Monday, January 23, 2012

TARTA missing audit items not 'minor'

In response to the declaration by the Ohio Auditor of State that TARTA is "unauditable" for the 2010 fiscal year, James Gee told the local daily that the missing items were “a list of minor details.”

So I emailed the auditor's office to find out what was missing.

Their letter reads, in part:

To Ms. Stacey Clink and Mr. James Gee:

As part of our regular audit of the Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority for the period January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010, we have determined that the condition of your financial records is not adequate to finish our audit. The IPA firm completing the audit has been unable to obtain the information in the attachments to this letter.

Consequently, we consider the financial records unauditable pursuant to Ohio Rev. Code Section 117.41.

Here are the items listed in the attachment referenced:

Cash and Cash Equivalents
• Request copies of the following checks:
 Huntington a/c 9902 (on Dec bank rec)
 Support of deposit in transit for $33,266.71

• Request details for PNC error

Accounts Receivable
• Support of A/R Federal Oper Assist account

• Trapeze prepaids

Fixed Assets
• FA2- Current year additions detail (need invoices for any significant additions)
• FA3 - Current year disposal detail (need check copy/support for any significant proceeds received)
• Requested support for significant CIP additions
• FA4 - Gain / loss on disposal detail
• Need responses to tax department questions

Accrued Liabilities
• Copy of AL16 for adjustment noted in health care accrual calculation which caused adjustment to be off $62,000

• Provide G/L detail for accounts 1380-000, 3020-000 and 3200-000.
• MC8 - Most recent (2011) internal Balance Sheet and Income Statement

Ohio Revised Code
• OR4 - Certificate for total amount from all sources available for 2009 and 2010.
• OR7 - Do-not-exceed certificate
• OR8 - Amending appropriation resolution for expenditures
• List of contracts over $25,000
• Any contracts > $50k. Need corresponding RFPs

Single Audit
• Disbursement Testing Selections. Sample was sent by email on 5/13/11. File was titled “Grants Disbursement Selection”. Requesting P.O.’s, invoices, and copies of cleared checks
• DBE Memos for 2010
• SA11 - Disposals that were purchased with federal dollars

• Hylant prepaid

Accounts Receivable
• Proof of subsequent receipt of TMACOG invoices in other accounts receivable
o Nov 09, Jan, Mar & - $21,918
o Nov – $11,166.20
o Dec - $14,065.61

Accounts Payable
• Need requested invoices for sample selected from 2011 check register. - missing grant invoices

• Legal fee detail for 2010 invoice
• Explanation for fluctuations in the following accounts:
o 6110-020
o 6145-020
o 6160-020
o 6175-020
o 6185-020

• Need to determine whether holiday and vacation accruals are correct for last week of pay period
• Updated report for claims
• Updated report for litigations

Control testing
• Last page of check registers for requested pay periods

• Completion of disbursement testing on 11/2/11
• Responses to questions and additional requests relating to quarterly narratives

These are NOT minor. It's not 'minor' to be missing your accounts receivable support for your federal operating assistance account.

It's not 'minor' to be unable to produce a listing of your fixed asset purchases and disposals.

It's not 'minor' to be missing your "Most recent (2011) internal Balance Sheet and Income Statement."

It's not 'minor' to be unable to produce - for 13 months! - your listing of contracts over $25,000 and the requests for proposals for all contracts over $50,000.

It's not 'minor' to be missing your list of disposals purchased with federal dollars. In fact, lack of the audit information on the federal items could result in loss of federal income.

It's not 'minor' to be missing details of your legal expenses, details about fluctuations in various accounts, reports for claims and litigation against the agency, or your complete check registers.

No matter what Gee says, these are major items, most of which should be kept on a regular basis or at least should be capable of being produced within a full year of being requested.

How does TARTA not provide a list of their contracts over $25,000? How do they not provide their RFPs for contracts over $50,000? How do they not gather this information in 13 full months????

There is no excuse for such incompetence. A change in personnel and a new computer system cannot be blamed for many of the missing items. It shouldn't take any specialized knowledge to go to your check register (the document used to record checks written) and make a copy of the last page for various pay periods.

I'll say it again: James Gee needs to go and the entire TARTA board needs to be replaced.

1 comment:

BPHTOL said...

May I second that motion?

Google Analytics Alternative