Single Audit for 2015

As required by the federal Single Audit Act, each year the California State Auditor's Office reviews and evaluates how well State entities administer federal programs. These audits involve several assessments. First, we review each entity's internal controls such as the system of accounting and administrative controls. Such controls include management and program policies, procedures, and guidance that help ensure effective and efficient use of resources; prevention and detection of fraud, waste, and abuse; and the reliability of financial reporting. State law requires each state agency to establish and maintain a system of internal accounting and administrative controls.

In addition to internal controls, the Act focuses on the entity's compliance with laws and regulations governing federal awards. Compliance refers to how well the respective agency receiving federal funds complies with the requirements in federal law, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to each of its federal programs. At a minimum, we review how well the entities comply with the 14 types of requirements applicable to most federal programs.

The number of programs we review is formula-driven and risk-based per the guidance of the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB). For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2015, the California State Auditor's Office audited 26 major programs and clusters of programs that met monetary thresholds and that we deemed to be high-risk.

Summaries of the 2015 Single Audit (Fiscal Year ended June 30, 2015)

The following tables provide you with an overview of the issues we noted during our 2015 Single Audit.

• Compliance and Internal Control Summary
• Internal Control Summary by Requirement Type
• Noncompliance Summary by Requirement Type
• Summary of Internal Control Deficiences by Department
• Summary of Departments' Noncompliance with Requirements
• Internal Control Deficiencies by Federal Program
• Summary of Noncompliance by Federal Program

Lastly, the drop-down menus below will allow you to create your own table based on your needs.

Noncompliance:	Less Severe Most Severe
Internal Control Deficiencies:	Significant Material
Requirement Type:	Activities Allowed or Unallowed Eligibility Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Period of Performance of Federal Funds Special Tests and Provisions Subrecipient Monitoring
Federal Department:	U.S. Dept. Agriculture U.S. Dept. Education U.S. Dept. Health and Human Services U.S. Dept. Transportation
State Department:	Community Services & Development Education Health Care Public Health Transportation
Program:	Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Subst... English Language Acquisition Grants HIV Care Formula Grants High-Speed Rail Corridors and Intercity Passenger ... Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Medical Assistance Program SCHIP (State Children's Insurance Program) Transit Services Cluster Transit Services Cluster Transit Services Cluster WIC (Supplemental Nutrition Program)

Auditor Conclusions

After assessing these programs, our office is required to issue an independent auditor's report on the State's compliance with requirements applicable to each major program and on internal controls. This includes our assessment of each entity's internal controls and an evaluation of how well the entity administered the federal funds and complied with the 14 types of requirements and any specific requirements set out by the federal government. If, during our assessment, we find deficiencies in the internal controls or failure to comply with the provisions mandated, we must report it to the federal government. If we believe that the noncompliance is material to the program, we must "qualify" our opinion—in other words, we must alert the federal government by identifying such issues in our report.

There are four types of auditor's opinions we can express:

• Unqualified—often referred to as a clean opinion. The State generally complied with applicable requirements.
• Qualified—often referred to as an "except for" opinion. The State generally complied with applicable requirements "except for" the condition(s) described in the report.
• Adverse—the State did not comply with the applicable requirements.
• Disclaimer—we are unable to express an opinion because of restrictions that prevented us from completing the planned audit procedures.

Summary of the types of auditor reports we issued for the 2015 Single Audit.

To view the entire 2015 Single Audit report, Full Report PDF.