HomeMy WebLinkAbout24 1995 AUDITOR SELEC 02-21-95NO. ~4
2-21-95
DATE:
FEBRUARY 8, 1995
Inter-Corn
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: AL SHIFBERG-MENCHER, CHAIRMAN, CITY OF TUSTIN AUDIT COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: 1995 AUDITOR SELECTION
RE COMMENDAT I ON:
The Audit Committee has evaluated the propoSals submitted and
recommends the selection of the firm of Moreland and Associates as
the City Auditors for the five year period begining 1995 through
1999.
FISCAL IMPACT:
While the Audit Committee is not recommending the firm with the
lowest price bi~ the fiscal impact on the City over the five years
of the proposed engagement will not be a significant increase over
the current cost of audit services.
DISCUSSION:
In compliance with City of Tustin Ordinance No. 1135, staff-
advertised for profesSional auditing services to begin with the
June 30, 1995 fiscal year end and continue through the June 30,
1999 year end. The City's comprehensive request for proposals was
requested by twenty firms. Nine firms attended a mandatory bidders
conference on November 14. Seven .firms submitted proposals for
evaluation by the Audit Committee.
The Committee evaluated the proposals primarily for the firms
technical qualifications and their proposed audit approach. Seventy
percent of the evaluation was based on qualifications and approach,
with thirty percent based on proposed cost.
After careful consideration, the Audit Committee.selected the firm
of Moreland and Associates to recommend to the City Council. The
Council should be aware that approximately ten years ago Mr. Mike
Moreland was a principal with the firm of Simonis, Moreland and
Associates when the City discovered a defalcation. Since that time
Mr. Moreland has terminated his relationship with his previous
partner and has established his own firm. The Audit Committee has
considered these facts in their evaluation and has discounted its
relevance in the selection process. The Committee voted 5-0 for
Page 2
February 8, 1995
the recommendation.
your reference.
A summary of the evalutions is attached for
The Audit Committee looks forward to the challenges of the upcoming
year and as always, we are available to serve the City Council.
Albert Shiftier, Chairman
Audit Committee
RAN:AS:is
a:audtdrft.a[
RATER:
Technical
Qualifications:
1995 Auditor Proposals
KPMG Lance/Soil Macias
Moreland Moss/levy
(35) 30 30 18 30 30 30 30
Audit Approach
(G5) 30 30 25 27 27 35 25
Price:
(30) 29 26 26 27 28 29 30
Total Points
RATER:
Technical
Qualifications:
89
Sullens
Capporicci
Expertise
(35) 20 34 35 24 28 30 28
Audit Approach
(35) 20 34 35 24 28 30 28
Price:
(30) 25 · 20 15 21 22 ;)3 25
Total Points
RATER:
Technical
Qualificatiom:
65 86 85 09
Jeffries (Was unavailable to submit pricing points)
Capporicci Conrad KPMG Lance/Soil
78 83 81
Macias Moreland Moss/levy
Expertise
(35)
Audit Approach
(35)
Prioe:
(30)
25 30 35 30 25 30 25
25 30 30 25 20 25 20
Total Points
RATER:
Technical
Qualifications:
50 60 65 55
Shifberg-Mencher
Cappodcci Conrad KPMG Lance/Soil
Expertise
(35) 20 28 29 20 25 30 14
Audit Approach
(35) 29 23 25 24 20 21 20
Price:
(30) 30 25 24 26 27 28 29
Total Points
RATER:
Technical
Qualifications:
79
Gallogly
Capporicci
76 78 70 73 79 63
Conrad KPMG Lanoe/'Soil Macias Moreland Moss/Lew
Expertise
(35) 30 32 35 31 30 32 25
Audit Approach
(35) 30 32 35 31 30 32 25
Price:
(30) 30 25 24 2§ 27 28 29
Total Points
Total Points
go 8.9 94 88 87 92 79
All Raters: I 373 399 391 366 368 403 353J