| Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and Development Fund |
The monitoring procedures contained limited fiscal procedures and do not cover all major functions and activities of the program. There was no documented sign-off of approval for the procedures performed and conclusions reached for the monitoring visit on the Cross-Program Instrument by someone other than the preparer. Further, Education does not maintain adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensure that the appropriate reviews and approvals are performed. Finally, there does not appear to be effective sanctions imposed by Education on the Local Education Agencies for the untimely implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2003-04 |
| Fully corrected. |
315 |
| Child Care and Development Block Grant |
The monitoring procedures contained limited fiscal procedures and do not cover all major functions and activities of the program. There was no documented sign-off of approval for the procedures performed and conclusions reached for the monitoring visit on the Cross-Program Instrument by someone other than the preparer. Further, Education does not maintain adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensure that the appropriate reviews and approvals are performed. Finally, there does not appear to be effective sanctions imposed by Education on the Local Educational Agencies for the untimely implementation of their corrective action plans. |
2003-04 |
| Fully corrected. |
315 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education does not have appropriately designed controls in place to monitor program earmarking requirements. Additionally, it does not perform actual calculations on required earmarks to ascertain if it has complied with the required limitations. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed corrective action for 2007. Education restates its corrective action in 2008-002, but BSA does not believe it is designed appropriately to address compliance with Earmark requirements. |
249 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education does not have effective policies or procedures for assessing Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) and Local Educational Agency (LEA) subrecipients as high-risk either on the individual program level or on the overall SELPA and LEA level. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
274 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education is not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed for site visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) for untimely implementation of their corrective action plans.
|
2005-06 |
| Education is implementing new protocols in FY 2008-09 to address the finding. |
265 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education lacks monitoring processes and controls to ensure interest earned on federal program advances over the $100 allowable limit is returned promptly to the federal government on a quarterly basis as applicable. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
233 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
Education was using unaudited Local Educational Agency (LEA) expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements, does not send final MOE calculations to each LEA annually, does not ensure that all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Education has a corrective action plan in place for two of the conditions. However, Education disagrees with the condition related to sending final MOE calculations to each LEA annually. |
242 |
| English Language Acquisition Grants |
We were unable to identify controls to ensure that award information was properly identified to the Local Educational Agencies (LEAs). |
2005-06 |
| CDE completed its 2007 corrective action. However, this was a repeat finding in 2008, as the corrective action was not adequate in correcting the finding. |
261 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education does not have effective policies or procedures for assessing Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) and Local Educational Agency (LEA) subrecipients as high-risk either on the individual program level or on the overall SELPA and LEA level. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
274 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education is not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed for site visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) for untimely implementation of their corrective action plans.
|
2005-06 |
| Education is implementing new protocols in FY 2008-09 to address the finding. |
266 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education lacks monitoring processes and controls to ensure interest earned on federal program advances over the $100 allowable limit is returned promptly to the federal government on a quarterly basis as applicable. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
233 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
Education was using unaudited Local Educational Agency (LEA) expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements, does not send final MOE calculations to each LEA annually, does not ensure that all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Corrective action plan in place for two of the conditions. However, Education disagrees with the condition related to sending final MOE calculations to each LEA annually. |
242 |
| Improving Teacher Quality State Grants |
We were unable to identify controls to ensure that award information was properly identified to the LEAs. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed its 2007 corrective action. However, this was a repeat finding in 2008, as the corrective action was not adequate in correcting the finding. |
262 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education does not have appropriately designed controls in place to monitor program earmarking requirements. Additionally, it does not perform actual calculations on required earmarks to ascertain if it has complied with the required limitations. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed its corrective action for 2007. Education restates its corrective action in 2008-002, but BSA does not believe it is designed appropriately to address compliance with Earmark requirements. |
248 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education does not have effective policies or procedures for assessing Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) and Local Educational Agency (LEA) subrecipients as high-risk either on the individual program level or on the overall SELPA and LEA level. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
273 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education does not perform any monitoring controls to ensure the subcontractor’s controls in place to gather and compile the information are effective to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the data supplied to Education. Additionally, Education does not maintain supporting documentation for its submitted reports. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education has strengthened quality control procedures over the reporting approval process by requiring regional offices to validate student count data. By December 31, 2008, Education plans to select a sampling of data submissions by region and check the data for completeness and accuracy |
259 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education is not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed for site visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) for untimely implementation of their corrective action plans.
|
2005-06 |
| Education is implementing new protocols in FY 2008-09 to address the finding. |
265 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education relies upon the work performed by an outside subcontractor and does not perform any monitoring to ensure the subcontractor’s controls are in place and effective to help ensure the accuracy of the funding formula supplied to Education. |
2005-06 |
| Partially corrected. Education has strengthened quality control procedures over the reporting approval process by requiring regional offices to validate student count data. By December 31, 2008, Education plans to select a sampling of data submissions by region and check the data for completeness and accuracy. |
276 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
We were unable to identify controls to ensure that award information was properly identified to the Local Educational Agencies (LEAs). |
2005-06 |
| The 2007 corrective action was fully implemented. However, this was a repeat finding in 2008, as the corrective action was not adequate in correcting the finding. |
261 |
| Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities - State Grants |
Education does not have appropriately designed controls in place to monitor program earmarking requirements. Additionally, it does not perform actual calculations on required earmarks to ascertain if it has complied with the required limitations. |
2005-06 |
| Completed corrective action for 2007. Education restates its corrective action in 2008-002, but BSA does not believe it is designed appropriately to address compliance with Earmark requirements. |
248 |
| Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities - State Grants |
Education does not have effective policies or procedures for assessing Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) and Local Educational Agency (LEA) subrecipients as high-risk either on the individual program level or on the overall SELPA and LEA level. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
273 |
| Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities - State Grants |
Education is not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed for site visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) for untimely implementation of their corrective action plans.
|
2005-06 |
| Education is implementing new protocols in FY 2008-09 to address the finding. |
265 |
| Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities - State Grants |
Education lacks monitoring processes and controls to ensure interest earned on federal program advances over the $100 allowable limit is returned promptly to the federal government on a quarterly basis as applicable. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
232 |
| Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities - State Grants |
Education was using unaudited Local Educational Agency (LEA) expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements, does not send final MOE calculations to each LEA annually, does not ensure that all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Corrective action plan in place for two of the conditions. However, Education disagrees with the condition related to sending final MOE calculations to each LEA annually. |
241 |
| Special Education - Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) |
Education does not have appropriately designed controls in place to monitor program earmarking requirements. Additionally, it does not perform actual calculations on required earmarks to ascertain if it has complied with the required limitations. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed its corrective action for 2007. Education restates its corrective action in 2008-002, but BSA does not believe it is designed appropriately to address compliance with Earmark requirements. |
248 |
| Special Education - Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) |
Education’s monitoring site visits consisted of programmatic procedures and did not include any fiscal procedures to gain assurance on compliance with fiscal requirements of the program. Further, Education’s follow-up schedule results in the untimely resolution of the Local Educational Agency's (LEA) corrective actions. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
268 |
| Special Education - Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) |
Education does not have appropriately designed controls in place to monitor program earmarking requirements. Additionally, it does not perform actual calculations on required earmarks to ascertain if it has complied with the required limitations. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed its corrective action for 2007. Education restates its corrective action in 2008-002, but BSA does not believe it is designed appropriately to address compliance with Earmark requirements. |
248 |
| Special Education - Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) |
Education’s monitoring site visits consisted of programmatic procedures and did not include any fiscal procedures to gain assurance on compliance with fiscal requirements of the program. Further, Education’s follow-up schedule results in the untimely resolution of the Local Educational Agency's (LEA) corrective actions. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
268 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education does not have appropriately designed controls in place to monitor program earmarking requirements. Additionally, it does not perform actual calculations on required earmarks to ascertain if it has complied with the required limitations. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed its corrective action for 2007. Education restates its corrective action in 2008-002, but BSA does not believe it is designed appropriately to address compliance with Earmark requirements. |
247 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education does not have effective policies or procedures for assessing Special Education Local Plan Area (SELPA) and Local Educational Agency (LEA) subrecipients as high-risk either on the individual program level or on the overall SELPA and LEA level. |
2005-06 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
272 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education is not maintaining adequate documentation of the procedures performed or ensuring that appropriate reviews and approvals are performed for site visits. Additionally, Education does not appear to impose effective sanctions on Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) for untimely implementation of their corrective action plans.
|
2005-06 |
| Education is implementing new protocols in FY 2008-09 to address the finding. |
264 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education lacks monitoring processes and controls to ensure interest earned on federal program advances over the $100 allowable limit is returned promptly to the federal government on a quarterly basis as applicable. |
2005-06 |
| Education partially completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
232 |
| Title I Grants to LEAs (Local Educational Agencies) |
Education was using unaudited Local Educational Agency (LEA) expenditure figures to calculate compliance with the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements, does not send final MOE calculations to each LEA annually, does not ensure that all required reductions for MOE failures are promptly processed. |
2005-06 |
| Education has a corrective action plan in place for two of the conditions. However, Education disagrees with the condition related to sending final MOE calculations to each LEA annually. |
241 |
| Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and Development Fund |
Education does not minimize the time elapsing between its drawdown of federal funds and the payment of the advance to the Local Educational Agencies. |
2006-07 |
| Partially corrected. Education complied with the policy and procedures established by Finance with agreement by the SCO when processing the claim noted in this finding. However, Education continues to work with the Risk Management Service in determining and implementing the cash management process improvements that are deemed practical and achievable within Education’s available resources |
291 |
| Child Care and Development Block Grant |
Education does not minimize the time elapsing between its drawdown of federal funds and the payment of the advance to the Local Educational Agencies. |
2006-07 |
| Partially corrected. Education complied with the policy and procedures established by Finance with agreement by the SCO when processing the claim noted in this finding. However, Education continues to work with the Risk Management Service in determining and implementing the cash management process improvements that are deemed practical and achievable within Education’s available resources |
291 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education lacks monitoring processes and controls to ensure interest earned on federal program advances over the $100 allowable limit is returned promptly to the federal government on a quarterly basis as applicable. |
2006-07 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
232 |
| Migrant Education - State Grant Program |
Education was unable to provide evidence that the consultant reviewed the reports submitted by the vendors, as indicated in the quality control process. |
2006-07 |
| Education completed the corrective action for 2007, and has a corrective action plan in place for the 2008 finding. |
277 |
