Cochise County June 30, 2005 Report Highlights-Single Audit

Office Of The Auditor General

Description

Cochise CountyCounty Implements NewREPORTHIGHLIGHTS Financial Reporting StandardSINGLE AUDITDuring fiscal year 2005, the County Custodial risk: This is the risk that aSubjectimplemented Governmental Accounting government will not be able to recoverCochise County is Standards Board Statement No. 40, deposits if a depository financialresponsible for preparing Deposit and Investment Risk Disclosures. institution fails, or recover the value of anfinancial statements, This reporting standard requires the investment if the outside party holding themaintaining strong internal County to disclose its investment policies investment fails. Governments mustcontrols, and demonstratingand any investment and deposit risks disclose deposits and investmentsaccountability for its use ofrelated to credit risk, custodial credit risk,public monies. As the exposed to this risk by type and fair valueauditors, our job is to concentration of credit risk, interest rate and describe how they are held. Atdetermine whether the risk, and foreign currency risk. The table June 30, 2005, the County’s deposits andCounty has met its below lists the County’s deposits and investments totaled $102.1 million. Of thisresponsibilities.investments at June 30, 2005. total, $1.2 million was exposed toOur Conclusion custodial credit risk.Deposits and Investments June 30, 2005 The information in the Concentration risk: This is the risk of(In thousands) financial statements is fairlyloss attributed ...

Informations

• Publié par: Omko
• Nombre de lectures: 8
• Langue: English

Extrait

Cochise County

REPORT County Implements New HIGHLIGHTS Financial Reporting Standard SINGLE AUDIT During fiscal year 2005, the County Custodial risk: This is the risk that a Subject implemented Governmental Accounting government will not be able to recover Cochise County is Standards Board Statement No. 40, deposits if a depository financial responsible for preparing Deposit and Investment Risk Disclosures. institution fails, or recover the value of an financial statements, This reporting standard requires the investment if the outside party holding the maintaining strong internal County to disclose its investment policies investment fails. Governments must controls, and demonstrating and any investment and deposit risks accountability for its use of disclose deposits and investments public monies. As the related to credit risk, custodial credit risk, exposed to this risk by type and fair value auditors, our job is to concentration of credit risk, interest rate and describe how they are held. At determine whether the risk, and foreign currency risk. The table June 30, 2005, the County’s deposits and County has met its below lists the County’s deposits and investments totaled $102.1 million. Of this responsibilities. investments at June 30, 2005. total, $1.2 million was exposed to Our Conclusion it risk. Deposits and Investments June 30, 2005 The information in the (In thousands) ion risk: This is the risk of financial statements is fairly to the magnitude of a stated in all material Description Amount respects and the financial investment in a single Deposits $4,197 statements can be relied ments must generally State Treasurer’s investment pools21,254 upon. The County mount and issuer, U.S. Treasury securities11,349 maintained adequate U.S. agency securities54,547 any one issuer that internal controls over Repurchase agreement9,900 rcent or more of total financial reporting. Also, the U.S. Treasury money market fund888 t June 30, 2005, the County maintained adequate  $102,135 internal controls over, and ore than 5 percent of its complied with, federal debt securities issued by program requirements for At June 30, 2005, the County was .S. agencies: Federal eight of the ten programs exposed to the following risks: ortgage Corporation (22.5 tested. However, for two of ral Home Loan Bank the federal programs tested, Credit risk: This is the risk that an our report recommends the percent), Federal Farm issuer or another party to an investment County strengthen controls 7.1 percent), and Federal will not fulfill its obligations. Governments over allowable costs/cost age Association (5.7 principles and DavisBacon must disclose the creditquality ratings of Act federal compliance certain investments. The County is requirements. required to report credit risk for its risk: This is the risk that investments in the State Treasurer’s erest rates will adversely investment pools, U.S. agency securities, alue of an investment. and the U.S. Treasury money market nt of the County’s fund. The County obtained credit quality ad a maturity of less than 1 ratings from Standard & Poor’s ratings emainder had a maturity of 2005 the highest ratings assigned by Standard service. The County’s investments had & Poor’s except for the State Treasurer’s Year Ended June 30, 2005 investment pools, which are not rated.

2 page

County’s Condensed

Statement of Net Assets

Current and other assets Capital assets Total assets

Current liabilities Noncurrent liabilities Total liabilities

Net assets: Invested in ca net of related debt Restricted net assets Unrestricted net assets Total net assets

Total Governmental and Businesst Activities 45  60,486  105,924

 7  15,530  22,636

 51  8  23,758 $ 83,288

The Statement of Net Assets presents information on all county assets and liabilities, with the difference between the two reported as net assets. The Statement of Activities presents information showing how net assets changed during the most recent fiscal year. As shown in the tables, net assets increased by over $10 million. This increase was primarily due to increases in the County’s property taxes and excise taxes, and in the stateshared sales and vehicle license tax revenues. Also the County increased its investment in capital assets, net of related debt.

Statement of Activities Year Ended

Program revenues: Governmental activities Businesst General revenues: Governmental activities Businesstype activities Total revenues Ex Governmental activities Businesstype activities Total expenses Change in net assets Net assets—beginning Net assets—ending

Total Governmental and Businesst Activities

30  35  46  328  112,866

 68  34,123  102,557  10,309  72,979 $ 83,288

The County Spent $11.8 Million in Federal Awards

The County spent $11.8 million of federal this past year for 51 programs. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develo and the U.S. Department of Labor were th largest federal grantors with county progra expenditures totaling $2.7 million and $2.3 respectively.

Expenditures from U.S. Department of Ho and Urban Development programs includ approximately $1.7 million spent for the Se Housing Choice Vouchers program. This is administered by the Housing Authority o Cochise County and helps lowincome fa obtain decent, safe, and sanitary rental ho

Expenditures from the U.S. Department of programs included approximately $1.3 mill the Workforce Investment Act Program Cl This program is designed to increase emp by providing job skills training and counsel jobseekers and lowincome young people.

Two County Programs with Noncompliance

Auditors identified and tested ten federal programs under the requirements established by the Sin Audit Act. Weaknesses in internal control and instances of noncompliance with program requirements were noted for two of the progra tested.

Airport Improvement Program

The County did not adequately monitor its construction contractor’s compliance with the DavisBacon Act to ensure that laborers were at or above the prevailing wage rates.

Drug Court Discretionary Grant Prog

The County did not keep complete records of i share of program costs used to meet the Cou share of the program’s matching requirements.

Federal Expenditures by Awarding Agency Totaling $11.8 Million Fiscal Year 2005 (In Millions)

Housing and Urban Developm ent $2.7

Labor $2.3

Justice $1.2

Health and Human Services $1.6

Transportation $1.2

Interior $1.3

Other $1.5

TheSingleAuditFactSheet ! No weaknesses in financial reporting internal controls. ! Two weaknesses in federal compliance internal controls that resulted in immaterial noncompliance with federal compliance requirements. ! No program costs were questioned as a result of our audit.

page

TOOBTAIN MOREINFORMATION

A copy of the full report can be obtained by calling (602)5530333

page 4

or by visiting our Web site at: www.azauditor.gov

Contact person for this report: Rebecca Rosenberg

Cochise County

REPORT HIGHLIGHTS SINGLE AUDIT Year Ended June 30, 2005