This study examines bonding practices for appointed and elected officials in county governments, indicating significant influences from finance staff.
The protection of government assets is often a public policy feature that can easily be overlooked. Proper bonding of public officials with asset responsibilities provides an assurance of resource protection and public trust. This study examines the level of impact that internal and external county characteristics have on the incremental bonding practices of appointed and elected government officials in North Carolina. Preliminary findings indicate more standardized bonding practices for appointed officials while bonding for elected officials is more discretionary to a point. Traditional finance office staff and audit findings influenced bond amount increases for both appointed and elected officials with specific importance placed on the accounts payable position. Implications of the study include the importance of well-trained finance personnel that can limit unnecessary risks and additional bonding increases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Modlin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: