| Career and Technical Education--Basic Grants to States |
By not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed, Education is not able to adequately support conclusions reached during its monitoring visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on local educational agencies (LEAs) for untimely receipt or implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. During internal training conducted on September 19, 2008, Education's on-site program monitors (program consultants) were given copies of recently revised Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) protocols that provide specific information about the preparation of the Notification of Findings. The CPM protocols emphasize that findings must include a statement of the legal requirements, evidence used to conclude LEA is not meeting legal requirements and a clear statement that describes what the LEA must do to meet legal requirements. An internal review is conducted by educational program consultants and the CPM Office Administrator to ensure these three components are included in the documentation maintained following an on-site visit. Discrepancies are noted in review documentation and become a source of information for training content. Additionally Education, in collaboration with the California Comprehensive Center at WestEd, has launched the pilot of a Web-based compliance tracking system; LEAs in CPM regions 4 and 10 participated in the pilot of the system that allows LEAs to prepare for CPM on-site visits by completing program instruments online, and uploading documents as evidence of compliance. This system facilitates timely resolution of correction actions, and based on the results of the pilot year, Education is in the process of expanding this Web-based compliance tracking system as a component of its overall monitoring system. |
287 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
By not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed, Education is not able to adequately support conclusions reached during its monitoring visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on local educational agencies (LEAs) for untimely receipt or implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. During internal training conducted on September 19, 2008, Education's on-site program monitors (program consultants) were given copies of recently revised Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) protocols that provide specific information about the preparation of the Notification of Findings. The CPM protocols emphasize that findings must include a statement of the legal requirements, evidence used to conclude LEA is not meeting legal requirements and a clear statement that describes what the LEA must do to meet legal requirements. An internal review is conducted by educational program consultants and the CPM Office Administrator to ensure these three components are included in the documentation maintained following an on-site visit. Discrepancies are noted in review documentation and become a source of information for training content. Additionally Education, in collaboration with the California Comprehensive Center at WestEd, has launched the pilot of a Web-based compliance tracking system; LEAs in CPM regions 4 and 10 participated in the pilot of the system that allows LEAs to prepare for CPM on-site visits by completing program instruments online, and uploading documents as evidence of compliance. This system facilitates timely resolution of correction actions, and based on the results of the pilot year, Education is in the process of expanding this Web-based compliance tracking system as a component of its overall monitoring system. |
287 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education has inconsistent policies and procedures in place to ensure its local educational agencies (LEAs) are properly notified of their requirement to return interest earned over $100 on program advances, and to ensure this interest was returned on at least a quarterly basis. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. On December 24, 2008, Education sent a letter notifying all LEAs of the federal interest requirement. Education has redirected staff to monitor LEAs’ quarterly federal interest remittances, including interest earned on unspent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Education is also following up with LEA accounting staff, on a selected basis, to assess the reasonableness of reported cash balances and the federal interest calculations. In addition, Education staff is working with LEAs and providing guidance in calculating federal interest utilizing average daily cash balances or other acceptable alternative methodologies. Furthermore, Education is verifying, on a select basis, federal interest remittances to Education’s accounting records. |
268 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education's current Maintenance of Effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Further, Education lacks controls to ensure all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. Education concurs that, by using unaudited amounts, there is a risk material adjustments or omissions may not adequately be reflected or computed in MOE calculations; however, Education still considers this risk minimal. Although Education initially proposed an addition to the audit guide requiring auditors quantify the impact of audit adjustments in sufficient detail to enable Education to take the adjustment into account when calculating MOE, it was subsequently determined, in many cases, it is not practicable to identify audit adjustments beyond a summary level. Education sends the final MOE calculation back to LEAs if final calculations differ from the preliminary calculations. LEAs are well aware of preliminary calculations because: (1) Form NCMOE, the MOE calculation, is a required part of the LEA's submission (LEAs must open and save this form before they can officially export their data); (2) LEAs must certify certain key values within their submission, including values from Form NCMOE; and (3) the calculation of MOE is well documented in the software user guide.
Education has strengthened processes to ensure 21st Century Community Learning Centers grants are reduced for grantees that fail to meet MOE requirements. |
276 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
By not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed, Education is not able to adequately support conclusions reached during its monitoring visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on local educational agencies (LEAs) for untimely receipt or implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. During internal training conducted on September 19, 2008, Education's on-site program monitors (program consultants) were given copies of recently revised Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) protocols that provide specific information about the preparation of the Notification of Findings. The CPM protocols emphasize that findings must include a statement of the legal requirements, evidence used to conclude LEA is not meeting legal requirements and a clear statement that describes what the LEA must do to meet legal requirements. An internal review is conducted by educational program consultants and the CPM Office Administrator to ensure these three components are included in the documentation maintained following an on-site visit. Discrepancies are noted in review documentation and become a source of information for training content. Additionally Education, in collaboration with the California Comprehensive Center at WestEd, has launched the pilot of a Web-based compliance tracking system; LEAs in CPM regions 4 and 10 participated in the pilot of the system that allows LEAs to prepare for CPM on-site visits by completing program instruments online, and uploading documents as evidence of compliance. This system facilitates timely resolution of correction actions, and based on the results of the pilot year, Education is in the process of expanding this Web-based compliance tracking system as a component of its overall monitoring system. |
287 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education has inconsistent policies and procedures in place to ensure its local educational agencies (LEAs) are properly notified of their requirement to return interest earned over $100 on program advances, and to ensure this interest was returned on at least a quarterly basis. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. On December 24, 2008, Education sent a letter notifying all LEAs of the federal interest requirement. Education has redirected staff to monitor LEAs’ quarterly federal interest remittances, including interest earned on unspent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Education is also following up with LEA accounting staff, on a selected basis, to assess the reasonableness of reported cash balances and the federal interest calculations. In addition, Education staff is working with LEAs and providing guidance in calculating federal interest utilizing average daily cash balances or other acceptable alternative methodologies. Furthermore, Education is verifying, on a select basis, federal interest remittances to Education’s accounting records. |
268 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education's current Maintenance of Effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Further, Education lacks controls to ensure all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. Education concurs that, by using unaudited amounts, there is a risk material adjustments or omissions may not adequately be reflected or computed in MOE calculations; however, Education still considers this risk minimal. Although Education initially proposed an addition to the audit guide requiring auditors quantify the impact of audit adjustments in sufficient detail to enable Education to take the adjustment into account when calculating MOE, it was subsequently determined, in many cases, it is not practicable to identify audit adjustments beyond a summary level. Education sends the final MOE calculation back to LEAs if final calculations differ from the preliminary calculations. LEAs are well aware of preliminary calculations because: (1) Form NCMOE, the MOE calculation, is a required part of the LEA's submission (LEAs must open and save this form before they can officially export their data); (2) LEAs must certify certain key values within their submission, including values from Form NCMOE; and (3) the calculation of MOE is well documented in the software user guide.
Education has strengthened processes to ensure 21st Century Community Learning Centers grants are reduced for grantees that fail to meet MOE requirements. |
276 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
By not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed, Education is not able to adequately support conclusions reached during its monitoring visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on local educational agencies (LEAs) for untimely receipt or implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. During internal training conducted on September 19, 2008, Education's on-site program monitors (program consultants) were given copies of recently revised Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) protocols that provide specific information about the preparation of the Notification of Findings. The CPM protocols emphasize that findings must include a statement of the legal requirements, evidence used to conclude LEA is not meeting legal requirements and a clear statement that describes what the LEA must do to meet legal requirements. An internal review is conducted by educational program consultants and the CPM Office Administrator to ensure these three components are included in the documentation maintained following an on-site visit. Discrepancies are noted in review documentation and become a source of information for training content. Additionally Education, in collaboration with the California Comprehensive Center at WestEd, has launched the pilot of a Web-based compliance tracking system; LEAs in CPM regions 4 and 10 participated in the pilot of the system that allows LEAs to prepare for CPM on-site visits by completing program instruments online, and uploading documents as evidence of compliance. This system facilitates timely resolution of correction actions, and based on the results of the pilot year, Education is in the process of expanding this Web-based compliance tracking system as a component of its overall monitoring system. |
287 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education has inconsistent policies and procedures in place to ensure its local educational agencies (LEAs) are properly notified of their requirement to return interest earned over $100 on program advances, and to ensure this interest was returned on at least a quarterly basis. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. On December 24, 2008, Education sent a letter notifying all LEAs of the federal interest requirement. Education has redirected staff to monitor LEAs’ quarterly federal interest remittances, including interest earned on unspent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Education is also following up with LEA accounting staff, on a selected basis, to assess the reasonableness of reported cash balances and the federal interest calculations. In addition, Education staff is working with LEAs and providing guidance in calculating federal interest utilizing average daily cash balances or other acceptable alternative methodologies. Furthermore, Education is verifying, on a select basis, federal interest remittances to Education’s accounting records. |
268 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education relies upon the work performed by an outside subcontractor and does not perform any monitoring to ensure the subcontractor’s controls are in place and effective to help ensure the accuracy of the funding formula supplied to Education. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. Education maintains electronic and hard copies of the Consolidated State Performance Report and supporting documents to validate its child counts. Education meets with subcontractors to review the preliminary child count reports for accuracy by comparing reports with data from other regional report submissions. Education reviewed a limited sample of data submissions by regions to check for accuracy and completeness, and Education maintains all documents pertaining to the monitoring of its subcontractor. |
292 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education relies upon the work performed by an outside subcontractor and does not perform any monitoring to gain any assurance that the information provided to Education is accurate. Further, Education does not maintain supporting documentation for its “Consolidated State Performance Report.” |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. Education maintains electronic and hard copies of the Consolidated State Performance Report and supporting documents to validate its child counts. Education reviewed a limited sample of reports submitted by the subcontractor to check for accuracy by comparing subgrant reports with data from other student count information submitted by each region. Education maintains all documents pertaining to the monitoring of its subcontractor |
280 |
| Reading First State Grants |
Education has inconsistent policies and procedures in place to ensure its local educational agencies (LEAs) are properly notified of their requirement to return interest earned over $100 on program advances, and to ensure this interest was returned on at least a quarterly basis. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. On December 24, 2008, Education sent a letter notifying all LEAs of the federal interest requirement. Education has redirected staff to monitor LEAs’ quarterly federal interest remittances, including interest earned on unspent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Education is also following up with LEA accounting staff, on a selected basis, to assess the reasonableness of reported cash balances and the federal interest calculations. In addition, Education staff is working with LEAs and providing guidance in calculating federal interest utilizing average daily cash balances or other acceptable alternative methodologies. Furthermore, Education is verifying, on a select basis, federal interest remittances to Education’s accounting records. |
268 |
| Special Education - Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) |
Education lacks sufficient policies and procedures over during-the-award monitoring of its subrecipients. For example, Education’s monitoring process did not include procedures to gain assurance on compliance with fiscal matters. Further, we noted that Education did not ensure that its subrecipients took timely corrective action when problems were identified. We reviewed a sample of 18 school districts that had compliance findings resulting from Education’s monitoring reviews; however, six school districts had findings that were still outstanding 13 to 19 months following Education’s visit. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education's Focused Monitoring and Technical Assistance Unit is in the process of developing the protocols for the fiscal components and a written assurance document. Implementation of the enhanced monitoring process will be for the 2009-10 school year and will be included as part of the Special Education Self-Review process. In regard to issues concerning statewide standardized testing for developmental center students, Education surveyed other state agencies on their implementation of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requirements and drafted a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Department of Developmental Services. |
284 |
| Special Education - Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) |
Education lacks sufficient policies and procedures over during-the-award monitoring of its subrecipients. For example, Education’s monitoring process did not include procedures to gain assurance on compliance with fiscal matters. Further, we noted that Education did not ensure that its subrecipients took timely corrective action when problems were identified. We reviewed a sample of 18 school districts that had compliance findings resulting from Education’s monitoring reviews; however, six school districts had findings that were still outstanding 13 to 19 months following Education’s visit. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education's Focused Monitoring and Technical Assistance Unit is in the process of developing the protocols for the fiscal components and a written assurance document. Implementation of the enhanced monitoring process will be for the 2009-10 school year and will be included as part of the Special Education Self-Review process. In regard to issues concerning statewide standardized testing for developmental center students, Education surveyed other state agencies on their implementation of Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requirements and drafted a Memorandum of Understanding with the California Department of Developmental Services. |
284 |
| Title I, Part A Cluster: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies |
By not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed, Education is not able to adequately support conclusions reached during its monitoring visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on local educational agencies (LEAs) for untimely receipt or implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. During internal training conducted on September 19, 2008, Education's on-site program monitors (program consultants) were given copies of recently revised Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) protocols that provide specific information about the preparation of the Notification of Findings. The CPM protocols emphasize that findings must include a statement of the legal requirements, evidence used to conclude LEA is not meeting legal requirements and a clear statement that describes what the LEA must do to meet legal requirements. An internal review is conducted by educational program consultants and the CPM Office Administrator to ensure these three components are included in the documentation maintained following an on-site visit. Discrepancies are noted in review documentation and become a source of information for training content. Additionally Education, in collaboration with the California Comprehensive Center at WestEd, has launched the pilot of a Web-based compliance tracking system; LEAs in CPM regions 4 and 10 participated in the pilot of the system that allows LEAs to prepare for CPM on-site visits by completing program instruments online, and uploading documents as evidence of compliance. This system facilitates timely resolution of correction actions, and based on the results of the pilot year, Education is in the process of expanding this Web-based compliance tracking system as a component of its overall monitoring system. |
287 |
| Title I, Part A Cluster: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies |
Education has inconsistent policies and procedures in place to ensure its local educational agencies (LEAs) are properly notified of their requirement to return interest earned over $100 on program advances, and to ensure this interest was returned on at least a quarterly basis. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. On December 24, 2008, Education sent a letter notifying all LEAs of the federal interest requirement. Education has redirected staff to monitor LEAs’ quarterly federal interest remittances, including interest earned on unspent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Education is also following up with LEA accounting staff, on a selected basis, to assess the reasonableness of reported cash balances and the federal interest calculations. In addition, Education staff is working with LEAs and providing guidance in calculating federal interest utilizing average daily cash balances or other acceptable alternative methodologies. Furthermore, Education is verifying, on a select basis, federal interest remittances to Education’s accounting records. |
268 |
| Title I, Part A Cluster: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies |
Education's current Maintenance of Effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Further, Education lacks controls to ensure all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. Education concurs that, by using unaudited amounts, there is a risk material adjustments or omissions may not adequately be reflected or computed in MOE calculations; however, Education still considers this risk minimal. Although Education initially proposed an addition to the audit guide requiring auditors quantify the impact of audit adjustments in sufficient detail to enable Education to take the adjustment into account when calculating MOE, it was subsequently determined, in many cases, it is not practicable to identify audit adjustments beyond a summary level. Education sends the final MOE calculation back to LEAs if final calculations differ from the preliminary calculations. LEAs are well aware of preliminary calculations because: (1) Form NCMOE, the MOE calculation, is a required part of the LEA's submission (LEAs must open and save this form before they can officially export their data); (2) LEAs must certify certain key values within their submission, including values from Form NCMOE; and (3) the calculation of MOE is well documented in the software user guide.
Education has strengthened processes to ensure 21st Century Community Learning Centers grants are reduced for grantees that fail to meet MOE requirements. |
276 |
| Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers |
By not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed, Education is not able to adequately support conclusions reached during its monitoring visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on local educational agencies (LEAs) for untimely receipt or implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. During internal training conducted on September 19, 2008, Education's on-site program monitors (program consultants) were given copies of recently revised Categorical Program Monitoring (CPM) protocols that provide specific information about the preparation of the Notification of Findings. The CPM protocols emphasize that findings must include a statement of the legal requirements, evidence used to conclude LEA is not meeting legal requirements and a clear statement that describes what the LEA must do to meet legal requirements. An internal review is conducted by educational program consultants and the CPM Office Administrator to ensure these three components are included in the documentation maintained following an on-site visit. Discrepancies are noted in review documentation and become a source of information for training content. Additionally Education, in collaboration with the California Comprehensive Center at WestEd, has launched the pilot of a Web-based compliance tracking system; LEAs in CPM regions 4 and 10 participated in the pilot of the system that allows LEAs to prepare for CPM on-site visits by completing program instruments online, and uploading documents as evidence of compliance. This system facilitates timely resolution of correction actions, and based on the results of the pilot year, Education is in the process of expanding this Web-based compliance tracking system as a component of its overall monitoring system. |
287 |
| Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers |
Education has inconsistent policies and procedures in place to ensure its local educational agencies (LEAs) are properly notified of their requirement to return interest earned over $100 on program advances, and to ensure this interest was returned on at least a quarterly basis. |
2005-06 |
| Fully corrected. On December 24, 2008, Education sent a letter notifying all LEAs of the federal interest requirement. Education has redirected staff to monitor LEAs’ quarterly federal interest remittances, including interest earned on unspent American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds. Education is also following up with LEA accounting staff, on a selected basis, to assess the reasonableness of reported cash balances and the federal interest calculations. In addition, Education staff is working with LEAs and providing guidance in calculating federal interest utilizing average daily cash balances or other acceptable alternative methodologies. Furthermore, Education is verifying, on a select basis, federal interest remittances to Education’s accounting records. |
268 |
| Twenty-First Century Community Learning Centers |
Education's current Maintenance of Effort (MOE) policies and procedures are insufficient to ensure they are compliant with required federal guidelines. Further, Education lacks controls to ensure all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. Education concurs that, by using unaudited amounts, there is a risk material adjustments or omissions may not adequately be reflected or computed in MOE calculations; however, Education still considers this risk minimal. Although Education initially proposed an addition to the audit guide requiring auditors quantify the impact of audit adjustments in sufficient detail to enable Education to take the adjustment into account when calculating MOE, it was subsequently determined, in many cases, it is not practicable to identify audit adjustments beyond a summary level. Education sends the final MOE calculation back to LEAs if final calculations differ from the preliminary calculations. LEAs are well aware of preliminary calculations because: (1) Form NCMOE, the MOE calculation, is a required part of the LEA's submission (LEAs must open and save this form before they can officially export their data); (2) LEAs must certify certain key values within their submission, including values from Form NCMOE; and (3) the calculation of MOE is well documented in the software user guide.
Education has strengthened processes to ensure 21st Century Community Learning Centers grants are reduced for grantees that fail to meet MOE requirements. |
276 |
| Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and Development Fund |
Education lacks adequate policies and procedures to minimize the time lapsing between its drawdown of federal funds and its payments to local educational agencies. |
2006-07 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. Education did not deviate from the Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) policies and procedures that were established by the Department of Finance (Finance) in agreement with the State Controller’s Office. Although the CMIA report that was submitted to Finance reflects delays as cited by the auditors, the delays were under ten days. Finance does not require Education to explain delays unless payment exceeds ten days from time of deposit. |
298 |
| Child Care and Development Block Grant |
Education lacks adequate policies and procedures to minimize the time lapsing between its drawdown of federal funds and its payments to local educational agencies. |
2006-07 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. Education did not deviate from the Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) policies and procedures that were established by the Department of Finance (Finance) in agreement with the State Controller’s Office. Although the CMIA report that was submitted to Finance reflects delays as cited by the auditors, the delays were under ten days. Finance does not require Education to explain delays unless payment exceeds ten days from time of deposit. |
298 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education’s “State Categorical Monitoring Program” does not include procedures regarding the sampling or review of child eligibility determinations. |
2006-07 |
| Partially corrected. Education has contracted with Kern County Superintendant of Schools to conduct random prospective re-interviews. The re-interviews are currently being conducted and should be completed by September 30, 2009. Any children found to be ineligible through this validation process will be removed from the migrant student data base prior to submitting the 2008-09 child count reports. A final report will be submitted to the U.S. Department of Education by December 30, 2009. |
291 |
| Career and Technical Education--Basic Grants to States |
Education incorrectly recorded payroll expenditures to the Adult Education Program. In addition, Education lacks internal controls that would have prevented or detected this error. |
2007-08 |
| Fully corrected. Education's Secondary, Career, and Adult Learning Division budget analysts have been instructed to review Labor Distribution Reports monthly to verify that information contained on personnel time sheets has been accurately keyed in by accounting office staff. If discrepancies are found, the analysts will take appropriate action to resolve the discrepancy. |
263 |
| Career and Technical Education--Basic Grants to States |
Education lacks sufficient controls over the review and approval of its Maintenance of Effort calculation so it can ensure the accuracy and completeness of the calculation and ensure compliance with the federal regulations. |
2007-08 |
| Remains uncorrected/disagree with finding. This finding was based on preliminary calculations prior to review, approval, and submittal to the federal government. |
272 |
| Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and Development Fund |
Education does not require journal entries to be reviewed and approved, nor does it require segregation of duties between the preparer and the recorder of the entry. Education’s current policies and procedures do not require that detailed transaction supporting documentation be maintained to support first-in-first-out (FIFO) amounts adjusted. |
2007-08 |
| Fully corrected. Education believes that appropriate segregation of duties and approval processes related to FIFO transactions are in place; however, Education has further strengthened procedures related to the adjusting of FIFO entries by maintaining supporting documentation of the specific transactions with the claim schedules. |
299 |
| Child Care and Development Block Grant |
Education does not require journal entries to be reviewed and approved, nor does it require segregation of duties between the preparer and the recorder of the entry. Education’s current policies and procedures do not require that detailed transaction supporting documentation be maintained to support first-in-first-out (FIFO) amounts adjusted. |
2007-08 |
| Fully corrected. Education believes that appropriate segregation of duties and approval processes related to FIFO transactions are in place; however, Education has further strengthened procedures related to the adjusting of FIFO entries by maintaining supporting documentation of the specific transactions with the claim schedules. |
299 |
| National School Lunch Program |
Education had instances where the physical quantity of commodities did not reconcile to the adjusted quantity in its inventory tracking system. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Since March 2009, Education encountered software problems with the testing of the IndeTrak Warehouse Management System (WMS) bar-coding program. The software problems have delayed Education’s implementation of the WMS. Recently, Education installed software enhancements to rectify the software problems. Once the enhanced WMS testing is complete and the system is deemed to be working properly, the WMS will track all donated commodities that are ordered, received, and distributed to recipient agencies. The WMS will be integrated with Education’s Child Nutrition Information and Payment System by December 31, 2009. |
261 |
| National School Lunch Program |
Education supplies its Local educational agencies (LEAs) with reports of donated commodities received during the fiscal year from its commodity distribution unit. However, this information does not contain award identification information to inform its LEAs that these are additional program awards of the National School Lunch Program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number 10.555, which are required to be included in the LEAs’ total federal award expenditures that are subject to annual federal audit. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Upon receiving additional guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service on February 24, 2009, Education informed LEAs of the CFDA number 10.555 for the Food Distribution Program by including it on the annual “USDA Commodity Agency Information Update/Annual Inventory Certification” form that is sent to renewing LEAs by March 30 each year, and on the “Agreement For Distribution of Donated Food" for new LEAs. The CFDA number requirement will allow LEAs to appropriately identify the correct CFDA number for their commodity entitlements in the LEA’s annual U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 audit |
259 |
| Reading First State Grants |
Education disbursed more than $101 million out of the total $102 million of program expenditures to local educational agencies (LEAs) without adequately ensuring LEAs were expending funds in accordance with federal guidelines for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008. Education outsources its subrecipient monitoring to a contractor; however, the contractor’s monitoring procedures focus on assisting LEAs with program implementation, as opposed to assessing their compliance with federal requirements. |
2007-08 |
| Remains uncorrected/agree with finding. Education's program monitoring processes are being restructured and revamped. Education plans to enhance monitoring procedures to help ensure federal funds are appropriately expended. |
285 |
| School Breakfast Program |
Education had instances where the physical quantity of commodities did not reconcile to the adjusted quantity in its inventory tracking system. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Since March 2009, Education encountered software problems with the testing of the IndeTrak Warehouse Management System (WMS) bar-coding program. The software problems have delayed Education’s implementation of the WMS. Recently, Education installed software enhancements to rectify the software problems. Once the enhanced WMS testing is complete and the system is deemed to be working properly, the WMS will track all donated commodities that are ordered, received, and distributed to recipient agencies. The WMS will be integrated with Education’s Child Nutrition Information and Payment System by December 31, 2009. |
261 |
| School Breakfast Program |
Education supplies its Local educational agencies (LEAs) with reports of donated commodities received during the fiscal year from its commodity distribution unit. However, this information does not contain award identification information to inform its LEAs that these are additional program awards of the National School Lunch Program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number 10.555, which are required to be included in the LEAs’ total federal award expenditures that are subject to annual federal audit. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Upon receiving additional guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service on February 24, 2009, Education informed LEAs of the CFDA number 10.555 for the Food Distribution Program by including it on the annual “USDA Commodity Agency Information Update/Annual Inventory Certification” form that is sent to renewing LEAs by March 30 each year, and on the “Agreement For Distribution of Donated Food" for new LEAs. The CFDA number requirement will allow LEAs to appropriately identify the correct CFDA number for their commodity entitlements in the LEA’s annual U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 audit |
259 |
| Special Milk Program for Children |
Education had instances where the physical quantity of commodities did not reconcile to the adjusted quantity in its inventory tracking system. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Since March 2009, Education encountered software problems with the testing of the IndeTrak Warehouse Management System (WMS) bar-coding program. The software problems have delayed Education’s implementation of the WMS. Recently, Education installed software enhancements to rectify the software problems. Once the enhanced WMS testing is complete and the system is deemed to be working properly, the WMS will track all donated commodities that are ordered, received, and distributed to recipient agencies. The WMS will be integrated with Education’s Child Nutrition Information and Payment System by December 31, 2009. |
261 |
| Special Milk Program for Children |
Education supplies its Local educational agencies (LEAs) with reports of donated commodities received during the fiscal year from its commodity distribution unit. However, this information does not contain award identification information to inform its LEAs that these are additional program awards of the National School Lunch Program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number 10.555, which are required to be included in the LEAs’ total federal award expenditures that are subject to annual federal audit. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Upon receiving additional guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service on February 24, 2009, Education informed LEAs of the CFDA number 10.555 for the Food Distribution Program by including it on the annual “USDA Commodity Agency Information Update/Annual Inventory Certification” form that is sent to renewing LEAs by March 30 each year, and on the “Agreement For Distribution of Donated Food" for new LEAs. The CFDA number requirement will allow LEAs to appropriately identify the correct CFDA number for their commodity entitlements in the LEA’s annual U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 audit |
259 |
| Summer Food Service Program for Children |
Education had instances where the physical quantity of commodities did not reconcile to the adjusted quantity in its inventory tracking system. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Since March 2009, Education encountered software problems with the testing of the IndeTrak Warehouse Management System (WMS) bar-coding program. The software problems have delayed Education’s implementation of the WMS. Recently, Education installed software enhancements to rectify the software problems. Once the enhanced WMS testing is complete and the system is deemed to be working properly, the WMS will track all donated commodities that are ordered, received, and distributed to recipient agencies. The WMS will be integrated with Education’s Child Nutrition Information and Payment System by December 31, 2009. |
261 |
| Summer Food Service Program for Children |
Education supplies its Local educational agencies (LEAs) with reports of donated commodities received during the fiscal year from its commodity distribution unit. However, this information does not contain award identification information to inform its LEAs that these are additional program awards of the National School Lunch Program, Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number 10.555, which are required to be included in the LEAs’ total federal award expenditures that are subject to annual federal audit. |
2007-08 |
| Partially corrected. Upon receiving additional guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service on February 24, 2009, Education informed LEAs of the CFDA number 10.555 for the Food Distribution Program by including it on the annual “USDA Commodity Agency Information Update/Annual Inventory Certification” form that is sent to renewing LEAs by March 30 each year, and on the “Agreement For Distribution of Donated Food" for new LEAs. The CFDA number requirement will allow LEAs to appropriately identify the correct CFDA number for their commodity entitlements in the LEA’s annual U.S. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-133 audit |
259 |
