REPORT DIGEST

 

REGIONAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION # 21

 

FRANKLIN/WILLIAMSON COUNTIES

 

FINANCIAL AUDIT

(In accordance with the
Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133)

For the Year Ended:

June 30, 2006

 

Summary of Findings:

 

Total this audit                    9       

Total last audit                    8

Repeated from last audit     6

 

Release Date:

June 5, 2007

 

 

State of Illinois

Office of the Auditor General

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND

AUDITOR GENERAL

 

To obtain a copy of the Report contact:

Office of the Auditor General

Iles Park Plaza

740 E. Ash Street

Springfield, IL 62703

(217) 782-6046 or TTY (888) 261-2887

 

This Report Digest and Full Report are also available on

the worldwide web at

http://www.auditor.illinois.gov

 

SYNOPSIS

 

·         The Regional Office made 7 non-routine/bonus payments to 2 employees from July through December 2005 which totaled $11,200.  These payments had signed Payroll Authorization forms but had no explanation for the pay increases.  In addition, the former Regional Superintendent and former Assistant Regional Superintendent did not complete employee evaluations.

 

·          The former Regional Superintendent submitted travel vouchers for mileage and meal expenses for himself and other employees that were reimbursed by the ROE that have been alleged to be materially false in indictments released on August 19, 2004.  As of June 30, 2006, one of four cases had been settled; legal proceedings related to the remaining three indictments were still continuing.

 

·          The former Regional  Superintendent’s wife, a former ROE employee, received compensation ($25,411) for 124 days in which she was absent from work and there was no documentation that services were performed.  Regional Office officials indicated that she was not on any authorized paid leave.

 

·          The former Regional Superintendent submitted monthly cell phone bills totaling $383.12 that included questionable expenditures.  The expenditures included service fees for phone lines not used by ROE employees for 2 ½ months, ring-tone downloads, multimedia packages and late fees.

 

·          The Regional Office of Education #21 did not maintain an adequate cost allocation plan.

 

·          The Regional Office of Education #21 did not comply with certain statutory administrative requirements.

 

·          The Regional Office of Education #21 made questionable employee reimbursements totaling $658.43.

 

·          The Regional Office of Education #21 did not allocate interest earned from its commingled bank account to each source of funds.

 

·          A full-time employee of the Regional Office of Education #21 received $450 from a school district within the counties served by the ROE.  Services provided were within the employee’s scope of employment with the ROE.  There was no documentation of approval by the Regional Superintendent for the arrangement.

 

 

 

 

                        {Expenditures and Revenues are summarized on the reverse page.}


                                                                                   

REGIONAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION #21

 FRANKLIN AND WILLIAMSON COUNTIES

 

FINANCIAL AUDIT

(In Accordance with the Single Audit Act and OMB Circular A-133)

For The Year Ended June 30, 2006

 

 

 

 

FY 2006

FY 2005

TOTAL REVENUES

$3,496,356

$3,744,499

Local Sources

$423,374

$490,945

% of Total Revenues

12.11%

13.11%

State Sources

$1,813,291

$1,670,134

% of Total Revenues

51.86%

44.60%

Federal Sources

$1,259,691

$1,583,420

% of Total Revenues

36.03%

42.29%

 

TOTAL EXPENDITURES

$3,663,484

$4,042,644

Salaries and Benefits

$2,091,953

$2,350,642

% of Total Expenditures

57.10%

58.15%

Purchased Services

$819,851

$653,004

% of Total Expenditures

22.38%

16.15%

All Other Expenditures

$751,680

$1,038,998

% of Total Expenditures

20.52%

25.70%

 

 

 

TOTAL NET ASSETS

$713,458

$880,586

 

 

 

INVESTMENT IN CAPITAL ASSETS

 

$214,841

 

$382,206

 

              Percentages may not add due to rounding.

 

 

REGIONAL SUPERINTENDENT 

During Audit Period:  Honorable Barry Kohl (Resigned effective May 31, 2006)

Currently:  Honorable Ronda Baker (Effective June 1, 2006)

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Regional Office made 7 non-routine/bonus payments to 2 employees from July through December which totaled $11,200.  These payments had signed Payroll Authorization forms but had no explanation for the pay increases.  In addition, the former Regional Superintendent and former Assistant Regional Superintendent did not complete employee evaluations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The former Regional Superintendent submitted travel vouchers for mileage and meal expenses for himself and other employees that were reimbursed by the ROE that have been alleged to be materially false in indictments released on August 19, 2004.  As of June 30, 2006, one of four cases had been settled;  legal proceedings related to the remaining three indictments were still continuing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The former Regional  Superintendent’s wife, a former ROE employee, received compensation ($25,411) for 124 days in which she was absent from work.  There was no documentation that services were performed and Regional Office officials indicated that she was not on any authorized paid leave.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The former Regional Superintendent submitted monthly cell phone bills totaling $383.12 that included questionable expenditures.  The expenditures included service fees for phone lines not used by ROE employees for 2 ½ months, ring-tone downloads, multimedia packages and late fees.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The Regional Office of Education #21 did not maintain an adequate cost allocation plan.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The Regional Office of Education #21 did not comply with certain statutory administrative requirements.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Regional Office of Education #21 made questionable employee reimbursements totaling $658.43.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


The Regional Office of Education #21 did not allocate interest earned from their commingled bank account to each source of funds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


A full-time employee of the Regional Office of Education #21 received $450 from a school district within the counties served by the ROE.  Services provided were within the employee’s scope of employment with the ROE.  There was no documentation of approval by the Regional Superintendent for the arrangement.

 

 

 

 

 

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 

 

INSUFFICIENT CONTROLS OVER PAY RATE AUTHORIZATIONS AND EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS

 

         The Regional Office of Education #21 made seven non-routine/bonus payments from July through December 2005 which totaled $11,200.  There were six $1,000 payments made to the Program Director of several of the ROE grants.  The other payment for $5,200 was made to a faculty member for Project ECHO (Alternative School).  While these payments were supported by a signed Payroll Authorization form, no explanation was provided for the employees’ pay increases.   

 

         In addition, the former Regional Superintendent and former Assistant Regional Superintendent did not complete employee evaluations.  Program directors completed self-evaluations; however, these were simply signed by the former Assistant Regional Superintendent and placed in the employee’s personnel files.  ROE personnel indicated that no evaluations were given to them, formally discussed with them, or signed by them.  (Finding 06-01, pages 13-15)  This finding was first reported in 2002.

 

         The ROE agreed with the finding and stated that bonus payments are no longer made and that all employees have a contract which specifies work assignment, compensation, and duration of assignment.  A salary schedule has been implemented for all teaching faculty which covers faculty at ECHO, Detention Center, and Star Quest.  Every job has been reviewed by the administration.  New job descriptions have been completed on every position and they have been signed by both the employee and administration.  Salaries have been adjusted, up and down, in many cases to reflect appropriate compensation for respective job assignments.  Appropriate documentation is now maintained in personnel records relative to job assignment and salary.  Any work performed by employees which is above and beyond the basic contract is now specified in a supplemental contract which specifically outlines the additional duties and compensation. 

 

         In addition, ROE officials stated that every employee has been formally evaluated by appropriate staff and the evaluations have been signed by the supervisor and employee and are on file with personnel records.  New personnel policies have been adopted.  Earned vacation and sick leave days have been determined for every employee. (For previous Regional Office response, see Digest Footnote #1.)

      

 

UNALLOWABLE EXPENDITURES

 

         The former Regional Superintendent submitted travel vouchers for mileage and meal expenses for himself and other employees that were reimbursed by the ROE that have been alleged to be materially false in indictments released on August 19, 2004.  The former Regional Superintendent and three ROE employees were indicted for allegations ranging from theft and forgery to official misconduct, conspiracy, and/or perjury.   As of June 30, 2006, one of the four cases had been settled; legal proceedings related to the remaining three indictments were still continuing.

 

         The former Regional Superintendent reimbursed the ROE $2,625.70 for some personal expenditures incurred.  However, it is unclear which specific charges were being reimbursed or whether any of these reimbursements related to matters that were the subject of the indictments.   (Finding 06-02, pages 16-17)   This finding was first reported in 2002.

 

         The auditors recommended that the Regional Office establish and follow a policy that prohibits personal expenditures from being paid with ROE funds.  Internal controls should be established to ensure that personal expenses are not paid by the Regional Office.  The auditors also recommended that the former Regional Superintendent reimburse the ROE for all personal expenses paid by the ROE that have not already been reimbursed.

 

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that personnel and financial policies have been revised to prevent future payment of personal expenditures.  Internal controls have now been established which require appropriate documentation, supportive documents, and proper authorization forms before payment can be made.  Requests for payment are now reviewed by the appropriate program director, bookkeeping, and the superintendent before a check is issued.  These new procedures have been reviewed at Director’s meetings on several occasions to insure that all staff are aware and familiar with the new procedures.  (For previous Regional Office response, see Digest Footnote #2.)

 

 

LACK OF INTERNAL CONTROLS OVER PAYROLL

 

          The former Regional Superintendent’s wife, a former ROE employee, received compensation for 124 days in which she was absent from work and there was no documentation that services were performed.  Additionally, the employee had no vacation or sick time earned or accumulated.  Regional Office officials indicated that the Superintendent’s wife was not on any authorized paid leave.  The total amount paid to the employee during this period was $25,411.

 

         Sound business practice requires that employees only be compensated for services provided and/or accumulated and available sick and vacation time.  (Finding 06-03, page 18)

     

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that under the new administration, this employee no longer works at the ROE.  Also, under new policies and procedures which have been established, this situation cannot occur in the future.  Regional Office officials noted that this has been forwarded to the Attorney General’s Office and the States Attorney’s Office for consideration of recovery of these funds. 

 

 

UNALLOWABLE CELL PHONE CHARGES

 

         The former Regional Superintendent submitted monthly cell phone bills which included a number of questionable expenditures.  These questionable expenditures included service fees for phone lines not used by ROE employees for 2 ½ months, ring-tone download charges (4 instances), multimedia packages (24 instances), and late fees (4 instances).  The questionable cell phone expenditures during FY06 totaled $383.12. 

 

         Cell phone charges should only be reimbursed for legitimate business activities incurred by ROE employees.  (Finding 06-04, page 19) 

 

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that policies and procedures have now been implemented which prevent this situation from occurring in the future.  Cell phones which were being used for questionable purposes were taken out of service immediately by the new administration.  Regional Office officials also noted that this recommendation has been forwarded to the Attorney General’s Office and the States Attorney’s Office for consideration of recovery of these funds.

 

 

IMPROPER ALLOCATION OF COSTS

 

         The Regional Office of Education #21 has not implemented a cost allocation plan or an approved indirect cost rate to allocate indirect costs in accordance with OMB Circular A-87.  The ROE invoices the various grants and programs it administers for central service activities, including support salaries and related benefits, accounting and secretarial services, and space rent based on the grants’ budgeted costs (rather than as part of a Cost Allocation Plan).  Such salaries and benefits are allowable expenditures under OMB Circular A-87; however, where employees work on multiple activities or cost objectives, a distribution of their salaries or wages is required to be documented in accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular A-87 or be included in the ROE’s cost allocation plan. 

 

         Grants, cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements with the Federal Government should bear their fair share of costs recognized under principles established by the Office of Management and Budget.  (Finding 06-05, pages 20-21)   This finding was first reported in 2000.

        

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that the Regional Office now has a cost allocation plan which will enable the proper allocation of costs to grant funding sources.  This cost allocation plan outlines the methods to be used to allocate both direct and indirect costs to grants.  This cost allocation plan will be applied to federal and State grants, as well as any other grants for which costs must be allocated.  Employees whose salaries are paid from multiple funding sources are required to complete time sheets.  Costs are determined and allocated based on formulas which ensure that only the actual cost of grant operation is charged to the grant.  The condition of grants being excessively charged has stopped.  The ROE has also received an approved indirect cost rate from the Illinois State Board of Education.    (For previous Regional Office response, see Digest Footnote #3.)

 

 

CONTROLS OVER COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND REGULATIONS

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/3-14.11) requires the Regional Superintendent to examine at least once each year all books, accounts, and vouchers of every school treasurer in the educational service region, and if any irregularities are found in them, to report them at once, as directed by the School Code. 

 

         The Regional Office did not examine at least once each year all books, accounts, and vouchers of every school treasurer in the educational service region.  Regional Office officials noted they believe the mandate is outdated and that they are satisfying the intent of the statute by other reviews they undertake.  For example, the Regional Superintendent reviews and signs off on the Annual Financial Reports from the school districts in the region.  This mandate has existed in its current form since at least 1953. 

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/3-14.25) requires the Regional Office of Education to maintain, and make available to the public during regular business hours, a list of unfilled teaching positions within the region.  The most current version of the list must be posted on or linked to the Regional Office of Education’s Internet website.  If the Regional Office does not have an Internet website, the Regional Superintendent of Schools must make the list available to the State Board of Education and the State Board of

Education must post the list on its Internet website. 

 

         The Regional Office of Education #21 did not maintain, and make available to the public during regular business hours, a list of unfilled teaching positions in the region.  In addition, the Regional Office did not provide a listing on its website of all such unfilled teaching positions. 

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/3-5) requires the Regional Superintendent to present under oath or affirmation to the county board at its meeting in September and as nearly quarterly thereafter as it may have regular or special meetings, a report of all acts as county superintendent, including a list of all the schools visited with the dates of visitation.  This mandate has existed in its current form since at least 1953.

 

         The Regional Office did not present at the September county board meeting, and as nearly quarterly thereafter, a report of all its acts including a list of all the schools visited and dates of visitation. 

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/3-14.5) requires the Regional Superintendent to visit each public school in the county at least once a year, noting the methods of instruction, the branches taught, the textbooks used, and the discipline, government and general condition of the schools.  This mandate has existed in its current form since at least 1953.

 

         The Regional Office performs compliance inspections for each public school in the region on a rotational basis every three years instead of annually.  The Illinois Public School Accreditation Process Compliance Component document completed at these visits includes many of the items delineated in 105 ILCS 5/3-14.5, but does not include a review of the methods of instruction and the textbooks used in the district. 

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/3-7) states that each school district shall, as of June 30 each year, cause an audit to be made of its accounts.  Each school district shall on or before October 15 of each year, submit an original and one copy of such audit to the Regional Superintendent.  If any school district fails to supply a copy of such audit report on or before October 15, or within such time extended by the Regional Superintendent from that date, not to exceed 60 days, then it shall be the responsibility of the Regional Superintendent to cause such audit to be made.

 

         The Regional Office of Education #21 was unable to supply evidence that 2 of the 16 school district financial statement audit reports were submitted to the ROE by October 15, 2005 or by the extension date.  One school district’s financial statement audit report was submitted 71 days after the allowable extension date granted of November 30, 2005.  The remaining school district’s financial statement audit report had not been submitted as of October 13, 2006. 

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/13B-25.35) states that based on district plans to provide alternative learning opportunities, the Regional Office of Education must submit an annual plan summarizing the number, needs, and demographics of students at risk of academic failure expected to be served in its region. This plan must be updated annually and be submitted to the State Board.

 

         The Regional Office of Education #21 did not provide the ISBE with an annual Regional Plan summarizing the number, needs, and demographics of students at risk of academic failure expected to be served in its region, even though school districts within the Regional Office’s region participated in an Alternative Learning Opportunities Program. 

 

         The Illinois School Code (105 ILCS 5/3-14.17) requires the Regional Superintendent to notify the presidents of the board of trustees and the clerks and secretaries of school districts, on or before September 30, annually, of the amount of money distributed to the treasurer, with the date of distribution.

 

         The Regional Office did not notify the board of trustees and the clerks and secretaries of school districts, on or before September 30, annually, of the amounts of money distributed to the school treasurer, with the date of distribution. (Finding 06-06, pages 22-28)

 

         The Regional Office accepted the recommendation to comply with the statutory requirements.  The Regional Office responded that with regards to compliance with 105 ILCS 5/3-14.11 and 105 ILCS 5/3-14.5, the Illinois Association of Regional Superintendents of Schools and the Illinois State Board of Education have agreed to seek legislation to remove duplicative and/or obsolete sections of the Illinois School Code.  Both parties believe that 105 ILCS 5/3-7 of the Illinois School Code and 23 Ill. Adm. Code 1.20, respectively, contain more current, thorough, and comprehensive requirements concerning a public school district’s financial transactions and visitation of public schools by the Regional Superintendent.  As a result, the two parties working together will seek legislation to repeal these two sections of the Illinois School Code.  

 

         With regards to 105 ILCS 5/3-14.25, the Regional Office stated there is now a link on the ROE website that lists any unfilled teaching positions.

 

         With regards to 105 ILCS 5/3-5, the Regional Office stated that there is an ongoing effort to attend meetings more frequently and provide reports to the members of each county board.

 

         With regards to 105 ILCS 5/3-7, the Regional Office stated that monitoring for FY 07 has included maintaining a log evidencing the receipt of the financial statements from the school districts and communication with districts not in compliance.

 

         With regards to 105 ILCS 5/13B-25.35, the Regional Office stated that the current superintendent plans to develop and submit a plan to provide alternative learning opportunities for students at risk of academic failure in the school year 06-07.

 

         With regards to 105 ILCS 5/3-14.17, the Regional Office agreed that the requirement to notify the board of trustees and the clerks and secretaries of school districts on or before September 30, 2005 was not completed.  The Regional Office stated this requirement was fulfilled for September 2006.

 

 

LACK OF AND/OR INCONSISTENCIES IN PAYMENT AUTHORIZATIONS

 

         The ROE made the following questionable reimbursements totaling $658.43 during FY 06:

·        The former Regional Superintendent received a $30 refund for a hotel stay that was paid for by the ROE and never remitted the refund to the ROE.

·        Two employees were reimbursed a total of $263.20 for mileage when an “Authorization for Payment” form was not attached or signed by the former Regional Superintendent.

·        The former Regional Superintendent was reimbursed $146.25 for mileage to and from Springfield, IL to renew the Driver’s Education car’s license sticker at a Secretary of State facility.  The former Regional Superintendent did not submit any additional documentation to indicate that he was traveling to Springfield, IL for any other reason during this time period.  This service is provided at other locations near the ROE.

·        An employee was reimbursed for the same meals twice.  In two instances, the employee submitted reimbursement for a meal that was charged to the employee’s hotel room which also was subsequently reimbursed by the ROE.  The dollar amount of these over-reimbursements was $64.98.

·        An employee was reimbursed for the same hotel stay twice.  The total dollar amount of the over-reimbursement was $154. 

 

         The ROE should adequately review employee claims for reimbursement and reimburse employees only for expenses that are supported by a legitimate business purpose and/or proper documentation in accordance with ROE’s Policies and Procedures Manual.  (Finding 06-07, pages 29-30)

 

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that internal controls have been strengthened to prevent inadvertent errors in payment.  Policies and procedures now require proper authorization for payment be adequately prepared and presented before payment is made.  The Policy Handbook is being amended to include a section specific to reimbursement of meal expense.  Current employees who were over reimbursed as a result of inadvertent errors on travel vouchers will be asked to reimburse the ROE in the amount of the overpayment.

 

 

FAILURE TO ALLOCATE INTEREST EARNED

 

         The Regional Office of Education #21 did not allocate interest earned from its commingled bank account to each source of funds. 

 

         The Regional Office of Education Accounting Manual states that if dollars from two or more sources of funds are combined in one bank account and/or fund, the ROE must allocate, no less than monthly, a portion of the interest earned on that bank account or fund to each source of funds.  (Finding 06-08, pages 31-33)

 

 

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that an Interest Allocation Plan has been developed which ensures that interest earned from grant funds will be allocated back to the grant source and used as part of the program as approved in the original grant agreement.  This allocation will be made monthly with a report going to the Superintendent and Program Director which will help ensure proper utilization.

 

 

ROE EMPLOYEE RECEIVED OUTSIDE COMPENSATION

  

         A full-time ROE employee received two payments totaling $450 from a school district within the counties served by the ROE.  The payments were for training sessions normally performed within the employee’s scope of employment with the ROE.  There was no documentation showing that the services performed were approved by the Regional Superintendent.

         

         According to the ROE Policies and Procedures Manual, employees of the ROE are prohibited from having conflicting employment while employed in a full-time ROE position.  In addition, if a full-time employee performs outside services or employment, such services or employment must be reported to the Program Director and/or Superintendent.  (Finding 06-09, page 34)        

 

         The Regional Office agreed with the finding and stated that ROE policies have been extensively revised.  A new Policy Handbook has been distributed to all employees.  A general staff meeting was held to give employees an opportunity to have any policy clarified.  The Policy Handbook has been discussed at several ROE Director’s meetings where additional clarification has been given.  All employees have now been informed of this policy.  Future violation should not occur.  School district superintendents and bookkeepers within Franklin and Williamson County will be notified that no payment should be made to ROE employees.

 

 

 

 

AUDITORS’ OPINION

 

         Our auditors state the Regional Office of Education    #21’s financial statements as of June 30, 2006 are fairly stated in all material respects. The auditors’ report contains an emphasis of matter paragraph due to contingent liabilities created by possible violation of restrictive provisions of grants.   

 

 

 

_____________________________________

WILLIAM G. HOLLAND, Auditor General

 

WGH:KJM:ro

 

 

SPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS

 

         Our special assistant auditors were Sikich, LLP.

 

 

 

DIGEST FOOTNOTES

#1:  LACK OF PAY RATE AUTHORIZATIONS AND EMPLOYEE EVALUATIONS – Previous Regional Office Response

In its prior response in 2005, the Regional Office responded that the payments were for extra duties performed such as substitute teaching, extra work over the summer for 9.5 month employees and salary payments for employees who worked Project ECHO’s 4-week summer school course.  The ROE indicated they could not avoid non-routine payments due to the unavoidable situations that cause the non-routine payments; however they would provide better explanations and documentation for the payments.

#2:  UNALLOWABLE EXPENDITURES– Previous Regional Office Response

In its prior response in 2005, the ROE responded that it is the ROE’s policy that personal expenses are paid by the employee, not the ROE, and that internal controls have been established to ensure the Regional Office does not pay personal expenses.  The ROE response also included a response from the former Regional Superintendent: “I object to the findings on the cell phone usage and meal and mileage compensation. These findings are inaccurate and not based on actual facts.”  Auditors commented that the former Regional Superintendent did not provide any documentation to support his claims.

#3:  IMPROPER  ALLOCATION OF COSTS – Previous Regional Office Response

In its prior response in 2005, the Regional Office responded that a cost allocation plan has not been developed that addresses the distribution of salaries of employees who work on multiple activities.

Complete Regional Office responses to prior findings are available upon request from the Auditor General’s Office.