Yes, and it’s one of the most effective arrangements for businesses that have outgrown DIY accounting but don’t need a full-time controller on staff. Your bookkeeper handles the daily transaction work while the controller provides oversight, review, and the technical accounting expertise that bookkeepers typically don’t have.

The supervision typically includes reviewing your bookkeeper’s reconciliations for accuracy, making adjusting entries that bookkeepers aren’t trained to handle (accruals, prepaids, depreciation), and ensuring the month-end close is done properly. Without this layer of review, errors compound month after month until your financial statements don’t reflect reality.

Most bookkeepers are good at data entry and basic categorization. What they’re not trained for is catching their own mistakes, understanding how transactions affect the balance sheet, or knowing when something needs to be accrued versus recorded on a cash basis. A controller fills that gap by reviewing work product rather than doing the transaction-level work themselves.

The working relationship usually involves the bookkeeper completing their regular tasks on a set schedule. The controller then reviews reconciliations, makes necessary adjustments, and produces finalized financial statements. This might happen weekly or monthly depending on your business volume and needs. The controller also provides guidance when the bookkeeper encounters unusual transactions or isn’t sure how to handle something.

For businesses in South Florida running $2 million to $15 million in revenue, this arrangement often makes more sense than hiring a full-time controller at $90,000 to $130,000 annually. You get the expertise without the overhead, and your existing bookkeeper gets professional development through working with someone more experienced.

The key is clear communication about responsibilities. Your bookkeeper needs to understand what’s expected of them and by when. Controller services work best when there’s a defined workflow: bookkeeper completes reconciliations by a certain date, controller reviews and adjusts, financials are finalized on a predictable schedule.

One thing to watch for is whether your bookkeeper is actually coachable. Some resist having their work reviewed. Others welcome the guidance because they know they’re operating at the edge of their knowledge. The arrangement works when the bookkeeper sees the controller as a resource rather than a critic.

This model is particularly common with professional services firms and other businesses where the owner needs reliable financials but doesn’t have the accounting background to review the books themselves. Having a controller in that supervisory role means someone with real expertise is validating the numbers before you make decisions based on them.

If your current situation involves hoping your bookkeeper is getting things right but never really knowing, controller oversight solves that problem. You get reviewed financials, proper adjusting entries, and someone accountable for the accuracy of your books.