Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Internal Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Audit firm finds low risk overall, flags facilities; board opts for one follow-up audit cycle on capital projects
Summary
External auditors from RS Abrams told the South Orangetown Central School District Board of Education that most functions they reviewed are low risk but facilities implementation remains untested; the board agreed to proceed with one in-depth audit cycle focused on capital projects and to remove a $10,000 consent-agenda item tied to the work.
Mary Anne Van Dine of RS Abrams presented the district's annual risk assessment, saying, "As you know, this is a report that we do every year. We reassess the risk, and then we make recommendations on cycles that we wanted to look in-depth." The audit covered accounting and reporting, payroll and human resources, student services and data, and found those areas to be low risk. Van Dine said prior-year recommendations had been implemented and that purchasing procedures had been adopted.
Van Dine told the board RS Abrams recommended two in-depth audit cycles: "one being on capital projects because I know you do have capital projects district wide going on now, as well as also the capital assets and inventory cycle." She said the firm aims to complete the work in time to present results to the audit committee and board in May and to finish the cycles by the district's June 30 fiscal deadline.
Board members pressed for detail on the facilities recommendation after Van Dine said facilities remained a higher concern because the district had not completed or allowed testing of the prior recommendations. Van Dine said, "When we came out in the field, they were all still in process," and that RS Abrams would return to verify implementation during the next cycle.
During business-item discussion later in the meeting, board members and staff considered the contract scope and cost for the recommended work. The board discussed doing only one of the recommended cycles (capital projects) this year rather than both capital projects and capital assets/inventory, citing the timing and the fact that facilities follow-up could be scheduled when more implementation data are available. Board discussion concluded with the decision to proceed with one cycle now and to remove a $10,000 line item from the business-office consent agenda linked to the engagement. The board approved a revision to the meeting agenda to remove that $10,000 consent-agenda item.
RS Abrams and district staff agreed on the next steps: the firm will begin the capital-projects audit cycle and will return to verify facilities implementation when appropriate, with a plan to present the completed work to the audit committee and the board in May and meet the June 30 cycle completion requirement.
The board’s approval to proceed with one cycle was discussed and reached in open session; the transcript shows the board chose to move forward with a single audit cycle and to postpone or add the second cycle later if desired.
