Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant presents Gilpin County cost-allocation plan; human-services indirects rise, parks allocations fall
Summary
MGT Consulting presented Gilpin County’s updated cost-allocation plan for FY2024: county-wide allocated costs rose 18%; human-services allocations rose about 21%, and Parks & Recreation allocations dropped about 4%.
MGT Consulting presented Gilpin County’s updated cost-allocation plan for fiscal year 2024 at the July 22 meeting, explaining how indirect county administrative costs are distributed to operating departments and funds.
Meredith Miller of MGT told the board the consultant looks at direct and indirect costs and allocates shared administrative costs — finance, county manager, human resources, county attorney and information technology — to funds and departments by metrics that reflect service usage.
Key findings Miller summarized:
- Overall allocated costs rose roughly 18% in the FY2024 plan compared with FY2023. - Department of Human Services allocations increased about 21%. Miller said that increase was driven by higher finance department allocations (which use total expenditures as a metric) and higher allocated costs from the county manager’s office. Human Services would benefit from state reimbursement of indirect costs. - Parks and Recreation allocations decreased about 4%, largely because maintenance department contract janitorial costs for the rec center and other buildings fell, reducing the pool of allocated maintenance costs.
Miller explained how Colorado’s state reimbursement for human-services indirect costs works: the state pays 30% of allowable indirect costs but does so with a true-up or “roll-forward” calculation. She gave a numerical example in which projected indirect costs in an earlier year were lower than actual recorded costs; the difference is added into the current-year indirect pool that is then re-calculated for reimbursement.
Commissioners had no objections and thanked the consultant for the detail. County staff said the plan will be used in grant accounting and to allocate costs across departments, and that the county will continue to refine allocation metrics where warranted.
Ending: MGT will finalize the cost plan for staff use; the document will support future grant claims (including the state human-services indirect reimbursement) and internal budgeting.
