Audit: Sierra Vista Unified receives clean opinion; auditors note minor federal and control findings
Loading...
Summary
External auditors presented an unmodified opinion on the district's financial statements, reported about $15.8 million in federal expenditures for FY24, and flagged minor findings related to meal count reporting, year-end reconciliations and a small number of uncross-checked cash receipts.
The Sierra Vista Unified District governing board heard the district's annual audit and single-audit report during its meeting on June 17, where outside auditors said they issued an unmodified (clean) opinion on the district's FY24 financial statements.
Dennis Machin, the audit presenter, told the board that the annual financial report contains a clean audit opinion and recommended that board members review the management's discussion and analysis for an overview of year-to-year changes. "Page 1 starts with the audit opinion where we issued an unmodified or clean opinion," Machin said.
Machin said the single-audit schedule showed about $15,800,000 in federal expenditures for fiscal year 2024 and that the audit tested roughly 40% of federal spending through a sample of programs. The firm tested the special education cluster, the child nutrition cluster and the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ESSER). He described one minor federal finding: a three-meal net variance between the district's meal-count submissions and what was reported to the Arizona Department of Education.
The auditor also described two internal-control items. One involved year-end audit adjustments and cash reconciliations; the other found that 4 of 37 tested cash receipts lacked evidence of a second review. "We saw a variance, so it's just something we need to report," Machin said of the meal-count issue, and he recommended stronger year-end reconciliations and dual review of cash receipts.
Board members asked about timeliness. One board member raised concern that the district missed the Auditor General's filing deadline in consecutive years and urged the auditing firm to start the process earlier. "That is a big concern for me going forward," the board member said, asking whether earlier scheduling or different procedures could prevent late filing. Machin replied that late county cash reconciliations and later capital-asset information had held up the field work and recommended providing those reconciliations earlier.
Machin also described the USFR compliance questionnaire the Auditor General requires and noted the district's number of "no" answers decreased year over year (14 to 12), with improvements in cash receiving and attendance reporting.
The presentation closed with the auditor noting no disagreements or difficulties with management and offering to work with the district to start field work earlier next audit cycle to meet the March 31 filing deadline.
Board president Cleveland thanked the presenter; no formal action was required on the audit presentation at the meeting.
