Treasury systems health check
An independent review of how your live treasury systems perform today. That covers a treasury management system or ERP treasury module, together with the interfaces, reports and spreadsheets that support it. Payments, dealing, static data, interfaces, accounting and access are each checked against evidence, not taken from a questionnaire.
Why a questionnaire is not enough
A questionnaire asks whether a control works, and the team answers yes. The review checks what the system does when that control is tested: which payments reach the monitoring report, which deals settle before approval, and which calculations only exist in a spreadsheet.
You might recognise this if…
- Key numbers are regularly validated outside the treasury system
- Manual adjustments or spreadsheets have become part of normal process
- Only a small number of people fully understand certain configurations or data flows
- Changes feel higher risk than they should, so they are deferred
- Audit or governance queries take longer to answer than expected
Not sure whether a health check is needed?
Many treasury teams recognise operational friction long before they formally review the environment. The self-assessment covers reporting confidence, manual workarounds, audit evidence, interfaces, ownership gaps, operational resilience and key-person dependency.
The checklist was written from live FIS Quantum environments after go-live. Most of the warning signs apply to any treasury system.
If several of the patterns feel familiar, a structured review is the most direct way to see where operational risk is building.
What this health check is
An independent, client-side review of how your live treasury system is operating. It complements vendor-led assessments by focusing on controls, reporting, interfaces, operating model fit and operational readiness.
It is
- Independent and implementation-informed
- Conducted against Production, where the live controls exist
- Evidence-based and prioritised
- Fixed in scope, time and fee
It is not
- A vendor audit or certification exercise
- A re-implementation
- A generic software assessment
- A replacement for your SI or internal technology teams
What the review covers
The areas where control confidence and operational resilience come under pressure after go-live.
Static data
The master source for each entity, counterparty and bank account, how records are created and changed, and the approval levels applied.
Market data
Which rates arrive automatically, how new rates are added, and what happens when a rate is stale or missing.
Statements & reconciliation
Prior-day and intraday receipt, manual uploads, the auto-match rate, and why items fall to manual matching.
Forecasting & positioning
Where forecast data comes from, and whether the cash position the team uses matches the one the system holds.
Payments
The approval and release path, formats in use, whether status messages confirm acceptance only or end-to-end, and which payments leave through bank portals.
Dealing & settlement
Pre-trade limit checks, platform integration, fixings, and whether settlement depends on confirmation or approval.
In-house bank & intercompany
Rate maintenance, manual entries, limits and subsidiary statements.
Accounting & GL interface
How entries reach each ERP, and where logic sits outside the posting rules.
Interfaces & scheduled jobs
What runs, when, and who is told when it does not.
Access
Who can do what, who administers the system, and when user rights were last recertified.
Offline work
Each spreadsheet that runs alongside the system, and why the work sits outside it.
Examples of issues the review can uncover
The review is designed to identify weaknesses such as the following. The actual findings will depend on the organisation's systems, configuration and operating processes.
Controls
- Approval paths that no longer enforce the intended segregation of duties
- Monitoring reports that do not show every payment awaiting action
- Settlement processes that do not enforce the intended confirmation or approval controls
- Limits monitored after the event, rather than warned or controlled when a transaction is entered
- User access reviewed informally, with no recertification cycle
Operations
- Scheduled jobs or interfaces that can fail without notifying the responsible team
- Market data processes that depend on manually maintained mappings
- Exception reports that make missing or invalid rates difficult to identify
- Valuations that cannot be readily reconciled to the source market data
- Reconciliation processes that leave avoidable volumes for manual matching
- Deal amendments that produce unexpected accounting entries or reversals
Knowledge
- Report logic documented outside the system, where not every user can reach it
- Obsolete reports that remain active after an archive review
- Spreadsheets and offline processes missing from the documented operating model
How the review runs
Week 1: Evidence
Your team completes a structured questionnaire and shares key reports, interface schedules and access lists. Lumin reviews relevant Production configuration using read-only access. Where direct read-only access cannot be provided, the review is conducted through recorded or live screen-share walkthroughs with authorised system users.
Week 2: Tracing
Three working sessions of up to two hours each, with the process owners for the areas under review. Different owners can join different sessions. Each answer is checked against what the system shows.
Week 3: Findings
A findings register with the consequence and fix route for each issue, prioritised by impact. A playback session of up to 90 minutes with your treasury lead walks through the register.
Time needed from your team: the questionnaire, up to six hours of working sessions in week 2, and the playback session in week 3. Sessions run remotely. On-site sessions can be arranged, with travel charged at cost.
What you receive
Findings register
Every issue with its consequence and its fix route: configuration, process, training or a vendor change request.
Prioritised action plan
Ordered by impact, with the owner for each fix.
Executive summary
Two pages for the CFO or treasurer.
Fee
Treasury systems health check
Introductory fee: £3,500, fixed. Available for the first three engagements.
Standard fee: £5,500.
Additional working sessions are available by agreement at £500 per two hours.
For FIS Quantum estates: health check with team training
£6,000 (introductory). The health check plus two days of Quantum team training built around the findings.
- Day 1: EWF reporting. Building views, layouts, filters and grouping. Saving and sharing reports. How user rights control who can create and change reports.
- Day 2: Your reports. Worked examples built from your own data, including tested calculated columns with their logic documented for the team. Requests raised during the session are delivered afterwards in writing.
The fixed fee covers one Production treasury system instance, together with the principal interfaces, reports and offline processes supporting it. Additional Production instances, materially different regional configurations or separate treasury platforms will be scoped separately.
Fees exclude VAT where applicable.
FAQ (for procurement and stakeholders)
Are you affiliated with any vendor?
No. Lumin is independent. This review is client-side and focused on controls, operating risk and confidence in live treasury operations.
Which systems does the review cover?
Any treasury management system or ERP treasury module, together with the interfaces, reports and spreadsheets that support it. The team training option is available for FIS Quantum estates only.
Does this replace a vendor health check?
No. Vendor checks can be useful for product-specific or upgrade-related questions. This review focuses on controls, reporting, operating model fit and how the live system is being used.
What system access do you need?
Read-only access to Production, agreed in advance and limited to what the review needs. Where read-only access cannot be provided, the review uses recorded or live screen-share walkthroughs with authorised system users.
Do you review a Test environment?
No. The review is conducted against Production, where the live controls, users, interfaces and reports exist. Test is consulted only where a proposed change or a configuration comparison needs examining for a specific finding.
Is this a sales route into a larger project?
No. The findings register stands on its own. If you later want further advisory input, that can be discussed separately, with no obligation.
Discuss your live treasury system
Start with a 30-minute discovery call. No charge and no obligation.