Follow-up Financial Monitoring Review Carleton University February 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Financial and Grants Management Institute - March 18-20, Key Concepts for Learn and Serve.
Advertisements

MONITORING OF SUBGRANTEES
2 Session Objectives Increase participant understanding of effective financial monitoring based upon risk assessments of sub-grantees Increase participant.
IMPLEMENTING EABS MODERNIZATION Patrick J. Sweeney School Administration Consultant Educational Approval Board November 15, 2007.
Lessons Learned from Financial Management Reviews May 15, 2008 Bruce Robinson FTA Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation.
Tri-Agency Awards – 101 A Presentation by Research Accounting on Tri-Agency Award Management.
Documenting Expenses & In-Kind Contributions. 2 Donations that Aren ’ t Dollars: In-Kind Contributions Session Objectives: Have participants understand:
What You Need to Know To Ensure Compliance October 2014.
Prepared by the Office of Grants and Contracts1 COST SHARING.
Fiscal Monitoring Fiscal Monitoring. Agenda I. Fiscal Monitoring I. Fiscal Monitoring II. Follow-up II. Follow-up III. Correction Action Plan III. Correction.
Date Using your grant funds An introduction to financial guidelines and regulations CURA Grants.
Department Administrator Session #14 October 30, 2014.
1 INTERNAL CONTROLS A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO HELP ENSURE FINANCIAL INTEGRITY.
UNC Charlotte Purchasing Card Training for Auditor Role Annette Heller.
FY2011 Other Education and General Program Accounts OVERVIEW OF “E” FUNDS.
Financial and Grants Management Institute - March 18-20, Federal Grants Management for Fiscal Staff.
An Educational Computer Based Training Program CBTCBT.
Purpose of the Standards
Financial Management For Project Administrators. How Feds View Themselves.
SAS 112: The New Auditing Standard Jim Corkill Controller Accounting Services & Controls.
This document remains the intellectual property of Arrow Accounting and may not be copied, or used without their prior written approval Use of any material.
Department Administrator Session #13 July 22, 2014.
Department Administrator Session #10 December 11, 2013.
Office of Field Services Fiscal Review Process Becky Pennington Susan Szymas February 7, 2013.
Verification Visit by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) September 27-29, 2010.
Financial Resource Management Recommended Best Practices Training for Volunteers and Support Groups.
Audit and Fiscal Oversight Responsibilities VAVRINEK, TRINE, DAY & CO., LLP December 15,2010.
Joint Meeting: Department Grant Administrators Budget Managers January 26, 2011.
Segregation of Duties– Sponsored Programs APM
Effective Management and Compliance 1 ANA GRANTEE MEETING  FEBRUARY 5, 2015.
Erica Cummings Grant Coordinator 1.  The New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (DHSEM) is responsible for:  Monitoring.
FEBRUARY 26, 2013 PRE-AWARD MATTERS THAT AFFECT POST-AWARD COMPLIANCE MODULE SESSION 2 OF SERIES III AAPLS (APPLICANTS & ADMINISTRATORS PREAWARD LUNCHEON.
Money Handling Procedures Updated by Roger Sparrow, Karen Ramage & David Herbst April 2014.
1 Public Administrator/ Guardian/Conservator’s Office (PAGC) Internal Controls Audit Public Administrator/ Guardian/Conservator’s Office (PAGC) Internal.
Update on the Federal Granting Agencies’ Financial Monitoring Activities CAUBO Conference – 19 June 2006 Update on the Federal Granting Agencies’ Financial.
Report on the Evaluation Function Evaluation Office.
The Campaign for McMaster University Tri-Council Monitoring Visit Fall 2009.
SBIR Budgeting Leanne Robey Chief, Special Reviews Branch, NIH.
10/16/2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Principal Investigators/ Program Directors/ Project Directors.
BACKNEXT Georgia State University --- Expenditure Review Executive Summary -- Online Training Online Training for Georgia State University Expenditure.
Understanding School Finances School Councils. What are school council’s major responsibilities regarding finance? 1.To approve the school’s annual budget.
FISCAL OFFICER Financial Policy I-1 Role of Fiscal Officer, Account Manager, and Account Supervisor.
Automated Statement of Accounts Project and Operational Guideline March 2011.
Brette Kaplan, Esq. Erin Auerbach, Esq. Brustein & Manasevit, PLLC Spring Forum 2013
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING ADMINISTRATION ARRA GREEN JOB AND HEALTH CARE / EMERGING INDUSTRIES NEW GRANTEE POST AWARD FORUM JUNE.
Webinar for FY 2011 i3 Grantees February 9, 2012 Fiscal Oversight of i3 Grants Erin McHughJames Evans, CPA, CGFM, CGMA Office of Innovation and Improvement.
1 Status of PSC recommendations (January December 2007) Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration 14 March 2008.
CAURA Ontario 2013 November 25, 2013 Presented by: Susan Munro, Assistant Director, Research Finance, McMaster University Annie Rémillard, Team Leader,
Daily Management of Awards Jennifer Crockett Jennifer Crockett, Director, Sponsored Projects Finance, Columbia University Tamara Hill Tamara Hill, Manager,
Financial Management of Sponsored Awards: Confessions From A Department Administrator.
University of Minnesota Internal\External Sales “The Internal Sales Review Process” An Overview of What Happens During the Review.
Understanding School Finances School Councils. What are school council’s major responsibilities with regard to finance? 1.To develop the school’s annual.
“SPEAR” W ORKSHOP O CTOBER 19 & 30, 2015 ANGELLE GOMEZ S UBAWARD R ISK A SSESSMENT / MONITORING.
Improving COI Information Management Special Projects COI Committee Lois Brako, Assistant Vice President for Research Regulatory Compliance Oversight June,
Evaluate Phase Pertemuan Matakuliah: A0774/Information Technology Capital Budgeting Tahun: 2009.
Date CCAC National Workshop Tri-Agency Financial Monitoring Review and Research with Animals May 8, 2009 Presented by: Carole Crête-Robidoux, Manager,
Lifecycle of an Award Reporting, Close-outs and Audits Michelle Vazin, Vanderbilt University Michele Codd, George Washington University.
Internal Sales Policy and Procedure Updates. Agenda o Policy o Procedures o Roles & Responsibilities o Definitions o Questions & Answers anytime during.
EN DG Regional Policy & DG Employment, Social Affairs & Equal Opportunities EUROPEAN COMMISSION Luxembourg, May 2007 Management and control arrangements.
Copyright © Texas Education Agency Accounting for Grant Funds, including Documentation for Expenditures.
An Educational Computer Based Training Program CBTCBT.
Welcome. Contents: 1.Organization’s Policies & Procedure 2.Internal Controls 3.Manager’s Financial Role 4.Procurement Process 5.Monthly Financial Report.
Annual Unit Sub Certification of Financial Results and Internal Controls.
2016/17 Tri-Agency Financial Monitoring Review Best Case Scenario Michael Walesiak, CPA, CA Associate Director, Finance Research Services Office, University.
PILOT SCHOOL PRINCIPAL EVALUATION
The Administration of Subrecipient Agreements
The Council Budget Understanding the Budget Process
Lessons Learned from Financial Management Reviews
Internal Controls.
Department Administrator Session #11
Presentation transcript:

Follow-up Financial Monitoring Review Carleton University February 2010

Objectives of the Review Review the effectiveness of policies, controls, and systems in place to ensure that the agencies’ policies and regulations are followed and that research funds are well managed. Ensure that grant holders use their research funds in accordance with the agencies’ policies, regulations and guidelines. Ensure that grant holders are properly supported by the institution in effectively managing the research funds. Share and disseminate information on agency requirements.

Approach Pre-visit Reviewed the questionnaires completed by the University prior to the visit Followed-up with selected university officials to seek clarification on issues identified in the questionnaires On site Met with officials and staff responsible for grant funds administration Reviewed transactions from NSERC - SSHRC accounts for fiscal year (October 1 to September 30) and followed-up on issues as they arose

Approach (con ’t) Met with several grant holders to determine their satisfaction with the administrative support available to them to support proper management of their funds Held an information session for faculty and staff on the use of grant funds. Hold a debrief session with university officials to inform them of the review findings

Overall Carleton University has clearly demonstrated that gaps identified in 2007 have been taken seriously and have been addressed accordingly. The essential elements of a strong control framework are in place: –Roles and responsibilities –Training –Continuous oversight

Overall (Continued) Comments received from various departments were consistent New weaknesses identified during this review are minor or are being addressed. The financial control framework of the institution pertaining to the management of grant funds is deemed to be FULLY satisfactory.

Findings – Good practices and strengths Excellent process for tracking shared costs (chemical disposal and courier fees) Release Time Stipend Confirmation form Harmonization of all ethics committees’ processes Control for the release of funds for grants with ethics requirements Purchasing card reconciliation process RTI grants verification process Excellent organization of documents upon arrival

Remarkable!!

Status on the 2007 recommendations Roles and responsibilities Research Accounting (RA) has taken a leadership role in the past two years to address weaknesses. Roles and responsibilities are better disseminated through on-going communications with the Research office (CURO), the department deans, the ethics committees, Graduate Studies, etc.. Processes are documented and communicated to staff involved. RA has hired a resource with 50% of time allocated to training.

Roles and responsibilities (continued) On-going and on-demand training is provided by RA, CURO and the ethics committees to the research community and the departments. Most agency requirements are controlled centrally in RA which provides accurate oversight of research grant funds. The agencies are satisfied with the changes implemented and the upcoming proposed changes. Recommendation fully addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Ethics review and release of funds CURO has a well defined role as the link between the ethics committees and RA. Good tracking and documentation of all projects requiring ethics clearance from the application stage. Harmonization of annual reviews between committees. No funds are released to researchers without appropriate clearance. Controlled on a yearly basis and as required. Recommendation fully addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Verification for compliance and eligibility on purchasing cards Clear process in place for reconciling all purchasing cards on a monthly basis. Verification for compliance and eligibility of all transactions that are charged to research accounts. Recommendation fully addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Research Time Stipends grants (SSHRC) Good documentation of the process and adequate dissemination of responsibilities to faculty deans. Excellent form to recognize actual costs. Good reconciliation process to identify actual costs, institution’s contribution and residual funds. Recommendation fully addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Research Tools and Instruments grants (NSERC) Better use of system’s capacity to store information and to retrieve it as needed. Excellent process to track purchases made on a RTI grant account and verification against the grant awarded. Process allows to verify that NSERC’s approval has been obtained when equipment purchased differs from Notice of Award. Recommendation fully addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Proceeds on sale of equipment Risk that proceeds may not be reinvested in research is minimized by education done at department level by RA. Departments interviewed were aware that proceeds must be used for research-related purposes. Comments from researchers confirmed that not all are aware of the requirement. University would benefit from formally addressing this issue and communicating it to the research community. Recommendation appears to be addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Agency salary/stipend limits System-based control now in place for Master and Doctoral students Risk identified with university-appointed post doctoral fellows (PDF). –Inconsistent use of the PDF status across departments –No control to ensure that amounts paid to PDFs (as defined by the agencies) respect the agencies’ limits Recommendation is only partly addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Approvals on copying charge expenses All copying card approval forms are kept centrally in Graphics department. Voice-services approval forms are kept in RA. All transactions reviewed were properly documented and approved by the grant holder. Recommendation fully addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

Supporting documentation (Travel-related expenses Consistent and comprehensive review of travel claims done by RA. Only a small percentage of travel claims did not contain all the required documentation/information. Recommendation addressed. Status on the 2007 recommendations

New Findings Visiting researchers No control in place to ensure that visiting researchers’ stipends are limited to $2,000 per month and up to 125 days per year.

Other Observation Sub-delegation One instance where a delegated authority sub-delegated its authority to another individual without the grant holder’s written approval. Ultimately, the grant holder is the person responsible for the management of the funds.

Researchers’ comments Researchers are generally satisfied with the services they receive from the RA office and the CURO. There was a general sense of dissatisfaction in regards to the financial information that is available to them from the financial system (FAST). Efforts could be made to have more on-line expense processing capability (ie: travel claims, direct deposit).

Summary of transactions reviewed Out of the 173 transactions we reviewed: 85% were eligible and compliant 7% were non-compliant 2% were ineligible –Thesis defence –Printing of grant applications –Office supplies –Basic software 6% still under review

Next steps Follow-up (1 month) –Clarification on one remaining issue –10 transactions Send initial report detailing our findings and recommendations to the institution Issue final report once we have received and reviewed the institution’s response