Payables checklists usually try to cover everything in one list, which makes them long enough that people stop using them. Splitting into a short per-invoice list and a slightly longer per-period list produces two documents people will actually follow, because each is aimed at a moment when somebody is genuinely doing that work.
Per invoice, five checks
Is the supplier known and is this our legal entity. Has this supplier and invoice number combination been seen before. Do the lines sum to the total. Does it match the order and the receipt within tolerance. Do the bank details agree with what we hold. Five checks, most of them automatable, and between them they catch the overwhelming majority of both errors and fraud.
Per period, six checks
Reconcile major supplier statements. Review the aged creditors list and the oldest items in each exception queue. Check goods received but not invoiced. Review supplier record changes since last period. Confirm no payment run was released by its preparer. And check the exception reason mix for anything growing.
Why splitting them works
The per-invoice list is used dozens of times a day by whoever is processing, so it has to be short enough to be memorable. The per-period list is used once by somebody reviewing, so it can be longer and more analytical. Combining them produces a list too long for the first use and too shallow for the second.
Questions people ask about accounts payable checklist
Should the per-invoice checks be automated?
Most of them can be, and should be. Automating them frees the human attention for the fifth check, bank details, which is the one that most rewards a person paying attention.
Who should do the period checks?
Somebody other than the person processing, since several of them are checks on the processing itself.
How long should the period review take?
An hour or two for a small team, mostly statement reconciliation. It is the cheapest assurance available.