Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RSU 18 audit: clean financial opinion but two federal compliance findings on special-education grants
Summary
An independent presenter told the RSU 18 board the FY2025 financial statements received an "unmodified opinion," while a single-audit review identified two compliance findings in the special-education cluster (an unallowable multi‑year software reimbursement and undocumented vendor debarment checks).
An auditor presented the results of the fiscal 2025 audit to the RSU 18 school board and said the district’s financial statements received an “unmodified opinion,” commonly referred to as a clean opinion.
The presenter said the audit work began with pre-audit visits in May and resumed in September, and that reports were dated and issued in January. “As far as the financial statements themselves, they did receive an unmodified opinion, which is a clean opinion on the financial statements,” the presenter told the board.
The presenter said the district also underwent a single audit because it receives more than $750,000 in federal grant funding. Auditors tested the school-nutrition cluster and the special-education cluster. The school‑nutrition work produced no findings; the special‑education testing produced two compliance findings.
One finding related to allowable costs: auditors reported that a software purchase with a five‑year term was included in reimbursements for FY2025 even though guidance requires reimbursements only for costs actually incurred in the fiscal year. The presenter described that as “not technically allowable.”
The second finding related to procurement suspension and debarment checks. The presenter said the RSU verified vendors were not suspended or debarred by checking online, but the district did not retain documentation of those checks. “Because we couldn't verify that, we had to consider that a compliance finding as well,” the presenter said.
Aside from those compliance issues, auditors reported no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in internal controls; the presenter said there was one minor recommendation included in the report. The presenter noted that fund‑balance classification and a small net decrease in the general fund were discussed during the presentation.
On fund balance, the auditor reviewed components of the general fund and said unassigned fund balance was $3.5 million for FY2025. That amount represented 7.9% of budget, the presenter said, which is below the state’s 9% threshold (about $3.9 million for RSU 18). The presenter also explained the reporting presentation that produced a $736,000 negative line (a gross-up of capital outlay and finance purchases) but said the net general-fund decrease was only about $18,550.
Board members asked questions about where committed and assigned balances are recorded in the financial statements; the presenter pointed to footnotes and offered to help locate the specific line items. Steve Smith (who identified himself as "president of Belgrade") asked how earmarked amounts are shown; the presenter said the financial-statement footnotes show the details.
No formal board vote on the audit report is recorded in the transcript; the audit was presented and discussed with staff and board members and will remain part of the record for future budget and oversight work.
