Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presented by Dave Yuhas Donna Denker and Associates.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Presented by Dave Yuhas Donna Denker and Associates."— Presentation transcript:

1 Presented by Dave Yuhas Donna Denker and Associates

2  Project conducted under sponsorship of : President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency Executive Council on Integrity and Efficiency Three State Auditors  Not all that important. Just interesting to see how many organizations had to be created and involved to get this project completed.  Report issued in June 2007

3  The Project was performed to: Determine single audit quality Provide baseline for monitoring ongoing quality Recommend needed changes to the process or the Single Audit Act

4  Study covered 208 audits out of a total 38,000 single audits performed in 2002/ %.  Breakdown of 208 – The 2 buckets 96 were from 852 entities expending Federal Awards greater than $50 million. 112 were from 37,000 entities expending Federal Awards less than $50 million. Which bucket does your entity fall into?? 97% audits conducted were on entities receiving less than $50 million -- 37,000 of the 38,000.

5  115 of 208 acceptable – 48.6% 115 represented 92.9% of total Federal Awards Bucket #1 audits for the most part  30 had significant deficiencies – 16% 30 represented 2.3% of total Federal Awards  63 were unacceptable – 35.5% WOW!! 63 represented 4.8% of total Federal Awards

6  Total of 96 audits 61 (63.5%) were acceptable 12 (12.5%) had significant deficiencies 23 (24%) were unacceptable  What is this telling us? Who performs these audits?

7  Total of 112 audits 54 (48.2%) were acceptable 18 (16.1%) had significant deficiencies 40 (35.7%) were unacceptable  More than half unacceptable!  What would your audit be classified as?  What is more important quality/cost?

8  Not documenting the understanding of internal controls over compliance requirements %  Not documenting the testing of internal controls of at least some compliance requirements – 61%  Not documenting compliance testing of at least some compliance requirements – 59.6%

9  Revised and improved single audit standards, criteria and guidance. Improve standards/guidance Suite of 8 plus more!  Established minimum requirements for training on performing single audits More CPE both as pre-requisite and ongoing.  Review and enhance processes to address unacceptable audits Possible application of suspension and debarment process  In the end More procedures = more time More time = increased audit costs

10  Choose your auditor carefully!  RFP should include: Details Deadlines Time Staff experience Peer review References  What is impact on entity if audit is determined to be unacceptable?

11


Download ppt "Presented by Dave Yuhas Donna Denker and Associates."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google