Forensic audits look to reduce level of risk

The upcoming forensic audit of Worcester County Public Schools’ financial management and records appears to have arisen from the discovery that a trusted employee may have embezzled $118,000 over a period of years.

Even so, the granular-level examination of financial procedures and practices the school administration has ordered is not, at this point, about ferreting out other instances of possible malfeasance and mismanagement.

None of that is likely or expected, which makes the real purpose of this assessment to be reducing the risk that something of this nature can happen again.

According to the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, forensic examinations — and more specifically risk assessments — are more about prevention than anything else. Consequently, there’s no reason such audits should be limited to the school system.

Worcester County government with its $300 million operating budget also could also benefit from a deep dive into its money management practices. Understand, of course, that annual audits differ from risk assessment audits, which have specific targets.

It isn’t that government personnel are prone to stealing, because they aren’t. National statistics show that employees in private businesses are more inclined to try that — but governments in rural areas are often the largest employers, are big targets and, of course, operate on the public’s dime.

That is why a molecular-level examination of the books and a risk assessment should not be limited to the schools but should be applied to county government as well … and any other institution financed with public money.

That’s especially important in these times of increasingly sophisticated AI-powered scams and schemes. But beyond that, the greater reason is that perfect financial management programs don’t exist because there aren’t any perfect human beings to run them.