One of the product decisions that became clearer as BrokenBooks evolved was that a single review depth was not enough.
Not because the accounting rules change.
Because the purpose of the review changes.
A first look and due diligence are not the same engagement.
A bookkeeper may need to review a prospective client’s QuickBooks Online file well enough to understand whether cleanup is required and what the engagement may involve.
An accounting firm may need a more comprehensive review before relying on the books for downstream work.
A buyer, advisor, or professional team may need a substantially deeper level of evidence and investigation for financial due diligence.
Those reviews should not be forced into the exact same amount of work.
Review depth should be separate from file complexity.
This distinction matters.
A relatively straightforward file may still require a deep review because of the purpose of the engagement.
A complicated file may initially receive a focused assessment because the immediate goal is simply to identify major concerns and determine the next step.
Complexity describes the accounting environment.
Review depth describes how far the professional needs to investigate it.
One framework can still support different depths.
I did not want BrokenBooks to become three unrelated diagnostic products.
The underlying principles are the same: review the appropriate areas, document findings, preserve evidence, make uncertainty visible, keep client context connected, and leave the accounting judgment with the professional.
What changes is the extent of investigation required for the purpose of the engagement.
The three review levels serve different purposes.
BrokenBooks is being designed around three levels of review:
- Initial Review — a focused professional assessment intended to identify accounting issues, understand likely cleanup needs, and establish the next step.
- Comprehensive Review — a deeper investigation into historical reliability, transaction integrity, discrepancies, and remediation requirements.
- Financial Due Diligence — a more evidence-intensive review for acquisitions, transactions, and other special-purpose engagements.
Financial due diligence in BrokenBooks should not be confused with automatically providing an audit or assurance engagement. The professional purpose and applicable standards still matter.
The goal is proportional review, not unnecessary work.
A structured system should help professionals investigate what the engagement actually requires.
Too little review can create false confidence.
Too much review can turn a focused engagement into unnecessary work.
The right depth depends on what the professional needs to establish.
That is the design problem we are solving.
Related: Learn more about the BrokenBooks diagnostic workflow.
