The worked review compares two stable row IDs, calculates A minus B, and preserves the initial 20-unit mismatch. A supplied fictional revision changes B’s R2 value from 40 to 60, bringing its total to 150. The review remains pending because numeric agreement does not supply authorization or an independent review record.
Establish a comparable scope
Start the procedure with entity, period, unit or currency basis, source reference, and source version. The sample assumes the same fictional entity, October period, and illustrative unit basis. An actual organization, year, currency, responsible owner, and approval route still need to be supplied in the maintained worksheet.
The page lets you change B's period. Enter September instead of October and compare again: the output becomes “Incomparable periods.” It stops presenting the arithmetic gap as an accounting discrepancy. Before investigating a difference, establish that the sources describe the same scope.
Penn's reconciliation policy describes comparing separate records, analyzing differences, maintaining supporting documentation, and recording review. Those procedural ideas inform this example. Its institutional deadlines, account codes, and write-off instructions do not become general requirements for your organization. Penn: Account reconciliation and review.
Work through the original rows
R1 is 90 in A and 90 in initial B, so its difference is zero. R2 is 60 in A and 40 in initial B, so its difference is 20. A totals 90 + 60 = 150; B totals 90 + 40 = 130. The total difference is therefore 20, traced to R2.
Record that original mismatch before proposing a correction. Its cause is unknown. The numbers alone do not identify a missing payment, fraud, or tax issue. Likewise, R1's numeric match does not verify the underlying transaction. Attach the source versions and the evidence used to investigate each issue.
Inspect the supplied revision
Choose Load referenced revision to inspect the separate fictional scenario. It supplies a current B version with R2 = 60 and describes the initial 40 as an older value. The current comparison becomes 150 minus 150 = 0. The historical panel still shows initial B = 130 and the original R2 difference of 20.
In real work, collect the actual revision reference, date, explanation, authorization evidence, and reviewer record. The example button changes a local comparison; it neither edits a source ledger nor posts an entry. Its fictional reference cannot substitute for your organization's records.
Keep amounts aligned and review complete as different statuses. The comparison can say the amounts align while the review remains pending. A source reference explains why a value changed; a separate review record shows who checked the comparison and supporting evidence.
Leave a record someone else can follow
Use these worksheet fields in the maintained accounting process: scope and source versions; stable row ID and original values; difference and investigation reference; supported cause; proposed action; confirmed owner and authorization; revised-source reference; independent reviewer, date, and evidence; unresolved items and next check.
The local notes fields are available to draft the investigation summary without changing the numeric result. Leave actual evidence blank until it exists. If a correction needs approval, follow the confirmed organizational route before treating it as authorized. A prepared procedure cannot choose that route for you.
For a handoff, ask the reviewer to trace R2 from its initial 40 through the supplied current 60, then identify which actual references are still missing. Reset restores the original comparison and blanks the local notes. Keep the native SOP, source records, mismatch history, and review evidence as the authoritative materials.
Copy a prompt for this example
Create an original fictional accounting reconciliation review with A R1=90 and R2=60, total150; initial B R1=90 and R2=40, total130. Same fictional entity, October period, and illustrative units. Compute each A-minus-B difference and total. Permit editing B R2 and B period; different periods must stop comparison as incomparable. Reject blank, negative or nonfinite amounts. Preserve a historical panel showing initial B130 and R2 difference20. A separate referenced-revision button sets current B R2=60 and records that the supplied fictional reference identifies40 as an older value. Recalculate B150 and zero difference without changing history. Keep review pending even at zero; no entries, source-ledger edits, fraud conclusions or accounting treatment. Include blank investigation/reference, authorization and independent-review notes, and reset to original data. Provide a six-step scope→match→investigate→propose→authorize→review procedure. Actual owners, approval route, year, currency, approvers and dates remain unconfirmed. The native SOP and actual records remain authoritative.
Return one complete HTML file. Put the editable current comparison beside the preserved 150/130 history on a wide screen and stack them on a phone. Label the period and amount fields clearly. Keep the calculated difference prominent and the review notes separate, so matching totals never erase the original mismatch.
For a sanitized walkthrough with the responsible reviewer, NOS can display this prepared HTML comparison. Use the original and revised panels to explain the change, then record actual authorization and review evidence in your maintained reconciliation file before closing the task.