome, recovery or a recorded loss with an incident report; 15,000 in a suspense account until explained. These amounts are small; the real risk would be to conceal them. I document the request and my reply. As the request comes from my direct supervisor, I inform the country finance manager or use the reporting mechanism provided (whistleblowing line); the whistleblower protection policy applies.