How to Write a Clear Audit Finding That's Actually Useful

You’ve found a control issue. Or a compliance problem. Or a material error that needs to be communicated.

Now comes the hard part: putting it into words.

 

A great audit finding doesn’t just check a box—it drives action.
A vague one? It gets skimmed, misunderstood, or ignored.

Whether you’re preparing financial statement findings under Yellow Book, or compliance findings under Uniform Guidance, clarity matters more than ever—especially in peer review.

Here’s how to write an audit finding that’s clear, constructive, and actually useful to the client (and your reviewer).

1. Use the Standard Format—But Make It Readable

Most frameworks (GAGAS, Uniform Guidance) require a standard structure:

• Condition – What was found

• Criteria – What should have happened

• Cause – Why it happened

• Effect – What it means or caused

• Recommendation – What to do next

• Views of Responsible Officials – The client’s response

• Planned Corrective Action – How they’ll fix it

But structure alone isn’t enough. The best findings use plain language—not accounting jargon.

❌ Instead of:

“The entity failed to implement controls over timely reconciliation of cash accounts.”

✅ Try:

“Monthly bank reconciliations were not performed during five of the twelve months tested, increasing the risk that errors or fraud could go undetected.”

 

2. Get Specific—But Stay Focused

Avoid generalizations like “internal controls were inadequate” or “procedures were not followed.”
Those don’t help the client fix anything—and they frustrate reviewers.

✅ Be clear about:

• How many items were affected

• What period was tested

• What was missing or incorrect

• How you determined it was a finding

🧠 Example:

“During testing of the Title I grant, 3 out of 10 payroll transactions lacked time-and-effort documentation required under 2 CFR §200.430. As a result, $14,200 in salary expenditures may be unallowable.”

That’s clear, measurable, and actionable.

3. Avoid Blame—Focus on Fixes

Findings should correct—not shame. Avoid language that feels accusatory, and focus instead on what’s broken in the process.

🚫 Don’t say:

“The finance director failed to perform reconciliations.”

✅ Say:

“Bank reconciliations were not performed or reviewed due to turnover and unclear responsibilities during the year.”

It’s professional. It’s fair. And it keeps the conversation focused on resolution.

4. Recommend the Next Right Step—Not a Wishlist

A recommendation isn’t the place to outline an ideal internal control environment. It’s the place to suggest one achievable action.

✅ Strong recommendations:

• Are realistic for the client’s size and resources

• Match the root cause

• Provide clarity without prescribing management’s response

🧠 Example:

“We recommend implementing a monthly reconciliation process with documented review by someone not responsible for initiating payments.”

Avoid boilerplate. Tailor your advice to what they can actually implement.

5. Leave Room for Their Voice—But Make It Count

The “Views of Responsible Officials” section often gets overlooked. But it’s a key part of the finding—and your opportunity to document agreement, disagreement, or context.

Encourage your client to:

• Agree with the finding, if applicable

• Clarify what happened

• Add any challenges to resolution (staffing, systems, timing)

If they disagree, include their explanation—but don’t water down your position. Document your conclusion and move forward.

Good Findings Solve Problems, Not Just Point Them Out

A strong audit finding should:

✅ Be specific
✅ Be clear
✅ Avoid blame
✅ Recommend a fix
✅ Leave the reader informed—not confused

Because at the end of the day, your job isn’t just to document issues.
It’s to help your clients build stronger systems through better reporting.

And that starts with better writing.

Less jargon.
More clarity.
More impact.