Reassess a reconciliation that changed after sign-off

A review approval applies to the work the reviewer actually saw. If the reconciliation changes afterward, compare the current file with the accepted version before treating the old approval as sufficient. Record the change date, preparer, and reason. Keep both versions so the scope of any additional review can be determined from evidence.

Distinguish a formatting change from a change in source data, formulas, accounting assumptions, or conclusions. A renamed tab may leave the result unchanged, while a refreshed query can alter many inputs without changing the file name. The reviewer needs the actual difference, not a generic message that the workbook was updated.

Identify the affected rows, totals, journals, and reports. Check whether a source change alters only a description or changes the amount, population, or classification. A small output difference can come from a broader logic change, while a large source refresh can leave the relevant result unchanged. Explain the dependency so the reviewer can focus on the actual risk.

In a hypothetical schedule, a preparer adds a late $8,000 contract after review. The closing balance increases, the recurring expense calculation changes, and a journal export needs regeneration. Re-reviewing only the new contract does not establish that the final upload includes the right total. The change record should identify all three affected outputs.

Ask the responsible reviewer which procedures need repeating. A supported description correction may need only inspection of the changed field. A changed allocation formula may require reperforming the calculation and checking its output population. Record the decision and any unresolved question. Do not automatically demand a complete repeat of unrelated work or assume no repeat is needed because approval already exists.

PCAOB AS 1215 records who performed and reviewed audit work and when. For an internal workpaper, preserving the review date and version similarly makes the approval understandable, without adopting the auditor's documentation regime as a company-wide requirement.

Determine whether the earlier version already produced a posted journal or released report. If it did, have the accountant approve the necessary correction and communication. If it did not, replace the pending output through a controlled process and check that an older draft cannot still post. The same workbook change can require different actions depending on implementation status.

Retain the original output reference and the revised reference. Confirm that the final reconciliation agrees with the actual ledger after approved changes. A reviewer can approve a corrected calculation while the ledger still contains the earlier amount, so the posting tie-out needs its own completion evidence.

Save the revised file, change explanation, additional review performed, and final conclusion together. Identify which earlier approval was supplemented or superseded. If a limitation remains, transfer it explicitly to the report-release reviewer. The final status should describe the accepted version rather than inherit a completed checkbox from the original file.

Use recurring changes to improve the close sequence. If source files repeatedly refresh after review, agree a clearer data cutoff or update notification with their owners. If reviewers cannot identify the changed version, improve file naming or version records. The next period should make it easy to see what changed and which approval covers the final work.