Golden Bear Golf, Inc. The assertions that were relevant to Paragon’s construction projects are: existence and occurrence, completeness, valuation or allocation, and presentation and disclosure. Existence and occurrence: should have been used to test the revenue and gross profit on its construction projects. By testing to see if the assertion is appropriate to make sure that all revenue and gross profit exist would have brought the attention to the $4 million of un-invoiced construction costs that materialized at the end of fiscal 1997. This assertion test also would have revealed that the earned value method in practice was allowing Paragon to book much larger amounts of revenue and gross profit on its construction projects than it would have under the cost-to-cost method. Completeness: the SEC said that Sullivan and his subordinates should have rigorously tested Paragon’s large amounts of unbilled revenues at the end of 1997. A significant amount of unbilled revenue that is reported as complete should be tested to determine the reason no billing has been posted for the work that was done. It also should be determined the reason income is being recognized for jobs that have not been identified as works in progress to determine the exact completion date of the project. By testing this assertion it would have been discovered that $4 million of work was fictitious. Valuation or allocation: Paragon overstated its revenue and profits by using the earned value method which caused a huge increase in unbilled revenue by the end of 1997. Approximately 30 percent of the 1997 income statement had not been billed to its customers. Paragon also overstated the revenue to be earned on its individual construction projects, and during the 1997 audit, Andersen personnel used thirteen of Paragon’s construction projects to corroborate the total revenue figures the company was