2.  Was required by act 7 of the 2005 legislature  Made up of 20 evaluation criteria to show the local districts trends or current standing  Used to make the state aware of potential financial risks of local school districts

3.  Public school enrollment  Non-public school enrollment  Local property & sales tax collections  Fiscal conditions & district performance scores  Future obligations  Certified school business officials  Submittal of general fund budget forms

4.  Submittal of Annual Financial Report (AFR)  Audit opinion on internal controls  Consecutive audit findings  Fraud  Single audit report (A-133)  Program monitoring  Fiscal monitoring

5.  General purpose financial statements  Expenditures of federal programs  Compliance with laws and regulations on federal programs  General fund deficit spending  General fund balance as % of general fund revenues  Major events

6.  Uses five year period  Looks for declining enrollment  If enrollment is declining might suggest adjustments need to be made in staffing

7.  Looks at percentage of non-public enrollment to public enrollment  Looks for change greater than 15%

8.  Looks at the prior five years  Looks at whether revenues are increasing or declining  Also looks at collections per student vs state average

9.  Looks at expenditures per pupil  Ranks in relation to % below state average  Looks at district performance score

10.  Looks at percent of teachers with more than15 years experience  Due to future retiree benefit costs (health ins)

11.  Is the district’s business manager certified by LASBO  Does the business manager have CPA license

12.  Was the budget submitted to DOE on time  Was it 1-14 days late or greater

13.  Was the annual financial report submitted to DOE on time  Was it 1-14 days late or greater

14.  Does the auditor list any weakness on internal controls  If there are internal controls was it a material weakness

15.  Are the auditors finding the same problems year after year  Rated excellent, good, needs improvement or unacceptable

16.  Was there any evidence of fraud discovered by auditors  Was there more than one case  Was it a material case of fraud

17.  Based on district’s external audit  Looks for questioned costs  What percentage of expenditures were questioned  Less than 5% good  Greater than 10% unacceptible

18.  Based on LDOE program monitoring  Looks at the use of funds related to program  Based on questioned costs by LDOE monitoring  Same percentages as single audit report

19.  Based on LDOE monitoring  Looks for questioned costs in relation to fiscal issues (attached backups to checks, ect.)

20.  This is based on external auditors opinion  Looking for unqualified opinion  Do not want an adverse opinion

21.  This is based on the opinion the external auditors gave on the expenditures of federal programs

22.  This is based on separate opinion the external auditors give on compliance with laws & regulations  Again looking for unqualified opinion

23.  The looks at a five year period  Critical that district address continuous deficit spending

24.  This looks at the district’s fund balance as related to revenues  Excellent is 7.5% or greater (GFOA recomments a fund balance of at least 12%)  Less than five percent is considered unacceptable

25.  New school systems will be monitored by the state  Events such as districts impacted by hurricanes cause districts to be monitored by the state  Going concern opinion by the external auditor means there is concern that the district cannot meet its financial obligations

26.  This document can be used as a positive in bond rating  the financial risk analysis can also be used with your stakeholders to show how well the district is operated