A Month-End Close RACI for Philippine Finance Teams

What should a month-end close RACI assign?

A month-end close RACI should assign one accountable owner, the people responsible for each task, the specialists who must be consulted, and the recipients who must be informed. The controller should apply those roles to journals, reconciliations, intercompany balances, consolidation, tax work, reporting, corrections, and retained evidence.

Key takeaways

• One accountable role should accept the result for each close task, even when several people perform the work.
• Every handoff should name its input, due time, reviewer, evidence, and escalation route.
• The RACI should cover corrections and reopened periods, not only the first posting cycle.
• A close-ownership design should complement, rather than duplicate, the existing close scorecard.

APQC's 2025 Accounting Month-End Close Checklist says its template “contains common tasks performed to ensure the financial statements accurately reflect the organization’s financial position at the end of the month.” APQC organizes the checklist by days before or after month-end and suggests who may perform each task. APQC also says organizations should adapt the checklist because not every task applies everywhere.

The proposed RACI below turns that task list into an approval map. It does not prescribe job titles or remove management's authority matrix. It also differs from Appcentric's guide to month-end close measures: the scorecard asks whether the close was timely and dependable, while the RACI asks who prepares, reviews, accepts, receives, and escalates each result.

Before approval, test one recurring journal, one reconciliation, one intercompany difference, and one correction against the role map. Any task without a single accountable acceptor, complete evidence, and an escalation path should return to design.

How should Philippine finance teams divide close work?

Philippine finance teams should divide close work by decision rights, not by who happened to perform the task last month. The controller can start with the following original role card, then replace each generic role with the company's approved position or committee. “Accountable” means final acceptance; it does not mean doing every step.

The task names can be reconciled to APQC's Process Classification Framework, which APQC describes as a taxonomy for naming, organizing, mapping, and comparing business processes. APQC published Cross-Industry PCF version 8.0 on August 19, 2026, but the framework is expressly designed for customization; it does not prove that every listed process belongs in one company.

A process workshop can map the approved roles and handoffs before system configuration. Appcentric's SAP Signavio service is the relevant service route when a team wants to document and examine finance processes. The controller still owns the finance decision: software can record workflow, but the RACI must identify who may accept an exception and who must stop the close.

What evidence should each RACI role retain?

Each RACI role should retain evidence that another reviewer can trace from source to final acceptance. For every material task, the evidence set should identify the period, entity, account or report, preparer, reviewer, completion time, exception, approval, and final system record. The proposed standard makes “done” an evidenced state rather than a status update.

Three numerical data points in the 2019 Revised Corporation Code explain why close evidence cannot be treated as optional administration. Section 74 gives a corporation 10 days after a stockholder's or member's written request to furnish its most recent financial statement. The same section uses a ₱600,000 total-assets-or-liabilities threshold for when statements may be certified under oath by the treasurer and president. Section 177 allows delinquent status after reportorial failures three times within five years.

Those provisions do not require a monthly RACI. They establish financial-statement and reportorial duties; the role card is an operating method for making the supporting work identifiable. The Code's Section 177 separately requires annual financial statements and a general information sheet, subject to the Code and SEC rules. The controller should confirm the entity's actual filing and certification requirements with its authorized advisers.

Use a fixed evidence test for each handoff:

1. The responsible role attaches the source and calculation before marking the task complete.
2. The reviewer records approval or rejection against the same item.
3. The accountable role accepts unresolved exceptions only within written authority.
4. The informed role receives the released result, not a working version.
5. The controller records corrections, reopened periods, and late evidence against the original task.

For teams moving close work into cloud ERP, the GROW with SAP service provides relevant implementation context. The RACI should be approved before workflow roles are configured so system permissions follow the finance decision rather than define it.

What should controllers ask before adopting the RACI?

Controllers should test the RACI against real journals, reconciliations, exceptions, absences, and corrections before making it the close standard. The following questions keep the review centered on finance ownership and evidence.

Can one person be both responsible and accountable?

Can one person be both responsible and accountable?

Yes, when the company's authority and control design allow it, but the assignment should be explicit. The RACI does not itself decide whether separate preparation and review are required. For a material task, the controller should document the review rule, approval limit, backup role, and evidence before combining roles.

Who is accountable when several entities consolidate?

Who is accountable when several entities consolidate?

Assign one group-level role to accept the consolidated result and one local role to accept each entity submission. Local accountants remain responsible for complete source packages, intercompany differences, and corrections. The group controller should reject submissions that lack required proof rather than absorb undocumented differences into the consolidation timetable.

Does a RACI replace the close calendar?

Does a RACI replace the close calendar?

No. The calendar states what is due and when; the RACI states who performs, accepts, advises on, and receives each item. Link each calendar task to one RACI row, one evidence requirement, and one escalation rule. That connection prevents a timely task from being mistaken for an approved task.

How should planned absences be handled?

How should planned absences be handled?

Name a qualified backup before the period opens, and transfer the same authority limits and evidence duties rather than merely forwarding a checklist. The controller should record the temporary assignment, effective dates, unresolved items, and return handoff. A blank owner or informal chat message should not become the close-control record.

When should the controller revise the RACI?

When should the controller revise the RACI?

Revise it after a legal-entity change, process redesign, ERP workflow change, recurring exception, or approved authority-matrix update. Keep the prior version with its effective dates. The month-end result should remain traceable to the role design in force for that period, including any documented temporary delegation.