Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference

Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference
Hello. Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference GASB Update May 5, 2016

Summary of New GASB’s GASB 72 – Fair Value Measurement and Application
GASB 74/75 - OPEB Plan Accounting and Employer Accounting and Reporting for OPEB GASB 76 – The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for State and Local Governments GASB 77 – Tax Abatement Disclosures GASB 78 – Pensions Provided through Certain Multiple-Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plans GASB 79 – Certain External Investment Pools and Pool Participants GASB 80 - Blending Requirements for Certain Component Units (an amendment of GASB Statement No. 14) GASB 81 - Irrevocable Split-Interest Agreements

GASB 72 - Fair Value Measurement and Application
Effective date Issued February 2015 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after June 15, (Applicable to FYE 6/30/2016) Objectives To enhance comparability of financial statements among governments by requiring measurement of certain assets and liabilities at fair value using a consistent and more detailed definition of fair value and accepted valuation techniques. To enhance fair value application guidance and related disclosures in order to provide information to financial statement users about the impact of fair value measurements on a government’s financial position. Why? “The board believes that requiring governments to provide additional information about how they measure the fair value of their assets and liabilities will increase financial statement users’ understanding of the nature of the fair value information they receive and enhance users’ ability to make decisions with that information” – GASB Chairman David Vaudt

Definitions Investment A security or other asset that (a) a government holds primarily for the purpose of income or profit and (b) has a present service capacity that is based solely on its ability to generate cash or to be sold to generate cash. Fair value The price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date An exit price that assumes the transactions takes place in a government’s principal market (or most advantageous market if no principal market) Principal market The market with the greatest volume and level of activity for that asset or liability Most advantageous market If no principal market exists, the most advantageous market is the market that maximizes the amount that would be received to sell an assets or minimizes the amount that would be paid to transfer a liability, after taking into account transaction costs and transportation costs The definition for investments is critical. Important to review all of the organizations assets to determine whether they are classified as an investment and subject to FV disclosures

Determining fair value measurement Unit of account For investments held in a brokerage account – each individual security For investments in mutual funds – each share of the respective mutual funds For an investment in a partnership – a group of related assets Valuation techniques Market approach – use prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets, liabilities or groups of assets and liabilities Quoted market prices Matrix pricing Cost approach – use amounts that would be required to replace the present service capacity of an asset (often referred to as current replacement cost) Income approach – convert future amounts (such as cash flows or revenue and expenses) to a single, current (discounted) amount. Present value Option pricing model (ie. Black-Scholes-Merton formula) Market approach will be most common with government entities

Basic Principles Maximize use of relevant observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs Select inputs that are consistent with the characteristics of the asset or liability that market participants would take into account in a transaction for the asset or liability

Hierarchy of inputs Level 1 – quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that a government can access at the measurement date Exchange markets, dealer markets, brokered markets and principal-to-principal markets Level 2 – observable inputs, either directly or indirectly (other than quoted prices) Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active Inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability, such as: Interest rates and yield curves observable at commonly quoted intervals Implied volatilities Credit spreads Market-corroborated inputs Level 1 examples: Common stock Mutual funds Money markets (if determined to be subject to FV) Level 2 examples: US Govt agency obligations (could potentially be level 1) Corporate bonds State and municipal bonds Govt mortgage backed securities

Hierarchy of inputs (Continued) Level 3 – unobservable inputs Best information available under the circumstances Management assumptions i.e. limited partnerships with K-1’s, real estate, long-dated currency swap, interest rate swap Net asset value per Share (NAV) Presented separately from Levels 1, 2, and 3 i.e. hedge funds NAV should not be applied if it is probable that the government will sell the investment for an amount different from the NAV per share If the fair value of an asset or a liability is measured using inputs from more than one level, the measurement is based on the lowest priority level input that is significant to the entire measurement. For example, if there are three inputs significant to a certain fair value measurement, two of them are Level 2 inputs, and one is a Level 3 input, the fair value measurement would be categorized in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy

Acquisition value The price that would be paid to acquire an asset with equivalent service potential in an orderly market transactions at the acquisition date, or the amount at which a liability could be liquidated with the counterparty at the acquisition date. The following assets should be measured at acquisition value: Donated capital assets Donated works of art, historical treasures, and similar assets Capital assets that a government receives in a service concession arrangement

Required Disclosures Should take into consideration the following: The nature, characteristics, and risks of an asset or a liability Assets can be aggregated (for example, U.S. Treasury bills with STRIPS because these investments have similar exposures to interest rate risk) Measurements categorized within Level 3 may need greater disaggregation The level of the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement is categorized Fair value measurements categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy may need greater disaggregation. Whether this Statement or another Statement specifies a type for an asset or a liability The objective or the mission of the government The characteristics of the government Relative significance of assets and liabilities Whether separately issued financial statements are available Line items presented in the statement of net position A type of asset or liability will often require greater disaggregation than the line items presented in the statement of net position

Required Disclosures For recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements: (1) The fair value measurement at the end of the reporting period (2) Except for investments that are measured at the NAV per share (or its equivalent), the level of the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurements are categorized in their entirety (Level 1, Level 2, or Level 3) (3) A description of the valuation techniques used in the fair value measurement (4) If there has been a change in valuation technique that has a significant impact on the result, that change and the reason(s) for making it. Changing from an expected cash flow technique to a relief from royalty technique or the use of an additional valuation technique For nonrecurring fair value measurements: the reason(s) for the measurement. Note that these disclosures do NOT take the place of the current GASB 40 disclosures….they are in addition to

Required Disclosures (Continued) Investments valued at NAV a. The fair value measurement of the investment type at the measurement date and a description of the significant investment strategies of the investee(s) in that type b. For each type of investment that includes investments that can never be redeemed with the investees, but a government receives distributions through the liquidation of the underlying assets of the investees: the government’s estimate of the period over which the underlying assets are expected to be liquidated by the investees c. The amount of a government’s unfunded commitments related to that investment type d. A general description of the terms and conditions upon which a government may redeem investments in the type (for example, quarterly redemption with 60 days’ notice) e. Any redemption restrictions (for example, investments subject to a redemption restriction, such as a lockup or gate) The estimate of when the restriction from redemption might lapse; if an estimate cannot be made, disclose that fact and how long the restriction has been in effect Any other significant restriction on the ability to sell investments in the type at the measurement date f. If a government determines that it is probable that it will sell an investment for an amount different from the NAV per share; then disclose the FV of all investments that meet this criteria and any remaining actions required to complete the sale

Basic disclosure example

Defined Benefit Pension Plan example

Defined Benefit Pension Plan example (Continued)

Question 1 Q—Are cash equivalents subject to the fair value disclosure requirements of Statement 72?

Question 1 Q—Are cash equivalents subject to the fair value disclosure requirements of Statement 72? A—Cash equivalents are short-term, highly liquid investments that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and so near their maturity that they present insignificant risk of changes in value because of changes in interest rates. Generally, cash equivalents are measured at other than fair value (including amortized cost) and, consequently, are not subject to the fair value disclosure requirements of Statement 72. Specific exceptions to fair value measurement for some investments are described in paragraph 69 of Statement 72. Examples of such investments include certain money market investments and nonparticipating interest-earning investment contracts, such as certain nonnegotiable certificates of deposit (CDs). If a cash equivalent is measured at fair value, the fair value disclosure requirements of Statement 72 apply.

Question 2 Q—Prior to the implementation of Statement 72, a government classified as capital assets certain assets that meet the definition of an investment in paragraph 64 of Statement 72. Likewise, the government classified as investments certain assets that do not meet the definition of an investment in Statement 72. Should the government reclassify those assets upon implementation of Statement 72?

Question 3 Q—Prior to the implementation of Statement 72, a government classified as capital assets certain assets that meet the definition of an investment in paragraph 64 of Statement 72. Likewise, the government classified as investments certain assets that do not meet the definition of an investment in Statement 72. Should the government reclassify those assets upon implementation of Statement 72? A—Yes. As part of the initial implementation of Statement 72, the government should evaluate its capital assets, investments, and other assets to determine if any of those assets should be reclassified based on the definition of an investment in Statement 72. For this purpose, the classification should be based on the facts and circumstances at initial implementation of the requirements of Statement 72, rather than on those in existence at the time the asset was initially acquired. After those classifications have been established as part of the implementation of Statement 72, they should not be changed for financial reporting purposes.

Common Issues or Questions in Implementation: Disagreement on level classification Difficulty obtaining information for required disclosures, especially those at NAV Determination of applicability for assets and liabilities Lack of understanding by Boards or Committees on what the levels mean (ie. Not risk based) Obtaining the NAV information or testing it often requires getting the prospectus, investment policy, audited financial statements (if available), etc. Education of Finance Committee and Board is important. Level 2 does not necessarily mean higher risk investments (ie. Most fixed income is Level 2, whereas common stock is Level 1)

GASB 74/75 - OPEB Plan Accounting and Employer Accounting and Reporting for OPEB
GASB 74 – OPEB Plan Accounting – Effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2016 6/30/17 GASB 75 – Employer Accounting and Reporting for OPEB – Effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2017 6/30/18 VERY SIMILAR TO GASB 67/68!!!

Applicability State and local government OPEB plans administered through a trust or equivalent arrangement: Employer/non-employer contributions irrevocable Plan assets dedicated to providing OPEB to plan members Plan assets legally protected from creditors of employers, nonemployer contributing entities, and the OPEB plan administrator. If a defined benefit OPEB plan, plan assets legally protected from creditors of the plan members as well. Defined benefit plans Single employer Agent multiple employer Cost sharing multiple employer Defined contribution plans State and local government plans NOT administered through a trust that meets the specified criteria

– OPEB Plan’s Fiduciary Net Position
GASB 74/75 - OPEB Plan Accounting and Employer Accounting and Reporting for OPEB Net OPEB Liability Total OPEB Liability – OPEB Plan’s Fiduciary Net Position Total OPEB Liability – Actuarial present value of projected benefit payments Single/agent employers recognize 100% of Net OPEB Liability Cost-sharing employers recognize proportionate shares of collective Net OPEB Liability One difference to point out is that if your client has a “pay as you go” OPEB plan with no trust assets, then that OPEB Plan Fiduciary Net Position is $0, which means the Total OPEB Liability will go on the books. Could be HUGE! In some cases, this will dwarf the net pension liability

Several changes in the way actuaries will determine costs and liabilities: Full liability will be immediately recognized (no longer amortization up to 30 years) Annual expense will be the changes in the liability plus/minus deferred items Reduction in the allowable actuarial methods – entry age method Interest assumptions reflects 20 year general municipal bond index

Additional changes to recognizing the OPEB liability: Amortization period will decrease significantly Reduction from up to 30 years under GASB 45 Similar to GASB 67/68 5 year closed period for amortizing differences in investment earnings Deferred inflows / outflows Layered effect of changes in deferred balances for changes in assumptions and earnings

GASB 76 - The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for State and Local Governments
Effective date Issued June 2015 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after December 15, (6/30/2017) Objective Reduce the GAAP hierarchy to two categories of authoritative GAAP and addresses the use of authoritative and nonauthoritative literature in the event that the accounting treatment for a transaction is not specified within a source of authoritative GAAP Implementation guides are now more authoritative (from level 4 to level 2)

Category A - Officially established accounting principles—Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statements Category B - GASB Technical Bulletins; GASB Implementation Guides; and literature of the AICPA cleared by the GASB Authoritative GAAP is incorporated periodically into the Codification of Governmental Accounting and Financial Reporting Standards (Codification), and when presented in the Codification, it retains its authoritative status. If the accounting treatment for a transaction is not specified within Category A or B, a governmental entity should first consider accounting principles for similar transactions within Category A or B and then may consider nonauthoritative accounting literature from other sources Cat A is most authoritative Cat B is 2nd Everything else is 3rd

Release of Implementation Guide No first implementation guide released to coincide with GASB 76 GASB 76 will NOT result in an accounting or reporting change for a vast majority of institutions Possible scenarios where a change in accounting could occur: Entity was using “practices that are widely recognized and prevalent in state and local government” as the basis for how they treated a transaction; this would now be trumped by the Implementation Guides Entity has a very unique accounting situation that is not addressed in GASB and they were relying on FASB guidance

Don’t Fall Asleep!

GASB 77 - Tax Abatement Disclosures
Effective date Issued August 2015 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after December 15, (6/30/2017) Objectives To improve financial reporting by giving users of financial statements essential information that is not consistently or comprehensively reported to the public at present To allow users to be better equipped to understand: (1) how tax abatements affect a government’s future ability to raise resources and meet its financial obligations and (2) the impact those abatements have on a government’s financial position and economic condition.

Definitions Tax abatement A reduction in tax revenues that results from an agreement between one or more governments and an individual or entity in which (a) one or more governments promise to forgo tax revenues to which they are otherwise entitled and (b) the individual or entity promises to take a specific action after the agreement has been entered into that contributes to economic development or otherwise benefits the governments or the citizens of those governments. This Statement establishes financial reporting standards for tax abatement agreements entered into by state and local governments. The disclosures required by this Statement encompass tax abatements resulting from both (a) agreements that are entered into by the reporting government and (b) agreements that are entered into by other governments and that reduce the reporting government’s tax revenues. The provisions of this Statement should be applied to all state and local governments subject to such tax abatement agreements Take a poll: How many have clients that enter into tax abatement agreements (cities and villages likely)? How many have clients that are effected by other governments who enter into tax abatements? Perhaps sales or property tax abatements.

Required Disclosures – Tax Abatements THEY Enter Into Brief descriptive information, including: (1) Names, if applicable, and purposes of the tax abatement programs (2) The specific taxes being abated (3) The authority under which tax abatement agreements are entered into (4) The criteria that make a recipient eligible to receive a tax abatement (5) The mechanism by which the taxes are abated, including: (a) How the tax abatement recipient’s taxes are reduced, such as through a reduction of assessed value (b) How the amount of the tax abatement is determined, such as a specific dollar amount or a specific percentage of taxes owed (6) Provisions for recapturing abated taxes, if any, including the conditions under which abated taxes become eligible for recapture (7) The types of commitments made by the recipients of the tax abatements. The gross dollar amount, on an accrual basis, by which the government’s tax revenues were reduced during the reporting period as a result of tax abatement agreements. DISCLOSURE ONLY

Required Disclosures - Tax Abatements THEY Enter Into (continued) If amounts are received or are receivable from other governments in association with the forgone tax revenue: (1) The names of the governments (2) The authority under which the amounts were or will be paid (3) The dollar amount received or receivable from other governments. If the government made commitments other than to reduce taxes as part of a tax abatement agreement, a description of: (1) The types of commitments made (2) The most significant individual commitments made. Information about a commitment other than to reduce taxes should be disclosed until the government has fulfilled the commitment. If tax abatement agreements are disclosed individually, a brief description of the quantitative threshold the government used to determine which agreements to disclose individually. If a government is legally prohibited from disclosing specific information, a description of the general nature of the tax abatement information omitted and the specific source of the legal prohibition. Last one is key. If legally prohibited from disclosing certain information, that is OK, but general nature still needs to be disclosed

Required Disclosures - Tax Abatements Entered Into by OTHER Governments, That Reduce THE REPORTING GOVERNMENT’S Tax Revenue Brief descriptive information, including the names of the governments entering into the tax abatement agreement and the specific taxes being abated The gross dollar amount, on an accrual basis, by which the reporting government’s tax revenues were reduced during the reporting period as a result of tax abatement agreements If amounts are received or are receivable from other governments in association with the forgone tax revenue: (1) The names of the governments (2) The authority under which the amounts were or will be paid (3) The dollar amount received or receivable from other governments If tax abatement agreements are disclosed individually, a brief description of the quantitative threshold the reporting government used to determine which agreements to disclose individually If a government is legally prohibited from disclosing specific information, a description of the general nature of the tax abatement information omitted and the specific source of the legal prohibition. Could be much more difficult to identify and obtain this information. Will likely require coordination with the other governments

Question 1 Q—A government with 25 tax abatement agreements identifies 3 major tax abatement programs that encompass 20 of those agreements. Is the government required to disclose information about the five tax abatement agreements not included in the major programs?

Question 1 Q—A government with 25 tax abatement agreements identifies 3 major tax abatement programs that encompass 20 of those agreements. Is the government required to disclose information about the five tax abatement agreements not included in the major programs? A—Yes. Information about those five agreements should be disclosed. If the tax abatement agreements for the three major programs are reported in the aggregate for each program, the remaining five tax abatement agreements should be reported in the aggregate. If, however, a government applies a quantitative threshold to disclose individually some or all of the tax abatement agreements in the three major programs, the same quantitative threshold should be applied to the remaining five tax abatement agreements.

GASB 77 - Tax Abatement Disclosures - Example
Note X. Tax Abatements The Village enters into property tax abatement agreements with local businesses under the state Economic Development Opportunity Act of 20X1. Under the Act, localities may grant property tax abatements of up to 50 percent of a business’ property tax bill for the purpose of attracting or retaining businesses within their jurisdictions. The abatements may be granted to any business located within or promising to relocate to the Village. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 20X7, the Village abated property taxes totaling $146,480 under this program, including the following tax abatement agreements that each exceeded 10 percent of the total amount abated: A 40 percent property tax abatement to a grocery store chain for purchasing and opening a store in an empty storefront in the business district. The abatement amounted to $97,500. A 50 percent property tax reduction for a local restaurant increasing the size of its restaurant and catering facility and increasing employment. The abatement amounted to $21,750.

GASB 78 - Pensions Provided through Certain Multiple-Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plans
Effective date Issued December 2015 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after December 15, (6/30/2017) Objective To address a practice issue regarding the scope and applicability of GASB Statement No. 68, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Pensions. This issue is associated with pensions provided through certain multiple-employer defined benefit pension plans and to state or local governmental employers whose employees are provided with such pensions.

GASB 78 - Pensions Provided through Certain Multiple-Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plans
This Statement amends the scope and applicability of Statement 68 to exclude pensions provided to employees of state or local governmental employers through a cost-sharing multiple-employer defined benefit pension plan that (1) is not a state or local governmental pension plan, (2) is used to provide defined benefit pensions both to employees of state or local governmental employers and to employees of employers that are not state or local governmental employers, and (3) has no predominant state or local governmental employer (either individually or collectively with other state or local governmental employers that provide pensions through the pension plan). This Statement establishes requirements for recognition and measurement of pension expense, expenditures, and liabilities; note disclosures; and required supplementary information for pensions that have the characteristics described above. Unlikely to impact many, if any, of our clients A government agency would have to be a participant in a cost sharing plan of a for-profit or NFP plan

GASB 79 - Certain External Investment Pools and Pool Participants
Effective date Issued December 2015 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after June 15, 2015 (6/30/2016), except for certain provisions on portfolio quality, custodial credit risk, and shadow pricing, which are effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015 (6/30/2017). Objectives To establish criteria for an external investment pool to qualify for making the election to measure all of its investments at amortized cost for financial reporting purposes To enhance note disclosure requirements for qualifying external investment pools that measure all of their investments at amortized cost for financial reporting purposes and for governments that participate in those pools. The main reason is to allow many state and local government external investment pools to continue to qualify for amortized cost accounting following rule changes the SEC is implementing. Not expected to have much impact. If they reported at amortized cost previously, then they likely still will. If at FV, still will. Does anyone have any clients that participate in an investment pool that is reported at amortized cost?

Definition External investment pool An arrangement that commingles (pools) the moneys of more than one legally separate entity and invests, on the participants’ behalf, in an investment portfolio; one or more of the participants is not part of the sponsor’s reporting entity. (as defined in Statement No. 31, Accounting and Financial Reporting for Certain Investments and for External Investment Pools) Criteria An external investment pool may elect to measure all of its investments at amortized cost if it meets all of the following criteria: a. Transacts with its participants at a stable net asset value per share (for example, all contributions and redemptions are transacted at $1.00 net asset value per share) b. Meets the portfolio maturity requirements c. Meets the portfolio quality requirements d. Meets the portfolio diversification requirements e. Meets the portfolio liquidity requirements f. Meets the shadow pricing requirements Much more detailed guidance on each of the requirements (b)- (f) in GASB 79

Noncompliance An external investment pool that is significantly noncompliant with any of the criteria during the reporting period generally should not measure its investments at amortized cost for that reporting period. Instead, that pool should apply the provisions in paragraph 16 of Statement 31, as amended (report at fair value). Such a pool may still report short-term debt investments with remaining maturities of up to 90 days at the reporting date at amortized cost, provided that the fair value of those investments is not significantly affected by the impairment of the credit standing of the issuer or by other factors. Factors that may indicate the noncompliance is significant include, but are not limited to: The noncompliance was not promptly identified. The noncompliance was due, at least in part, to factors within the control of the external investment pool’s management. The noncompliance was not an isolated incident. Necessary corrective or remedial action was not promptly taken

Reporting If an external investment pool meets the criteria and measures all of its investments at amortized cost, the pool’s participants also should measure their investments in that external investment pool at amortized cost. If an external investment pool does not meet the criteria, the pool’s participants should measure their investments in that pool at fair value Disclosures Disclose the presence of any limitations or restrictions on withdrawals (such as redemption notice periods, maximum transaction amounts, and the qualifying external investment pool’s authority to impose liquidity fees or redemption gates) in notes to the financial statements.

GASB 80 - Blending Requirements for Certain Component Units (an amendment of GASB Statement No. 14)
Effective date Issued January 2016 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after June 15, 2016 (6/30/2017). Objective To improve financial reporting by clarifying the financial statement presentation requirements for certain component units. Applies to component units that are organized as not-for-profit corporations in which the primary government is the sole corporate member The GASB’s initial research indicated that a significant number of component units included in the reporting entity of the governments studied were not-for-profit corporations. For example, as a primary government seeks to expand its operations, it may acquire legally separate entities to expand services or spin off operations to incorporate them into legally separate entities. Many of those legally separate entities that are reported as component units have governing bodies that are representative of the community, and the primary government is the sole corporate member. Generally, those types of component units would not meet the previous blending requirements established in paragraph 53 of Statement 14, as amended, for three reasons: Previous standards do not equate being the sole corporate member to having substantively the same governing body. The main purpose of those legally separate entities is to provide or expand services to the general public, or to entities or individuals other than the primary government and its employees. Although it is possible that the primary government may have some responsibility for the total outstanding debt of the acquired or spun-off entities, it is generally expected that those entities will generate sufficient resources to meet some or all of their own obligations. The Board believes that being a sole corporate member of a not-for-profit corporation establishes a unique relationship, from the standpoint of financial accountability, between the primary government and the component unit. This relationship is established through articles of incorporation or bylaws and is not found in other component unit relationships in which the primary government appoints the component unit’s governing body. Based on this unique relationship, the Board concluded that blending is the appropriate presentation of a component unit that is a not-for-profit corporation, in which the primary government is the sole corporate member.

GASB 81 - Irrevocable Split-Interest Agreements
Effective date Issued March 2016 Provisions of this Statement are effective for financial statements for periods beginning after December 15, 2016 (6/30/2018). Objective To improve accounting and financial reporting for irrevocable split-interest agreements by providing recognition and measurement guidance for situations in which a government is a beneficiary of the agreement. To enhance the transparency and decision-usefulness of general purpose external financial reports, and their value for assessing accountability, by more clearly identifying resources that are available to a government. Provides guidance on how to record if: Govt is the remainder interest beneficiary Govt is the lead interest beneficiary Life interest in real estate And if a third party is the intermediary Seems to be very similar to current FASB guidance

GASB 68 – One Year Later Who loves it?

GASB 68 – One Year Later What did we learn?
Digging up payroll/HR records from (for FY 16 audits it will be files) What is creditable compensation What happened to our financial statements More disclosure New layers of amortization Fiscal Standards Advisory 16-04

Thank You. Jeffrey Jensen Direct 916.492.5162 Mobile 916.217.5155

Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Community College Internal Auditors Spring Conference"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback