In this guide
Start with a clear request
“Send revenue support” leaves several questions unanswered. Which entity, period and population? What format? What reconciliation or explanation is expected? Agree the request and acceptance criteria with the requester before assigning work.
Preserve the original request wording and use a separate field for clarifications. A request ID should stay stable when the owner or due date changes. That allows follow-up messages and replacement documents to refer to the same item.
KPMG's overview of its audit technology describes PBC and task management as part of the client handoff. A spreadsheet or worksheet can organise the basic request record even when the engagement uses a separate secure portal for the actual files.
Fields that prevent avoidable follow-up
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| Request ID | Stable reference agreed with the requester |
| Entity and period | The population the request covers |
| Request and acceptance criteria | Document, format and explanation needed |
| Owner and due date | One person accountable for the next response |
| Status | Requested, preparing, submitted, query open or accepted by requester |
| Evidence reference | Approved storage location or portal reference |
| Version and submitted date | Exactly which file was sent and when |
| Reviewer question | The outstanding clarification, kept separate from the original request |
| Acceptance record | Who accepted the response and on what date |
“Submitted” and “accepted” are different states. A file can be present while a question remains unresolved. Avoid using a single completion tick for both events.
A fictional request from issue to acceptance
Request PBC-014 asks for a year-end inventory listing for Entity A, with its agreed reconciliation and explanation of adjustments. The finance owner uploads version 1 and marks the item submitted.
The requester identifies a missing location. The status becomes query open, and the question names that location. The owner prepares version 2, retains version 1 and records the reason for replacement. The requester then confirms acceptance of version 2.
The tracker now explains what changed, what was supplied and which response closed the question. Replacing version 1 silently and marking the row “done” would remove that history.
Separate the tracker from sensitive evidence
Use the engagement's agreed secure channel for documents. A broadly shared request tracker should not contain bank details, payroll information or sensitive attachments when a restricted reference is sufficient.
Check file permissions from the intended recipient's perspective. A correct link that the reviewer cannot open is still an incomplete handoff. Conversely, opening a sensitive folder to everyone to resolve one access problem creates a different issue.
Use descriptive filenames with entity, period and version where helpful. Agree a simple convention rather than repeatedly renaming documents after submission. The evidence reference should continue to identify the file that was actually reviewed.
Manage the weekly queue
Filter for overdue requests, query-open items and work due before the next fieldwork milestone. Ask the owner for the next action and realistic date. Preserve changed deadlines and their agreement; do not move them solely to make an overdue count disappear.
If a request is withdrawn or superseded, retain its ID and link to the replacement. Do not count it as accepted evidence. If one document supports several requests, reference that same version and explain the relevant section for each item.
An illustrative PBC list published by NAIHC shows how request content can depend on the engagement. Use your audit team's actual list instead of treating a generic online list as complete.
Questions you might have
Who should own the PBC tracker?
Usually a designated engagement coordinator or finance owner maintains the overall list, with individual requests assigned to the people who can supply the records. Agree ownership with the audit team so parallel lists do not drift apart.
Should a late replacement overwrite the old file?
Keep the submitted version identifiable and use the agreed replacement process. Record the reason and notify the requester. The goal is to know which version supports the current response without losing the previous handoff.
Does this make the organisation audit-ready?
A tracker improves coordination. Audit readiness also depends on the underlying records, controls and engagement requirements. A high completion percentage does not establish the quality of the evidence.
Is Auditably a financial-audit PBC portal?
No. This general finance worksheet is free to use independently. Auditably's paid scope is evidence and review around prepared climate-reporting figures. If that is also part of your work, the first-cycle reviewer guide and coverage matrix explain the relevant workflow and limits.
Prepared with AI assistance using the linked sources and original fictional examples. No customer results, field measurements or independent specialist review are claimed.