P&L review process
The report set, store-status checks, G&A and admin checks, the B04 dimension completeness check, and the AI-assisted trend pass.
Complete the P&L review only after the balance sheet review is finalized. The P&L review functions as a final check on balance sheet completeness — a glaring case discussed in the walkthrough was a location known to be missing rent expense entirely. Reviewing the P&L side-by-side after the balance sheet is done is exactly the kind of check that catches that before the books are called closed.
Source: Rackson_RRS_RCY_Review_Process.docx section 25.
The report set
| Report | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Side-by-side | The primary report used to confirm the close is accurate and complete. Reviewed store-by-store, since it surfaces store-level anomalies — a missing or unusual expense at a specific location — that a consolidated trend view would obscure. This is the report to use as the final gate before signing off that a balance sheet is done. |
| Trend by location (Income Statement Trend – TTP) | An analytical report used to validate consistency over time. Most useful at the consolidated level — it becomes difficult to parse store-by-store given the store count (roughly 95 per concept). At that volume it is easy to get disoriented tracking which anomaly belongs to which store. |
Consolidated reports available in Intacct
Under Income Statement:
- Income Statement (Total Rackson, both concepts combined)
- Income Statement Trend TTP – RCY (consolidated)
- Income Statement Trend TTP – RRS (consolidated)
The two report options just above the consolidated trend reports are the store-by-store trend versions for each concept — running all ~95 stores for restaurants, for example.
Store-status checks — closed and not-yet-open locations
For any closed or not-yet-open location, confirm there is no activity other than the expected pre-opening or closed-store expense account.
The quickest path.
Net income for that location should equal the pre-open/closed-store expense line, with nothing else posted.
Illustrative examples. Store 1498 had zero sales because it is not yet open. Store 1332 is a new store and is expected to show noisy trend-report comparisons simply because it lacks prior-period history — not because of an error.
The mechanics of the entry that produces this state are on Closed store reclass.
G&A and admin account checks
Investigate anything else showing up at the store level.
Specifically, in-house maintenance should already have been allocated out to the stores by the time this is reviewed. See In-house maintenance.
Watch for company-wide (all-location) GL adjustments that inadvertently hit the admin or closed-store buckets because they were coded to "all locations" rather than a specific store. When this happens, flag it and reclass — this is a recurring pattern rather than a one-off.
Location-coding / dimension completeness check (B04)
Run the Intacct dimension balance report (Report B04) for P&L accounts, with the "include sub-dimensions" option unchecked.
| Setting | Result |
|---|---|
| Sub-dimensions checked | Rolls up all child locations under a parent dimension |
| Sub-dimensions unchecked | Returns only balances posted directly to the top-level (or otherwise non-specific) dimension — which is exactly what surfaces P&L activity that was never coded to an actual store |
This is a standard completeness check that should be run for every client, not just Rackson, and it takes only a couple of minutes once the report parameters are set up correctly.
AI-assisted trend analysis
After the report set is generated, the trend report is run through an AI-assisted prompt to flag anomalies relative to historical trend and to peer-store performance — for example percentage-of-sales outliers on cost of sales, labor, or similar high-volume accounts.
The prompt has been refined iteratively. The most recent refinement was specifically designed to constrain the analysis so it stays organized and directly responsive to what is being asked, rather than returning broad, unstructured commentary. The intent is to keep the analysis reliably covering the specific things being asked for rather than free-associating across the report.
Before this approach, the practice was to ask more open-ended questions of the same report. The newer, structured prompt is intended to preserve that breadth of coverage while making the output easier to act on.
Recommended sequence — and why
To catch anything the close itself missed — for example a location missing rent expense entirely, a scenario the side-by-side view catches that a trend view might not.
For a broader, comparative view across stores and time.
This mirrors how the client's own finance team reviews these reports — they also lead with the side-by-side view. Staying aligned with that sequence keeps PBI's review consistent with how the client reads the numbers.
The trend report is a "last check," not the primary completeness check. If the balance sheet is done and the side-by-side looks right, the trend/AI pass is there to catch something both of those steps missed — not to replace them.
RCY additions
For RCY, the period-close review also includes running both the Side by Side and Period Trend favorited reports and storing them as Excel for AI-assisted review, confirming inventory is posted for each location, and pulling the labor report out of ProWork.
Related
- Intacct reporting infrastructure — how these reports are built, and what breaks when you change them
- Intercompany tie-out — run as part of finalizing the balance sheet, not as an afterthought
- RRS prelims and RCY prelims — the prelim workpapers
- Period end financial report tie out — the screenshot walkthrough of the report tie-out