Maricopa County June 30, 2007 Report Highlights - Single Audit

Office Of The Auditor General

Informations

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

Extrait

Maricopa County
REPORT The County Needs to Improve
HIGHLIGHTS Infrastructure ReportingSINGLE AUDIT
The County maintains a network of statements as current year activity,Subject transportation and flood control resulting in a total misstatement of $56
infrastructure assets valued at $1.4 billion. million. Furthermore, adjustments forMaricopa County is
Therefore, it is essential that the County transportation land were calculatedresponsible for preparing
financial statements, accurately value and account for these using current market values rather than
maintaining strong internal assets. However, the County’s internal historical costs, and adjustments
controls, and demonstrating control policies and procedures did not decreasing the value of transportation
accountability for its use of always ensure that its infrastructure infrastructure were not supported.
public monies. As the assets were properly valued or reported. • The County incorrectly reported nearly
auditors, our job is to For fiscal year 2007, auditors noted the $17 million of transportation and flood
determine whether the County following material internal control control infrastructure assets that hadhas met its responsibilities.
weaknesses over financial reporting: been annexed by other governments.
• The County did not maintain anOur Conclusion
• The County made numerous accurate listing of construction in
The information in the adjustments to the value of progress for transportation
financial statements is fairly transportation infrastructure assets infrastructure projects. The listing
stated in all material respects acquired in previous years due to the included projects that were already
and the financial statements implementation of a new asset completed prior to June 30, 2007.
can be relied on. However, management system that more
auditors identified 26 accurately measures roads. These The County adjusted its financialdeficiencies in internal control
adjustments should have been statements for all significant errors andover financial reporting,
recorded as a restatement ofincluding 3 material restated the July 1, 2006, balances for
beginning net assets but wereweaknesses. In addition, the errors affecting prior years.
recorded in the 2007 financial County maintained adequate
internal controls for three of
ten federal programs tested
and complied with federal Expenditures of Federal Moniescompliance requirements for
seven programs. However, Increased by $7.2 Millionauditors found material
internal control weaknesses
for six programs and material During fiscal year 2007, expenditures Federal Expenditures by Awarding Agencynoncompliance with program
Totaling $122.8 Millionof federal award monies increased byrequirements for three Fiscal Year 2007$7.2 million, or 6.2 percent, from theprograms. (In Millions)
$115.7 expended during fiscal year
Transportation Election Assistance 2006. The increase was primarily $3.4 Commission
Health and
$7.2 attributed to the County’s receiving Human Services
$52.2 Justicenew federal award monies from the
$7.3
U.S. Election Assistance Commission
Otherrelated to the Help America Vote Act
$8.7 Requirements Payments program,
Agriculturepassed through the Arizona2007
$9.9 Secretary of State. The County
expended $7.2 million of federal LaborYear Ended June 30, 2007
$10.1 Housing andmonies on this program to purchase
Urban Development
$24.0 voting system equipment. The County Did Not Always
Comply with Federal
Program Requirements
Auditors identified and tested ten federal Planning and Construction program, and an
programs under the guidelines established by adverse opinion was expressed for the Job
the Single Audit Act. Of those ten federal Access—Reverse Commute program. In
programs, the federal program administered addition, the internal control weaknesses for
by the Housing Authority of Maricopa County the Child Nutrition Cluster’s reporting
was audited by other auditors whose report requirements; WIA Cluster’s subrecipient
was furnished to us. Audit tests included monitoring requirements; Highway Planning
evaluating the County’s compliance with each and Construction program’s subrecipient
program’s federal requirements generally monitoring requirements; Job Access—
related to expending, monitoring, and Reverse Commute program’s activities
reporting federal awards. Auditors noted allowed or unallowed, allowable costs/cost
internal control weaknesses and instances of principles, matching, and suspension and
noncompliance with program requirements for debarment requirements; Head Start
seven of the programs tested. For three of the program’s matching and suspension and
seven programs, the instances of debarment requirements; and the
noncompliance were considered to be Immunization Grants program’s eligibility
material. As a result, a qualified opinion was requirements were considered to be material.
expressed for the WIA Cluster and Highway
Summary of Internal Control Weaknesses and Instances of Noncompliance

Type of Compliance Requirement
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Program Responsible Department Activities Costs Eligibility Match Suspension Report Monitoring Special
Child Nutrition Cluster JuvenileProbation X
WIA Cluster Human Services X
JARC Human ServicesX X X X
Head Start Human Services X X
HPC Transportation X
Immunization Grants Public HealthXXX
Section 8 Housing Choice
Vouchers Housing Authority X

WIA – Workforce Investment Act
JARC – Job Access—Reverse Commute
HPC – Highway Planning and Construction

1Activities: Federal monies may have been expended for unallowable activities.
2Costs: Support was not retained for cost allocations.
3Eligibility: Benefits may have been awarded to ineligible participants.
4Match: Cash and in-kind matching contributions were not adequately supported.
5Suspension: Suspension and debarment verifications were not documented.
6Report: Reports were not submitted on time and contained inaccurate information.
7Monitoring: Subrecipient monitoring was not documented.
8Special: Special program requirements were not complied with.
page2z
z
z
z
The County Did Not Always Comply
with Requirements for the Job
Access—Reverse Commute Program
Three material weaknesses in internal • The Department was required by 49
CFR §18.35 to ensure that transactionscontrol were noted for the Job Access—
were entered into only with entities thatReverse Commute program administered
were not suspended or debarred. Priorby the Department of Human Services
to awarding monies to subrecipients or(Department). As a result, the County did
to vendors for goods and services, thenot comply in all material respects with
Department must verify that the entitiesthree of the program’s five compliance were not suspended or debarred from
requirements. Specifically, auditors receiving federal monies. The
reported the following as material Department did not retain
weaknesses or material noncompliance: documentation supporting how
verifications were performed for entities
• The Department did not retain that were contracted to provide goods
supporting documentation for and services.
expenditure transactions that totaled
$9,850. Consequently, the Department
was unable to support that the costs
were spent on allowable activities. In
addition, the Department did not retain
adequate documentation supporting its
allocations of expenditures between
federal and non-federal activities.
The Single Audit Fact Sheet
• The Department was required by an
Twenty-six weaknesses in financialintergovernmental agreement with the
reporting internal controls, includingCity of Phoenix to pay for at least 50
three material weaknesses. Of thesepercent of the program’s costs through
twenty-six weaknesses, eleven relatelocal monies. The Department reported
to Maricopa County, ten to the$608,171 in local matching
Accommodation Schools, and fivecontributions to the City of Phoenix;
to the Sports Commission.however, this was a budgeted amount
Eleven weaknesses in federaland did not represent actual costs
compliance internal controls,incurred. The County did not maintain
including eight material weaknesses.adequate records to support its
Nine violations of federal compliancematching contributions. As a result,
requirements, including fourauditors could not verify compliance
instances of materialwith the program’s matching
noncompliance.compliance requirement. However,
Program costs totaling $9,850 werebased on documentation provided,
questioned as a result of our audit.auditors determined that the County’s
matching contributions consisted of
work-related transportation costs and
Special Needs transportation costs.
Special Needs transportation costs
were not allowable for matching since
they included costs for items such as
home-delivered meals that are not
related to work activities.
page3County’s Condensed
Financial Information
The County’s government-wide
Statement of Net Assets financial statements are designed to June 30, 2007
provide readers with a broad
Total Governmental overview of the County’s finances in
and Business-type a manner similar to private-sector
Activities businesses. These statements report
the fin