The KPMG defendants sometimes "expressed muted doubts about topside accounting practices" to Xerox management. Defendant Safran, for example, told management at the conclusion of the 1998 audit that accounting adjustments should be entered at the transaction level, rather than at the "top level," so that they could "be effectively monitored and prudently controlled." When nothing was done, Safran told the Xerox Audit Committee a year later with respect to topside accounting adjustments that "we believe the Company needs to improve its analytic processes and controls to confirm that the assumptions used are reasonable and that appropriate fair values are derived from existing methodologies." Safran consulted on these issues with Conway, the national practice partner, and Boyle, the relationship partner assigned to represent KPMG before the Xerox Board of Directors and its Audit Committee. Xerox did nothing to address or correct KPMG's concerns, however, and KPMG did not press more vigorously for action or threaten to qualify its audit report. The fraudulent practices continued and were not disclosed to the investing public.