THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

 

TO:

The Honorable the Members of the Board of Regents

Subcommittee on Audits

 

FROM:

Theresa E. Savo 

 

SUBJECT:

Board of Regents Oversight – Financial Accountability

 

DATE:

January 23, 2007

 

STRATEGIC GOAL:

Goal 5

 

AUTHORIZATION(S):

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Issues for Discussion

 

            Two items are presented for discussion with the Members of the Subcommittee on Audits including:

 

1.                  State of New York Single Audit

2.                  Completed Audits

 

Reason(s) for Consideration

 

            Update on Activities

 

Proposed Handling

 

            Discussion and Guidance

 

Procedural History

 

The information is provided to assist the Subcommittee in carrying out its oversight responsibilities related to audits of financial and reporting practices; performance audits or reviews; ethical conduct issues arising from audits; internal controls; and compliance with laws, regulations, and policies.

 

 


Background Information 

 

1.                  State of New York Single AuditDepartment staff will brief the Members on the results of the State of New York Single Audit as it relates to the State Education Department. The single audit looks at the Department's internal controls related to the larger federal grant programs as well as compliance with federal regulations. The Department receives in excess of $3 billion in federal funds, most of which is sent to local education agencies. (Attachment II)

 

2.         Completed Audits

            Reports are provided as follows:

 

Office of the State Comptroller

Center Moriches Union Free School District

Seaford Union Free School District

Saugerties Central School District

Northeast Central School District

Madison Central School District

Spencer-Van Etten Central School District

Nassau BOCES

Dunkirk City School District

Remson Central School District

Newfield Central School District

Akron Central School District

Warsaw Central School District

Taconic Hills Central School District

Greene Central School District

Ticonderoga Central School District

Charlotte Valley Central School District

Town of Greenburgh

Schenevus Central School District

Mahopac Central School District

Odessa-Montour Central School District

Groton Central School District

Gorham-Middlesex Central School District

Hoosick Falls Central School District

Galway Central School District

Elmira Heights Central School District

Dalton-Nunda Central School District

 

Recommendation

 

For item one (State of New York Single Audit) and item two (Completed Audits), no further action is recommended.

 
Timetable for Implementation

 

            N/A

 

The following materials are attached:

·               Roadmap

·               Minutes of the January Meeting (Attachment I)

·               State of New York Single Audit – State Education Department Schedule of Findings and Corrective Action Plans (Attachment II)

·               Audit Report Abstracts (Attachment III)

 


 

REGENTS SUBCOMMITTEE ON AUDITS

MEETING ROADMAP

 

Date:  February 2007

Time:  TBD

Location:  TBD

TOPIC

OUTCOME

WHO

MINUTES

Opening Remarks

 

Chair

2

Review Agenda/Minutes (Attachment I)

Approval

Conway

5

State of New York Single Audit (Attachment II)

Update

Staff

25

Audit Report Abstracts (Attachment III)

Questions Addressed

SED and OSC Staff

25

Next Session

Preview

Staff

3

 


Attachment I

 

MEETING OF THE REGENTS SUBCOMMITTEE ON AUDITS

January 8, 2007

 

Subcommittee Members in Attendance:

 

Regent Geraldine D. Chapey, Chair

Regent Joseph E. Bowman, Vice Chair

Regent Arnold Gardner

Regent John Brademas

 

Other Members of the Board of Regents in Attendance:

 

Regent Roger B. Tilles

 

Regent Chapey opened the meeting.

 

Regent Gardner moved to accept the minutes of the previous meeting and Regent Brademas seconded the motion.

 

Discussion Items

 

The first item on the agenda was a briefing on the four sources of audit reports presented to the Regents Subcommittee on Audits for review. 

 

1.         The Department’s Office of Audit Services (OAS) perform three types of audits:

·         External audits of USNY institutions, primarily focused on school districts and BOCES;

·         Internal audits of Department operations; and

·         Audits of providers of pre-school education programs. These audits, though issued by OAS, are often conducted by accounting firms under contract with counties or the NYC Department of Education.

 

2.         Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) performs audits through the State Audit Bureau and Local Government Services and Economic Development.

 

            The State Audit Bureau performs several types of audits:

·         Audits of State Education Department programs and grants;

·         Tuition Assistance Program (TAP) recipients; and

·         Follow-up audit.

 

Local Government Services and Economic Development, formerly Municipal Affairs, performs:

·         Audits of municipalities of all types; and

·         Audits of school districts and BOCES.

 

3.         U.S. Department of Education – Office of Inspector General conducts audits of the Department’s administration of federal grant programs as well as individual school districts’ compliance with grant requirements.

 

4.         New York State Federal Single Audit Findings – Any entity expending more than $500,000 in federal grants must have a Single Audit conducted in accordance with the Federal Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Circular A-133.

 

Regent Gardner asked why the scope of the school district audits performed by OSC focused on different areas.  OSC staff responded that a risk assessment process is performed looking at the main areas of accountability.  OSC then narrows the scope to areas of vulnerability or where improvement opportunities exist. Regent Gardner expressed concern regarding OSC audits of program area audits since they are not areas of traditional audit focus. OSC staff responded that they try to determine if a program is accomplishing its purpose, if laws and regulations are being adhered to, and the accuracy of the program data being reported.

 

Action Item

 

The second item on the agenda was a briefing on the updates to the Statement on the Governance Role of a Trustee or Board Member. The Chancellor and the Commissioner originally issued this document in November 2001. It provided information for prospective and active board members, including web links and best practices.  With the event of the new 5-Point Plan, the Department developed suggested changes to the document including:

 

Regent Bowman asked how the document would be disseminated.  The response was that the document would be posted on the Regents web site and distributed by Deputy Commissioners.  Regent Chapey added that it would be shared with the School Boards Association and various colleges and universities.  The previous version was widely disseminated.  It is an excellent resource and, given the present climate, affected entities will be anxious to receive it.

 

Regent Bowman commented on the absence of Pre-K in the Appendix. Staff indicated it would be added to the final version. Regent Tilles stated he was happy to see the document but would like to see some stronger language stating someone was watching or overseeing these activities.  Staff indicated that additional language will be included in the document prior to the vote of the Full Board.

   

Submitted for vote “the document would be put before the Full Board for their approval with the additional language emphasizing oversight and clarification of the inclusion of Pre-K.”

 

Regent Brademas made the motion, Regent Gardner seconded it and the vote was unanimous.                    

 

Discussion Items

 

Regent Chapey commented about the volume of paper the Regents are receiving.  Because of the 2005 NYS Legislature’s School District Financial Accountability Act (the 5-Point Plan is part of the Act), OSC received funding for 89 new auditors, and within 5 years, all school districts within the State will be audited.  This will provide valuable information for schools, universities and other USNY institutions for follow-up and to track trends. 

 

Regent Bowman requested a listing of new legislation that pertains to the Subcommittee on Audits to keep them on point. 

 

Thirty audit reports were presented to the Subcommittee for review.  Regent Gardner asked for the 3 most serious.  The follow-up audit of Roslyn and the Mount Vernon and Yonkers School Districts were identified. 

 

The results of the Roslyn audit indicated that 12 of the 27 recommendations made in the previous audit were fully implemented; 10 of the 27 were partially implemented; and 5 were not implemented.  Regent Tilles has spent time in Roslyn recently and he feels they are improving.  They are currently seeking a new Superintendent.

 

Regent Bowman asked about the OSC audit of the New York State Education Department’s Use of Technology for Professional Licensing and Renewal and asked about the Office of Technology (OFT) Guidebook.  Department staff responded that the OFT Project Management Office published a Guidebook to assist agencies in implementing project management technology.  The Department is in the process of creating a Project Management Office to begin implementing this process in information technology projects.  The Guidebook is available on the OFT web site. 

 

Regent Tilles expressed concern about multiple audits with repeated violations and school board members not bothering to address the issues.  Department Counsel stated the Commissioner has the authority to remove board members for willful violations of law or their duty.  We can also withhold State aid payments.  A case-by-case analysis is done to determine if the violation is of legal regulations or best practices.  If there is enough evidence we can go to a hearing and the Commissioner has the final word.  A resident can make a complaint or the Commissioner can initiate the process.  In the past, there have been very plain examples of wrongdoing.  We need to see a pattern of behavior over a period of time.

 

The Regents were informed that as a result of the School District Financial Accountability Act, a Corrective Action Plan must be approved by the school board and submitted for every audit.

 


Attachment II

 

STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

March 31, 2006

School Breakfast Program (10.553)

National School Lunch Program (10.555)

Special Milk Program for Children (10.556)

Summer Food Service Program for Children (10.559)

Adult Education - State Grant Program (84.002)

Title 1 Grants to Local Educational Agencies (84.010)

Special Education - Grants to States (84.027)

Special Education - Preschool Grants (84.173)

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities - State Grants (84.186)

Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers (84.287)

Education Technology State Grants (84.318)

Reading First State Grants (84.357)

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants (84.367)

 

State Education Department

Reference: 06-08

Requirement

In accordance with OMB Circular A-133, a pass-through entity is responsible for (a) Ensuring required audits are performed within nine months of the end of the subrecipient’s audit period; (b) Issuing a management decision on audit findings within six months after receipt of the subrecipient’s audit report; and (c) Ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate corrective action on all audit findings. In cases of the continued inability or unwillingness of a subrecipient to have the required audits, the pass-through entity shall take appropriate action using sanctions.

Finding

As part of their pass-through entity responsibilities, the Department is responsible for ensuring that subrecipients receiving at least $500,000 in Federal funds have an audit performed in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. The A-133 audit report must be submitted within the earlier of 30 days of the receipt of the auditor’s report or nine months after the end of the audit period.


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

March 31, 2006

 

 

In prior fiscal years, the Office of Audit Services (OAS) automated the receipt and review process of the A-133 reports by using an electronic control log system. The Department also has procedures in place to remind subrecipients of their obligation to submit A-133 reports and procedures to follow up on late reports. A letter is sent to all subrecipients in November stating that the  A-133 report must be submitted within nine months subsequent to the subrecipient’s fiscal year end. Additionally, in March, a follow up letter is sent to all subrecipients with June fiscal year ends who have yet to submit the A-133 report, reminding them of their obligation to submit the report by March 31. The Department also sends out dunning letters to subrecipients that are past the submission deadline, reminding them that Federal awards may be suspended if they fail to submit the report. Late reports are followed up with numerous phone calls and faxes, once again indicating that aid may be withheld if the reports are not submitted.

 

During our examination of the A-133 control log, we noted that 11 out of 752 subrecipients never submitted their A-133 report and 123 out of 752 subrecipients did not submit their A-133 report within the nine-month submission deadline.  Extensions were granted by cognizant or oversight Federal agencies to 16 of the 123 subrecipients that did not submit their A-133 report within nine months. Of the 16 subrecipients who received extensions, 9 submitted their A-133 report after the approved extension date.  In all cases where A-133 reports were submitted after the due date, the Department withheld Federal funding in accordance with Section 225(a) of OMB Circular A-133, until the A-133 report was received or an extension to file was received from a cognizant or oversight Federal agency. For those A-133 reports outstanding, the Department is currently withholding Federal funding pending receipt of the A-133 report.  Additionally, we noted that 90 reports required corrective action and the Department to issue a management decision within six months. For ten reports, the Department had not sent the management decision within the six-month time frame and in eight of the ten reports, the corrective action plans had not been received by the Department as of October 2006. 

A similar finding was included in the prior year Single Audit Report as finding 05-04 on page 29.

 

Recommendation

We recommend that the Department strengthen their procedures to ensure that all subrecipients that require an audit in accordance with OMB Circular A-133 submit their audit reports on time, and management decisions are made timely and incomplete A-133 reporting packages are followed up on.

 

Related Noncompliance

 

Based on the above, the Department was not in compliance with the above requirement.


 

STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs
March 31, 2006

 

Questioned Costs

 

None

 

Views of Responsible Officials

 

Presented in the State Agency Corrective Action Plans attached as an appendix to the Single Audit Report.

 


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

March 31, 2006

 

 

Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States (84.126)

 

State Education Department

 

Reference: 06-20

 

Requirement

 

Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred or whose principals are suspended or debarred. Covered transactions include procurement contracts for goods or services equal to or in excess of $100,000 and all nonprocurement transactions (e.g., subawards to recipients) (34 CFR 85.200).

 

Finding

 

The Department had policies in place to ensure that suspension and debarment certifications were obtained from all organizations with contracts for $100,000 or more. For multi-year contracts, in prior years, the Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States program unit obtained a signed “Required Federal Certification Debarment and Suspension Form.”

 

During our testwork, we noted that of the 40 contract files tested, two did not contain a signed Required Federal Certification Debarment and Suspension Form for the 2005-2006 contract period. Twenty of 40 contract files represented multi-year contracts.

A similar finding was included in the prior year Single Audit Report as finding 05-21 on page 58.

 

Recommendation

 

We recommend that the Department continue with their implementation of their corrective action plan.

 

Related noncompliance

 

Based on the above, the Department was not fully in compliance with this requirement.

 


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs
March 31, 2006

 

Questioned Costs

 

None

 

Views of Responsible Officials

 

Presented in the State Agency Corrective Action Plans attached as an appendix to the Single Audit Report.

 


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

March 31, 2006

 

 

Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States (84.126)

 

State Education Department

 

Reference: 06-21

 

Requirement

 

The State Vocational Rehabilitation (VR) Agency must determine whether an individual is eligible for VR services within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed 60 days, after the individual has submitted an application for the services unless:

 

·          Exceptional and unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of the State VR Agency preclude making an eligibility determination with 60 days and the State agency and the individual agree to a specific extension of time;

 

·            The State VR Agency is exploring an individual’s abilities, capabilities, and capacity to perform in work situations through trial work experiences in order to determine the eligibility of the individual or the existence of clear and convincing evidence that the individual is incapable of benefiting in terms of an employment outcome from VR services (Section 102(a)(6) of the Act (29 USC 722(a)(6))).

 

Finding

We reviewed a sample of 40 case files to determine if the eligibility status was determined within the timetable required.  In six of 40 cases tested, the individual’s eligibility was not determined within 60 days and an eligibility extension was not filed to note a reason for additional time needed to process the determination.

A similar finding was included in the prior year’s single audit report as finding 05-20 on page 56.

Recommendation

The Department should strengthen its procedures over the review of the eligibility of individuals to ensure compliance with the requirement.

 


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs
March 31, 2006

 

Related Noncompliance

 

Based on the above, the Department was not fully in compliance with this requirement.

 

Questioned Costs

 

None

 

Views of Responsible Officials

 

Presented in the State Agency Corrective Action Plans attached as an appendix to the Single Audit Report.

 


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

March 31, 2006

 

 

Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States (84.126)

 

State Education Department

 

Reference: 06-22

 

Requirement

 

The State Vocation Rehabilitation (VR) Agency must determine whether an individual is eligible for VR services and that only eligible individuals participated in the program. An individual is eligible for VR services if the individual (a) has a physical or mental impairment that, for the individual, constitutes or results in a substantial impediment to employment; (b) can benefit in terms of an employment outcome from VR services; and (c) requires VR services to prepare for, secure, retain, or regain employment (Section 102(a)(1) of the Act (29 USC 722(a)(1))).

 

Finding

 

We reviewed a sample of 40 case files to determine if an individual was eligible for VR services. In four of 40 cases tested, the individual’s eligibility determination was not signed or dated by the counselor.

 

Recommendation

 

The Department should strengthen its procedures over the review of the eligibility of individuals to ensure compliance with the requirement.

 

Related Noncompliance

 

Based on the above, the Department was not fully in compliance with requirement.

 

Questioned Costs

 

None

 

Views of Responsible Officials

 

Presented in the State Agency Corrective Action Plans attached as an appendix to the Single Audit Report.


STATE OF NEW YORK

Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs

March 31, 2006

 

 

Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers (84.287)

 

State Education Department

 

Reference: 06-23

 

Requirement

 

In accordance with OMB Circular A-133, a pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the subrecipient’s use of Federal awards through site visits or other means to provide reasonable assurance that the subrecipient administers Federal awards in compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements and that performance goals are achieved.

 

Finding

 

The Department had policies and procedures in place to monitor its subrecipients via the review and approval of the Local Education Agencies’ (LEA) proposed budgets and signed assurances.

However, we noted that there were no site visits or other means to provide reasonable assurance that the subrecipient administers Federal awards in compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements and that performance goals were achieved.

 

Recommendation

 

We recommend that the Department strengthen its policies and procedures to monitor its subrecipients by performing regular site visits or other means to provide reasonable assurance that the Department’s subrecipients are administering Federal awards appropriately.

 

Related noncompliance

 

Based on the above, the Department was not in compliance with this requirement. 

 

Questioned Cost

 

None

 

Views of Responsible Officials

 

Presented in the State Agency Corrective Action Plans attached as an appendix to the Single Audit Report.

 

NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

 

Single Audit of Federal Programs for
State Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2006


State Agency:

State Education Department

Single Audit Contact:

Theresa E. Savo

Title:

Deputy Commissioner for the Office of Management Services

Telephone:

(518) 474-2547

E-mail:

tsavo@mail.nysed.gov

Federal Program(s)  CFDA #(s):

School Breakfast Program (10.553)

National School Lunch Program (10.555)

 Special Milk Program for Children (10.556)

Summer Food Service Program for Children (10.559)

Education - State Grant Program (84.002)

Title 1 Grants to Local Educational Agencies (84.010)

Special Education - Grants to States (84.027)

Special Education - Preschool Grants (84.173)

Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities- State Grants (84.186)

Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers_(84.287) Education Technology State Grants (84.318)   

Reading First State Grants (84.357)

Improving Teacher Quality State Grants (84.367)

Audit Report Reference:

06 -08

 

I.                    Type of Finding: [Check one to identify the nature of the particular audit finding.]

 

Internal Control with related noncompliance     [ X ]

Internal Control Only (no noncompliance cited) [   ]

Other reportable noncompliance (Finding Only) [   ]

 

Questioned Costs:                                                   None

 

II.                       Summary of Finding (including any Internal Control Recommendation(s), if applicable):

 

As part of their pass-through entity responsibilities, the Department is responsible for ensuring that subrecipients receiving at least $500,000 in Federal funds have an audit performed in accordance with OMB Circular A-133. The A-133 audit report must be submitted within the earlier of 30 days of the receipt of the auditor’s report or nine months after the end of the audit period.

 

In prior fiscal years, the Office of Audit Services (OAS) automated the receipt and review process of the A-133 reports by using an electronic control log system. The Department also has procedures  in place to remind subrecipients of their  obligation  to  submit  A-133 reports and procedures to follow up  on late reports.  A letter is sent to all subrecipients in November stating that the A-133 report must be submitted within nine months subsequent to the subrecipient’s fiscal year end. Additionally, in March, a follow up letter is sent to all subrecipients with June fiscal year ends who have yet to submit the A-133 report, reminding them of their obligation to submit the report by March 31. The Department also sends out dunning letters to subrecipients that are past the submission deadline, reminding them that Federal awards may be suspended if they fail to submit the report. Late reports are followed up with numerous phone calls and faxes, once again indicating that aid may be withheld if the reports are not submitted.

 

During our examination of the A-133 control log, we noted that 11 out of 752 subrecipients never submitted their A-133 report and 123 out of 752 subrecipients did not submit their A-133 report within the nine-month submission deadline.  Extensions were granted by cognizant or oversight Federal agencies to 16 of the 123 subrecipients that did not submit their A-133 report within nine months.  Of the 16 subrecipients who received extensions, 9 submitted their A-133 report after the approved extension date.  In all cases where A-133 reports were submitted after the due date, the Department withheld Federal funding in accordance with Section 225(a) of OMB Circular A-133, until the A-133 report was received or an extension to file was received from a cognizant or oversight Federal agency.  For those A-133 reports outstanding, the Department is currently withholding Federal funding pending receipt of the A-133 report.  Additionally, we noted that 90 reports required corrective action and the Department to issue a management decision within six months. For ten reports, the Department had not sent the management decision within the six-month time frame and in eight of the ten reports, the corrective action plans had not been received by the Department as of October 2006. 

A similar finding was included in the prior year Single Audit Report as finding 05-04 on page 29.

III.         Agency Response:

The Office of Audit Services will continue to use its system of notices, dunning letters and phone calls for those subrecipients who are late in filing and will also


consider withholding funds, when necessary.

A)    Additional follow up steps will be taken to ensure that A-133 audit reports are received within the required deadlines and that actions are taken when A-133 audit reports are not filed within the required deadlines.

 

 In addition to the procedures already in place, the following procedures will  or have been implemented:

1)   An additional field has been added to the database used to track A-133 reports that summarizes what actions have been taken for delinquent A-133 reports.  

Reminders will be sent to agencies whose A-133 audit reports will come due within 60 days and to those agencies who are past due with their A-133 audit reports.  This will be done on an ongoing basis.  It is to be noted that all school districts and BOCES A-133 reports were received this year. Of the 582 reports due, only two were received more than 10 months after the fiscal year-end.  For these two districts, federal funding was withheld until receipt of the A-133 report.

 

2)   Nonprofits tend to be more problematic because there are fewer State laws and regulations that apply to them.  Of the 146 reports due, 95 were received after 9 months of their year-end.  In all cases, federal funding was withheld unless later filing dates were approved by Federal cognizant or oversight agencies.

For fiscal years ending in 06, in addition to using the payments to entities by the Department as a criterion for identifying entities that require an A-133, the following steps will also be taken:

3)   A letter will be sent to all entities that receive between $100,000 and $499,999 in payments from the Department requesting that the entities certify that they had less than $500,000 in expenditures for federal programs.

4)   The Department is working with other State Agencies to determine the total payments from all State Agencies to identify those entities that received more than $500,000 in payments from New York State but less than $500,000 from the Department.

5)   A download of total federal expenditures from the Federal Clearinghouse will be done as soon as the information is available and will be periodically downloaded after that.


B)   Management Decisions

There has been significant improvement in this area.  The database used to track management decisions has been updated and improved to better track management decisions and procedures have been established to ensure program offices are consulted to verify the accuracy of findings. The Department is working hard to ensure that management decisions are issued in a timely manner.

A monthly report will be run from the database to determine which management decisions need to be prepared.


 


NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

Single Audit of Federal Programs for
State Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2006

State Agency:

New York State Education Department

Single Audit Contact:

Theresa E. Savo

Title:

Deputy Commissioner for the Office of Management Services

Telephone: (518) 474-2547

E-mail: tsavo@mail.nysed.go v

Federal Program(s) CFDA #(s): Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States (84.126)

Audit Report Reference: 06 –20

 

I.          Type of Finding: [Check one to identify the nature of the particular audit finding.]

Internal Control with related noncompliance [   ]

Internal Control Only (no noncompliance cited) [   ]

Other reportable noncompliance (Finding Only) [ X  ]

 

 Questioned Costs: None

 

II.         Summary of Finding (including any Internal Control Recommendation(s), if applicable)

The Department had policies in place to ensure that suspension and debarment certifications were obtained from all organizations with contracts for $100,000 or more. For multi-year contracts, in prior years, the Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States program unit obtained a signed “Required Federal Certification Debarment and Suspension Form.”

During our testwork, we noted that of the 40 contract files tested, two did not contain a signed Required Federal Certification Debarment and Suspension Form for the 2005-2006 contract period. Twenty of 40 contract files represented multi-year contracts.

A similar finding was included in the prior year Single Audit Report as finding 05-21 on page 58.


III.        Agency Response:

The two files that did not contain a signed form were due to errors.  Both organizations are being contacted and being asked to sign a Debarment and Suspension form.


  


NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

Single Audit of Federal Programs for
State Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2006

State Agency:

New York State Education Department

Single Audit Contact:

Theresa E. Savo

Title:

Deputy Commissioner for the Office of Management Services

 

Telephone:              (518) 474-2547

 

E-mail:                        tsavo@mail.nysed.gov

 

Federal Program(s) CFDA #(s): Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States (84.126)

Audit Report Reference: 06 -21

 

I.                    Type of Finding: [Check one to identify the nature of the particular audit finding.]

 

Internal Control with related noncompliance      [X ]

Internal Control Only (no noncompliance cited) [   ]

Other reportable noncompliance (Finding Only) [   ]

 

Questioned Costs:                                           None

 

II.                  Summary of Finding (including any Internal Control Recommendation(s), if applicable):

 

We reviewed a sample of 40 case files to determine if the eligibility status was determined within the timetable required.  In six of the 40 cases tested, the individual’s eligibility was not determined within 60 days and an eligibility extension was not filed to note a reason for additional time needed to process the determination.

 

A similar finding was included in the prior year’s single audit report as finding 05-20 on page 56.

III.        Agency Response:

This finding is based on an inaccurate understanding of when an application is considered completed, and when the time frame for the 60 days for determination of Eligibility commences. Auditors incorrectly used the VESID date stamp date, when initial application form was received at the District Office, as the “start “ date for the 60 day Eligibility certification window. The Assistant District Manager attempted to explain that federal regulations, as reflected in our policy Section 202.00 Eligibility for Service, TIMELINESS OF ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS state: “Eligibility will be determined as soon as there is sufficient information to decide that the person meets or does not meet the requirements for eligibility. Once sufficient information has been obtained, a determination of eligibility must be made within 60 calendar days after the individual has applied for services, unless there are exceptional circumstances or a trial work experience or extended evaluation is necessary.”

 

Many consumers mail in an application form without any accompanying medical information, which is a requirement for determining eligibility( as stated in Federal RSA regulation, and in VESID Policy manual under  the same  Section 202.00 Eligibility  for Service, in item V. CRITERIA  FOR DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY). Therefore, the “clock” for the 60 day Eligibility determination cannot start until some form of medical documentation is received by this office, and a complete application is on hand for evaluation. 

It often requires extensive work (usually performed by the Counselor Assistants) to aid the consumers in accessing the required medical documentation to be submitted to us.  In the Buffalo District Office, receipt of the medical materials triggers the case being put in Status 02 by Counselor Assistant staff.  The Status 02 date, followed by the Eligibility Certification date is the actual measure of the timeliness of these applications, since the Status 02 date marks the point at which a complete application is on hand to be evaluated .In the cases in questions, the following dates then apply:

Consumer Name

Date of Status 02, Completed Application

Date of Eligibility Certification

60 day Eligibility Waiver present

# of days intervening

A

5/26/05

5/26/05

N/A

1

B

1/12/06

3/15/06

No

61*

C

3/08/06

3/10/06

N/A

2

D

3/16/06

3/16/06

N/A

1

 

Thus, 3 of the 4 cases in category were timely and should not be included in the negative finding.  

*The fourth case exceeded the limit by one day. However a legal holiday (Martin Luther King Day) is included in that period, and it is our contention that due to that circumstance the fourth case should also be considered timely

Two additional cases were not completed within the 60 day limit, and we agree they should be included in the error total. Staff training will be conducted to assure compliance with the sixty day Eligibility Certification  requirement, and supervisory oversight will be utilize as necessary to ensure compliance.


 

NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

Single Audit of Federal Programs for

State Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2006

State Agency:

New York State Education Department

Single Audit Contact:

Theresa E. Savo

Title:

Deputy Commissioner for the Office of Management Services

Telephone:                         (518) 474-2547

E-mail:                      tsavo@mail.nysed.gov
Federal Program(s) CFDA #(s): Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States (84.126)

Audit Report Reference: 06 –22

 

I.          Type of Finding: [Check one to identify the nature of the particular audit finding.]

Internal Control with related noncompliance      [   ]

Internal Control Only (no noncompliance cited) [   ]

Other reportable noncompliance (Finding Only) [X]

 

Questioned Costs:                                            None

 

II.         Summary of Finding (including any Internal Control Recommendation(s), if applicable):

 

We reviewed a sample of 40 case files to determine if an individual was eligible for VR services. In 4 of the 40 cases tested, the individual’s eligibility determination was not signed or dated by the counselor.

 

III.        Agency Response:

In the course of the audit, 4 cases were encountered where the counselor did not sign the completed Eligibility certification documentation after it was printed.  However, the date of completion of the Eligibility certification is clearly listed in the Certification case note. While we agree that there are other record keeping protocols that indicate the document should be signed, the signature is not a component of the timely completion of an Eligibility determination, and should not be considered in the overall error rate for this item.

We will provide appropriate training and supervisory oversight around signature of documents, and on the 4 cases listed below; we will have the counselor sign with the current date, and case note the discrepancy between the completion date and the signature date. 

Please see previous item re use of correct date (Status 02, Applicant date) as beginning of 60 day Eligibility time frame. In that context, outcomes are as follows:

 

Cases requiring counselor signature:

Consumer Name

Date of Status 02, Completed Application

Date of Eligibility Certification

60 day Eligibility Waiver present

# of days intervening

1

2/9/06

3/22/06

yes

41

2

4/4/05

10/5/05

no

164

3

9/28/05

10/27/05

N/A

30

4

1/9/06

3/31/06

yes

80 (extension covered by waiver)

 

Thus, for the 4 cases in this finding, only one case was not in compliance.

 


NEW YORK STATE CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN

Single Audit of Federal Programs for

State Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2006

 

 

State Agency:

New York State Education Department

Single Audit Contact:

Theresa E. Savo

Title:

Deputy Commissioner for the Office of Management Services

Telephone:

(518) 474-2547

E-mail:

tsavo@mail.nysed.gov

Federal Program(s) CFDA #(s):

Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers (84.287)

Audit Report Reference:

06 -23

 

I.            Type of Finding: [Check one to identify the nature of the particular audit finding.]

Internal Control with related noncompliance       [   ]

Internal Control Only (no noncompliance cited) [ X ]

Other reportable noncompliance (Finding Only) [   ]

 

Questioned Costs:                                             None

 

II.          Summary of Finding (including any Internal Control Recommendation(s), if applicable):

The Department had policies and procedures in place to monitor its subrecipients via the review and approval of the Local Education Agencies’ (LEA) proposed budgets and signed assurances.

However, we noted that there were no site visits or other means to provide reasonable assurance that the subrecipient administers Federal awards in compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements and that performance goals were achieved.

III.          Agency Response:

As identified in the process memo concerning subrecipient monitoring, the State Education Department (SED) program office in conjunction with regional and statewide technical assistance centers engages in numerous activities that provide knowledge and information about program implementation; however, lack of documentation for such efforts does fail to meet the requirements for appropriate monitoring as described by the auditors.  SED program administrators will immediately initiate a process to assure that a copy of the Annual Performance Report (APR) for each Twenty-First Century grantee is included the grantee’s folder.  The APR, which is submitted through a web-based system developed for the USDOE, includes data on student achievement and student behavior, as well as on hours of operation, staffing and activities.  In addition, SED program administrators will immediately create and begin to use appropriate monitoring documents based upon those used by other NCLB titles. Staff will be required to make ten formal monitoring visits during the next twelve months, to record their findings, and to report back to grantees on the results of t

 

 

 

 

 


Attachment III

 

Audit Report Abstracts

Regents Subcommittee on Audits

February 2007

 

Office of State Controller

Audit

Major Finding(s)

Recommendation/Response

Center Moriches Union Free School District – Real Property Tax Increase and Procurement of Professional Services

Report 2006M-91

10th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that District and Board officials did not provide taxpayers with the required information (school district property tax report card and school district budget notice) to make an informed decision before voting on the 2004-05 fiscal year budget.  District taxpayers also thought that a proposed 13.7 percent increase in spending was the increase in the tax; however, the tax rate increase was 38.4 percent.

 

In addition, the audit found that District personnel rarely used a request for proposal (RFP) to obtain competitive proposals for professional services.  Audit testing showed the District did not solicit RFPs for seven of the 10 professional service contracts tested or enter into written agreements with three out of the 10 professional service providers.  Furthermore, there was no documentation to support Board approval for one of the contracts that the District’s former school business administrator signed.  Finally, the District overpaid a professional $9,127 because they did not adhere to approved contract rates.

 

4 recommendations

 

The report recommends that the Board provide taxpayers with legally required information prior to the budget vote; seek training and information on best practices to improve its budget process; revise the District’s procurement policy to include the solicitation of RFPs; and enter into written agreements with anyone providing professional services to the District. The report also recommends that the claims auditor should compare invoices to corresponding contracts, prior to payment, to ensure that hourly rates and services performed are in accordance with contract provisions.

 

The Board agreed with the report’s conclusions regarding District officials not providing required information to taxpayers prior to the May 2004 budget vote and the misconception regarding the tax increase.  However, the Board contends that the electorate was not deliberately mislead about the tax increase; the District’s procurement process for professional services is in full compliance with New York Law and Department of Education Regulations; and the District did not overpay a service provider, it paid them more than was Board approved.

Seaford Union Free School District – Financial Condition and Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities

Report 2006M-95

10th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that a year end unreserved fund balance for the 2005-06 fiscal year was not used to properly offset the following year’s tax levy, causing voters to reject the proposed budget twice and resulting in unnecessary program cuts.

 

The audit also found instances where the Board either had not established critical internal controls, or had implemented controls that were improperly designed, or operating ineffectively.  For instance, inappropriate segregation of duties over financial transactions existed in the treasurer’s office, bank reconciliations were not performed accurately, and control procedures for verifying procurement compliance with bidding processes were inadequate.

 

In addition, tests of claims and payments showed that 53 invoices, totaling $163,743 were not supported by purchase orders; 47 purchase orders, totaling $195,566 contained dates indicating they were confirming purchase orders; eight service providers were hired and paid a total of $515,653 without the use of request for proposals; and five service providers were paid a total of $323,403 without entering into written agreements.

 

Furthermore, the audit identified capital asset inventory records that were not being maintained in accordance with District policy, a physical inventory has not been conducted in three years, and inventories have not been updated to reflect asset disposals and transfers.

17 recommendations

 

The report recommends that the District officials prepare a realistic estimate of the unreserved fund balance at the end of the fiscal year and provide the Board with periodic trial balances and cash flow statements.  The report also recommends that the District and Board strengthen controls over transactions, reconciliations, claims processing, procurement, and capital assets.  Finally, the report recommends that the District recover duplicate or overpayments made to service providers.

 

Board officials felt the findings fairly represented the conditions that existed at the beginning of the audit and that many of the recommended changes have been made.

Saugerties Central School District – Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities

Report 2006M-105

3rd Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the District has not established adequate internal controls over purchasing and claims processing.  Auditors tested five contracts requiring bid solicitation and found that the District did not bid three of the contracts valued at $394,159; similarly, for 10 purchases (worth $69,301) that required quotes, the District failed to obtain quotations for all 10 purchases. 

 

Auditors also found that of the 44 claims approved for payment, only two were both authorized and adequately supported.  In addition, the District paid for certain travel and entertainment expenses, meal expenses, credit card charges, and cellular phone costs that were unsupported. 

 

Furthermore, auditors determined that 13 of 25 District budgetary accounts tested were over-expended at various times during the 2004-05 and 2005-06 fiscal years because District officials did not verify appropriations were available before issuing purchase orders.

 

Finally, the audit found that District officials had not established adequate controls to protect capital assets and inventories against loss, waste, and misuse.  The District’s inventory of capital assets has not been maintained on a current basis, periodic physical inventories have not been taken, and controls over inventories of consumable items appeared to be inadequate.

9 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board and District administrators monitor and enforce compliance with adopted procurement, travel expense, and capital asset policies.

 

In addition, the report recommends the Board ensure a proper audit of claims, establish written meal and refreshment policies, consider obtaining reimbursement for an inappropriate travel reimbursement to the Superintendent, establish written policy for cellular phone and credit card usage, and establish procedures to monitor the District’s budget.

 

District officials generally agree with the recommendations and have taken action to address concerns identified in the report.

Northeast Central School District - Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities

Report 2006M-107

9th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the District has not implemented an adequate internal system to allow for proper safeguarding and accountability for its capital assets.  The District has not assigned overall responsibility for its capital assets to one individual and there has not been a complete physical inventory since July 2004.  Audit tests uncovered 13 items valued at approximately $24,000 that had not been recorded in inventory.  Additionally, auditors found the District’s inventory records lacked specific identifying information, such as a model and serial number, and the location of capital assets.  Auditors were also unable to locate four digital cameras costing about $200 each, one laptop computer that cost $2,400, and one desktop computer that cost $1,800.

 

The audit also found weaknesses in the controls over the District’s payroll and personnel records.  A review of 50 personnel files revealed missing immigration forms, employment applications, and references.  A lack of segregation of duties in payroll processing was also noted.

 

Finally, the audit found that the Board had not adopted written policies that addressed travel-related lodging and meals, meals and refreshments at meetings, and cellular phone assignment and usage.

14 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board designate a property control manager to maintain a capital assets inventory record, revise its capital assets policy to ensure accurate and timely capital asset reporting, ensure asset inventory duties are appropriately segregated, and require the business manager to review bi-weekly payroll reports for variances. 

 

The report also recommends the property control manager conduct periodic physical inventory comparisons with capital assets inventory records and account for all computer equipment during the District’s periodic physical inventory.

 

Furthermore, the report recommends including identifying information in the inventory records for all equipment; updating inventory records to accurately reflect missing or discarded items; and investigating any missing items.

 

Finally, the report recommends the business manger develop a checklist of required documentation for employee personnel files and the Board require a periodic review of processed payroll transactions.

 

District officials generally agree with the recommendations and have fully implemented, or are in process of implementing all recommendations.

Madison Central School District – Internal Controls Over Financial Operations

Report 2006M-114

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the BOCES does not provide for adequate segregation of duties over the District’s financial transactions.  Auditors noted that the BOCES employee who enters the District’s financial data into the computer system also maintains custody of the manual check stock inventory, occasionally prepares manual checks for the treasurer’s signature, directly receives all bank statements and canceled checks, and reconciles District bank accounts.

 

The audit also found that the District’s claims processing function is not well designed because the claims auditor does not report directly to the Board, but reports to an individual who approves purchases.  The District’s claims auditor also serves as the Superintendent’s secretary, reporting directly to the Superintendent rather than to the Board.  The Superintendent served as the District’s purchasing agent, and currently serves as the alternate purchasing agent.  In addition, the District’s claims auditor does not audit claims as outlined in the District’s policy.

 

Additionally, District officials did not comply with the District’s procurement requirement of obtaining written or verbal quotes for two of the six purchases that auditors reviewed.

 

Lastly, District officials did not adopt a comprehensive asset policy and do not maintain perpetual inventory records for diesel fuel.

9 recommendations

 

The report recommends District officials ensure that BOCES officials assign the District’s financial-related duties so the work of one individual independently verifies another’s work in the course of their regular duties; have District personnel review bank reconciliations, bank statements, and cancelled checks, and use accounting system reports for descriptions of vendor changes, user access, and manual checks; ensure that District personnel adhere to the District’s procurement policy; ensure that District personnel maintain complete, accurate and up-to-date capital asset records; and design and implement internal controls to safeguard fuel supplies.

 

The report also recommends the Board review the claims auditor’s various duties for incompatibility, ensure that the claims auditor audits claims in accordance with its adopted policy, ensure that the claims auditor reviews claims for compliance with the District’s procurement policy concerning price quotes, and establish a comprehensive capital asset policy and communicate the objectives or the policy to District personnel.

 

District officials agree with the recommendations and have taken steps towards implementation.   

Spencer-Van Etten Central School District – Internal Controls Over Financial Operations

Report 2006M-115

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the District  treasurer performs many financial functions including receiving and investing cash; recording cash transactions in the accounting records; making inter-fund and inter-bank cash transfers; approving cash journal adjustments; approving bank changes, such as opening and closing accounts; preparing manual District checks; and signing District checks.

 

Additionally, a review of 210 claims for the 2004-05 fiscal year showed that the District’s claims auditor and other District officials did not properly authorize 69 claims totaling $972,684.  Auditors also found that District personnel did not adequately support 58 claims totaling $64,800.

 

Lastly, the audit found that in July 2005, the Board appointed an employee of the Greater Southern Tier Board of Cooperative Educational Services Central Business Office to serve as its claims auditor for the 2005-06 fiscal year.

5 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board evaluate the treasurer’s duties and responsibilities and, where practicable, assign them to other business office staff to better segregate duties.  Where it is not practicable, the Board should establish sufficient compensating controls.  The Board should also ensure that the claims auditor audits all District claims in compliance with its policy; the purchasing agent and other District officials approve all District claims in compliance with its policy; District officials and staff provide appropriate supporting documentation for all claims; and its appointment of the District’s claims auditor is in accordance with SED regulations.

 

District officials agree with the recommendations.

Nassau BOCES – Financial Management System and Infor-mation Technology Infrastructure

 Report 2006M-122

10th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The examination found that the BOCES Regional Information Center (RIC) has a disaster recovery plan in place that covers its in-house financial software but does not cover services provided to school districts; RIC personnel print checks for several school districts using signature disks stored at the network operations center; and there is no requirement that the treasurer from the school district oversee the printing of the checks.

0 recommendations

 

Officials generally disagreed with the conditions cited in the report.

 

 

Dunkirk City School District – Internal Controls Over Claims Processing and Selected Fixed Assets

Report 2006M-128

8th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the Board has not established adequately designed internal controls over the audit, processing, and payment of claims.  In addition, the Board has not appointed a claims auditor, established comprehensive written guidance for the audit of claims, segregated incompatible duties, and taken necessary steps to ensure that it adequately audits claims before they are paid.  Auditors reviewed 60 claims and identified deficiencies in 18 of them. 

 

Auditors also reviewed 42 checks used to purchase gift cards and various other items, totaling $21,214, from a retail store.  They found there is virtually no control over what the gift cards are used for once District staff has distributed them.  A comparison of gift card transactions with vendor receipts showed that $11,055 was unaccounted for and no indication that the District received any goods or services.  In addition, three District checks were used to purchase 293 gift cards totaling $2,930.  The District’s purchasing agent stated that the cards are provided to District students as an incentive but there is no accounting that indicates who actually received the 293 cards.  Furthermore, District officials indicated that because the store does not accept purchase orders, the District must issue a check before it makes each purchase, thus circumventing the claims audit process.

 

Finally, the audit found the District’s internal controls to safeguard fixed assets are inadequate because procedures have not been developed to identify and track individual assets.  District officials also did not ensure that fixed assets records were accurate and up-to-date by performing periodic physical inventories and a teacher loaned a musical instrument to a former student teacher.

6 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board should immediately assume its statutory responsibility to audit claims or properly appoint a claims auditor; establish written guidance for the claims auditor, periodically monitor the claims auditor’s activities, and develop procedures to ensure that the treasurer does not make payments for claims until the claims auditor has approved them.

 

Additionally, District officials should immediately discontinue purchasing gift cards, issuing checks to vendors that circumvent the claims audit function, locate as many of the gift cards as practicable, and determine if any balances remain.

 

Lastly, the Board should adopt an asset management policy that describes fixed asset protection procedures; assign District personnel who are independent of the asset recordkeeping function to conduct periodic physical inventories, reconcile any differences, and investigate discrepancies; and recover any loaned District assets.

 

The Board agreed with all of the recommendations and has taken corrective action.

Remsen Central School District – Internal Controls Over Cash Disbursements and Conflicts of Interest

Report 2006M-129

5th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that a BOCES employee that enters most of the District’s financial data also receives custody of the unsigned printed checks from the system, enters all general journal entries, receives bank statements and cancelled checks, performs monthly bank reconciliations, and serves as the District’s claims auditor.  In addition, District officials did not provide the claims auditor with written guidance concerning their auditing responsibilities.

 

The audit also found the District has no formal system to identify outside occupations and/or business interests of District officers and employees.  Auditors identified two purchases totaling $872 and $799 from a business in which the Superintendent’s husband owns 33 percent of the stock.

4 recommendations

 

The report recommends that financial related duties be assigned so that the work of one individual provides independent verification for the work of another.  Additionally, the Board should review the claims auditor’s various duties for incompatibility; develop a written duties statement for the claims auditor position and report directly to the Board; and review the General Municipal Law’s conflict of interest provisions and adopt procedures to help ensure compliance in the future.

 

The Board agreed with all of the recommendations and has taken corrective action.

Newfield Central School District – Internal Controls Over Capital Assets

Report 2006M-139

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that District personnel do not consistently place unique identification number tags on capital assets or perform periodic physical inventories to verify the existence of the items and the accuracy of the asset listings.  The most recent physical inventory was conducted in March 2003.  Auditors found that six of the 25 items recorded on the asset listings were missing.  The items included three computers and other various pieces of equipment, and cost $20,259.

2 recommendations

 

The report recommends that the Board amend their capital asset policy to include tagging capital items with unique identification numbers when received, including the item on the asset listing as soon as possible, removing the item from the asset listing when it is disposed of, annual physical inventory counts of capital assets, and Board authorization prior to disposal of capital assets.  The report also recommends that District officials investigate the missing equipment.

 

The Board generally agreed with the recommendations and has taken corrective action.

Akron Central School District – Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Operations

Report 2006M-141

8th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that internal controls over claims processing were not operating effectively, as auditors identified a lack of proper approval and itemization on many of the claims they tested.  For example, 10 claims totaling $4,256 did not contain appropriate authorization and there were no properly approved requisitions or conference approval forms attached to the claims.  Five claims totaling $1,706 had requisition forms attached, but were approved after the purchase had been made, and six claims, totaling $2,024, lacked proper documentation to substantiate the purpose for each purchase.

 

Additionally, the Board did not establish adequate policies that clearly assign responsibility for food inventory control.  Auditors’ counts of selected product in the District’s inventory did not agree with District inventory records.  Furthermore, the freezer in the high school was overstocked, which created safety concerns; some of the food packages were opened and showed signs of freezer burn; and there was food in the District inventory that was over two years old.

 

Finally, although the Board adopted capital asset policies, District officials did not comply with those policies.

6 recommendations

 

The report recommends that the Board develop procedures to ensure that all claims are properly itemized; ensure that purchase requisitions and conference approval forms are prepared, approved, and attached to claim forms; and adopt a food inventory policy that clearly assigns responsibility for food purchases, inventory control, and usage.

 

In addition, the cafeteria manager should ensure that adequate inventory control is maintained; the freezer is not overstocked; food supplies are used on a timely basis; items that are expired, opened or damaged are properly disposed of and accounted for; and reconcile inventory records of food to physical counts.

 

District and Board officials agreed with most of the recommendations and have taken corrective action.

Warsaw Central School District – Internal Controls Over Financial Operations

Report 2006M-143

8th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the secretary to the Superintendent of Buildings and Grounds (Secretary) was appointed by the Board as the Extra Classroom Activity (ECA) Treasurer and, as such, is responsible for collecting, depositing, recording, and disbursing ECA moneys.  No other District official periodically reviews the work performed by the Secretary.  The Secretary is also responsible for making bank deposits of cafeteria receipts.

 

Audit testing showed that ECA cash on deposits exceeded the recorded cash balances in the Secretary’s ledgers by $2,400, and ECA bank reconciliations were not always properly prepared or reviewed.  Additionally, many deposits are not properly recorded in the ledgers, many were not made intact, and several were not made to the appropriate bank account.  Both ECA and cafeteria cash receipts were not deposited timely.  Finally, auditors did not find sufficient documentation to support 38 of 89 ECA disbursements, which amounted to $27,104 that they reviewed.

 

The audit also found that the Board has not adopted a comprehensive capital asset policy and the District failed to maintain adequate inventory records of its capital assets.  None of the 25 items selected for testing were included on the District’s capital asset inventory record.  In addition, 1 of the 40 laptop computers selected for testing has been missing since March 1, 2006.  Furthermore, bar codes were not affixed to any of the District owned assets observed by the auditors.

 

Additionally, auditors identified 13 of 51 purchases where the date of the vendor invoice was before the issuance of a purchase order.  For two other purchases, there was no evidence that a purchase order had been issued.   Lastly, auditors tested 26 claims, totaling $174,587, and found that 15 of the claims ($74,770) did not contain the required verbal or written quotations from 3 or more vendors; District procurement policy sets forth these requirements.

12 recommendations

 

The report recommends that District officials should thoroughly review the processes and procedures used to account for ECA funds; segregate the recordkeeping activities from the custody of cash; ensure that the Secretary issues pre-numbered duplicate receipts for all funds; deposit and record all money in a timely manner in the proper bank account; ensure that all capital assets have an identification tag affixed; determine if the missing computer has been stolen; ensure that purchase orders are approved before making a purchase; and ensure that the required number of quotations are obtained for all purchases subject to the Board’s procurement policy.

 

In addition, the ECA Treasurer should properly document all outstanding checks and deposits in transit on the monthly bank reconciliations, maintain records in an orderly manner, and correct all errors noted by the auditors.

 

Finally, the Board should adopt a comprehensive capital asset policy to track and account for all acquisitions and dispositions.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations and have taken corrective action.

Taconic Hills Central School District – Purchasing and Claims Processing Report 2006M-147

3rd Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that District personnel did not obtain written or verbal quotes for 13 of 16 purchases that required the quotes.  The 13 payments totaled $103,562.  The District’s procurement guidelines also require the business official to annually evaluate the internal control structure to ensure District personnel comply with the procurement policy.  Auditors found no written evidence that the business official performed the annual evaluation, or that District officials made any efforts to enforce compliance with the District procurement policies.

 

Auditors performed tests and found that District personnel did not provide requisitions for 52 of 75 payments.  The 52 purchases totaled $129,695.  A second test showed that District personnel dated purchase orders after the actual purchase date in 8 of 50 purchase packets reviewed.  In a third test, auditors reviewed 65 purchase packets and found that 8 did not contain an invoice or receipt.

2 recommendations

 

The report recommends that the Board and District officials should monitor and enforce compliance with the District’s procurement policies and regulations relating to verbal and written quotes.  In addition, the Board should ensure that the internal claims auditor conducts a proper audit of claims in accordance with laws, regulations, and District policies.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations and have taken corrective action.

Greene Central School District – Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities

Report 2006M-151

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the District appointed an employee from the Delaware-Chenango-Madison-Otsego Board of Cooperative Education Services (BOCES) Central Business Office to serve as its claims auditor for the 2004-05 and 2005-06 fiscal years.  The appointment results in a conflict of interest because the BOCES provides material and significant services to the District.

 

In addition, auditors reviewed 30 items on a property listing report and found that 10 assets did not have unique identification tags, District personnel had not included one asset (a desk) on the report, and District personnel do not reconcile the property listing report with other District asset records.  Auditors also found that District personnel had not removed a vehicle from the property listing report after it was sold.

 

Furthermore, the audit found that District officials had not formally adopted internal control policies and procedures over consumable inventories.

3 recommendations

 

The report recommends that the Board take action consistent with Department guidelines to provide an independent audit function, formally adopt written, comprehensive internal control policies and procedures for its capital asset and consumable inventories, and ensure that District personnel enter all assets into the capital assets inventory system.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations and have taken corrective action.

Ticonderoga Central School District – Internal Controls Over Financial Operations

Report 2006M-153

4th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found the Board has not established policies and procedures over payroll processing. The District has not properly assigned access to computerized payroll applications.

 

The audit also found the Board has not established sufficient policies and procedures over the collection of cash receipts. The District did not maintain adequate cash receipts records to account for all cash received including extra-classroom activity moneys and yearbook fees. In addition cash was not deposited in a timely manner and bank reconciliations were not done on a timely basis.

 

The audit also found the District did not sufficiently control capital assets such as laptop computers. The auditors could not locate three computer purchases for $3,113. 

9 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board establish written policies and procedures for payroll, cash receipts and capital assets.

 

The report also recommends the District improve control over payroll, bank reconciliations, and control of capital assets including the conduct of an annual physical inventory.

 

District officials generally agreed with the recommendations and indicated they planned to take corrective actions.    

Charlotte Valley Central School District – Internal Controls Over Capital Assets and Purchasing

Report 2006M-155

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the District’s policy related to the claims auditor’s duties was too general and did not provide sufficient detail on what should be done in auditing claims.  The audit found claims that had no indication the purchasing agent authorized the claim, payments made prior to the warrant date, insufficient supporting documentation, purchase orders issued after the date of the invoice, and one claim paid twice.

 

The audit found District officials sometimes overrode the District’s procurement policy by not obtaining quotes when required.

 

Finally, the audit found the District’s internal controls over capital assets to be weak.  This resulted in assets that could not be located, incomplete and inaccurate inventory records, lack of identification numbers and tags, lack of approval for disposing of assets, and failure to conduct an annual physical inventory.

5 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board establish written policies and procedures on claims auditing, periodically review the work of the claims auditor and ensure staff follow procurement policies and procedures.

 

The report also recommends the Board adopt a written comprehensive capital asset policy.

 

Finally, the report recommends District officials account for items that could not be located, and monitor compliance with District policy and procedure.

 

District officials generally agreed with the recommendations and indicated they plan to take corrective action.

Town of Greenburgh – Educational Grant Award to the Valhalla Union Free School District

Report 2006M-156

9th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found the Town of Greenburgh was providing funds to the District.  The funds were to be used to provide supplemental education services.

 

The audit concludes that the Town can only fund programs that are for Town purposes. Programs funded by the educational grant the Town makes to the District do not further Town purposes, but rather further the purposes only of the District.

 

The audit also raises concerns about a school principal functioning as the grant administrator. The District did not have time records to support the amount of time spent by the grant administrator on the function.

6 recommendations

 

The six recommendations are addressed to the Town and recommend consideration be given to ways to appropriately run the grant program. The report also recommends the Town recover funds provided to the Valhalla School Foundation, ensure receipts are recognized and credited to the general fund, and ensure all expenditures be included in the Town Budget.

 

Town Officials generally agreed with the recommendations.

 

 

Schenevus Central School District – Internal Controls Over Purchasing

Report 2006M-161

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that although the District’s internal controls over purchasing were appropriately designed, they were not operating effectively in some areas. The audit found the purchasing agent didn’t always approve purchases, some purchase orders were prepared after the District made the purchases, and sometimes quotes were not obtained. 

2 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board monitor the purchasing function and ensure the claims auditor checks claims for compliance with Board approved policies.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations.

Mahopac Central School District – Internal Controls Over Payroll and Purchasing

Report 2006M-164

9th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found district controls to be generally adequate but found instances were controls were not operating effectively.

 

The audit identified instances were supervisors were allowed to receive overtime pay without the required approval and supporting documentation. The District also paid two stipends without Board authorization.

 

The audit also found the Board did not enter into written agreements with three providers of professional services, and the District purchased janitorial supplies from a vendor who did not submit a bid, rather than from the vendor who was awarded the contract for janitorial services.

6 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board review staffing needs in areas that generate the most overtime, and enter into written agreement with all professionals.

 

The report recommends that District officials review supervisors overtime payments, and the cost of renting school district facilities to outside organizations. The report also recommends District officials ensure payroll is only paid upon the authorization of the Board, and that bidding thresholds are appropriately followed.

 

District officials generally agreed with the recommendations and will incorporate them into District procedures.

 

 

Odessa-Montour Central School District – Treasury and Accounting Duties

Report 2006M-169

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the Board had not corrected some of the conditions that allowed a fraud to occur in 2001.  The auditors did acknowledge that District officials have taken substantial corrective actions.

 

The audit found that there needs to be a separation of duties between record keeping and check preparation.

 

The audit also found that the Board could improve monitoring by reviewing the audit logs and change reports or requiring an independent review of such reports.

4 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board ensure incompatible financial duties are separated, and review and give prior approval for changes to services provided by BOCES Central Business Office.

 

The report also recommends the Board ensure all bank reconciliations continue to be independently prepared, and require the use of additional monitoring reports.

 

District officials generally agreed with the recommendations.

Groton Central School District – Internal Controls Over Purchasing

Report 2006M-174

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the Board has established and designed appropriate internal control policies and procedures over purchasing and that these policies and procedures are operating effectively to protect assets.

 

 

 

0 recommendations

Gorham-Middlesex Central School District – Treasury and Accounting Duties

Report 2006M-181

7th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found the Board did not effectively address the treasurer’s duties and responsibilities to ensure they were properly segregated and did not establish compensating controls. This permitted the treasurer to have control over all phases of a transaction without independent oversight.

 

The audit also found the Board did not review other documentation that would provide an independent review of the treasurer’s activities.

2 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board ensure that District officials assign financial related duties to adequately segregate incompatible duties. The report also recommends someone review audit logs showing the source of changes made to the accounting records.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations and have implemented them.   

Hoosick Falls Central School District- Internal Controls Over the Extra-Classroom Activity Fund

Report 2006M-185

3rd Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found the District had not established sufficient policies and procedures for the extra-classroom activity fund. District staff and students followed an informal process and the District treasurer held responsibility for the activity fund’s entire accounting function.

 

A review of disbursements found three were not supported by vendor invoices.

2 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board establish policies and procedures for the extra-classroom activity fund. The report also recommends District officials ensure staff properly document and support all extra classroom fund disbursements with vendor invoices.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations and have begun to implement them.

 

Galway Central School District – Internal Controls Over Capital Assets

Report 2006M-186

4th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found the District’s capital asset policy does not require the appointment of a property manager to track and monitor assets. The responsibility is done by business office staff. The audit also observed that the inventory record did not include a serial number making it difficult to find some items.

 

The auditors reviewed purchases and found some items had not been accounted for and some serial numbers were not recorded.

2 recommendations

 

The report recommends the District assign a property control manager. The report also recommends the Board require an identification number be assigned to all capital assets and the number be affixed to the individual items.

 

District officials agreed with the recommendations and have begun to implement them.

Elmira Heights Central School District – Internal Controls Over Cash Disbursements

Report 2006M-187

6th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the District’s claims auditor had other incompatible duties, did not report directly to the Board and did not review all handwritten checks. As a result the claims auditor had not reviewed $540,000 in disbursements prior to payment.  The audit also found that the claims auditor subsequently became an employee of BOCES. The report states that because of the significant relationship between BOCES and the District this cannot be considered independent.

 

The audit also found that the District treasurer’s signature is electronically produced when BOCES prepares payroll checks. The treasurer does not control the use of her signature.

 

Finally, the audit noted that there were inadequate internal controls over wire and bank transfers. There was no approval or review by a second individual.

4 recommendations

 

The report  recommends the Board ensure the claims auditor is appointed in accordance with regulations, all disbursements are approved by the claims auditor, the treasure’ signature is secured at all times, and improve controls over wire and bank transfers.

 

District officials are reviewing the recommendations and will respond with a corrective action plan that will address any material weaknesses noted.

Dalton-Nunda Central School District – Internal Controls Over Payroll Report 2006M-189

7th Judicial District

$0 adjustment

 

The audit found that the Superintendent was engaged to act as a consultant in the search for a new superintendent. At the outset of her consulting service there was no contract in place to define what services the Superintendent would provide, how the services would be provided while working as a full-time superintendent or what the compensation would be. Subsequently a contract for consulting services was executed.

 

The district’s claims auditor had concerns about the payment to the Superintendent. There was no documentation to support the amount paid, nor time records indicating when the services were performed. The Board subsequently approved the payment.

 

The audit also found that the District’s payroll clerk was responsible for all aspects of the payroll process, which represents a lack of segregation of duties.

3 recommendations

 

The report recommends the Board have signed contracts prior to the commencement of professional services, reassign some payroll duties to improve segregation, and conduct periodic payroll payouts as an internal control.

 

District officials generally agree with the recommendations but point out the difficulty of segregating duties in a business office with limited staff. District officials also indicate they will discuss further control with the internal auditors.