EIN: 636001101
UEI: DLJWLMSNK627
Data as of August 24, 2026
Management decision deadline — for entities that funded this organization
The FAC accepted this audit on June 21, 2024. Under 2 CFR 200.521(d), a pass-through entity that provided federal funds to this organization for this audit period must issue a management decision on these findings by December 21, 2024 (611 days ago).
What is a management decision? →We tested a sample of 10 withdrawn students. In two instances, the change in status was not reported within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. See Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2023-001 – Special Tests and Provisions – Enrollment Reporting – Repeat Finding Information on the Federal Program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: Under the Pell grant and loan programs, institutions must update the Enrollment Reporting Roster for changes in student status, report the date the enrollment status was effective, enter the new anticipated completion date and submit the changes electronically through the batch method or the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) website. Institutions are responsible for timely reporting, whether they report directly or via a third-party servicer. These changes include reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations or approved leaves-ofabsence. Condition: We tested a sample of 10 withdrawn students. In two instances, the change in status was not reported within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. See Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2023-001 - Special Tests and Provisions - Enrollment Reporting - Repeat Finding There were students who withdrew on 9/21/23 and 9/24/23, but at the time of the Clearinghouse Enrollment Report, which was submitted on 10/11/23, neither of the students were listed as withdrawn in PeopleSoft when the data was pulled for submission. The next enrollment submission was 12/4/2,3 which showed that both students were withdrawn; however, the 60 days had elapsed. In order to strengthen the policies and procedures with regard to the enrollment reporting requirements, we will hire a person that will be dedicated to ensuring that data flow between the student information system and tertiary systems is running efficiently and accurately. This person will be responsible for thorough research, analysis, and administrative efforts related to the auditing of complex data collections. In the meantime, the Office of Records & Registration will make sure that the term withdrawal forms are completed on a daily basis so that we do not miss any during the enrollment submission with NSC. Anticipated Date of Completion: September 30, 2024 Contact: Marie McNear Director of Records and Registration mmcnear@alasu.edu 334-229-4312
2022-003
FAC accepted this audit on June 29, 2023 — management decision was due December 29, 2023.
We tested 25 students who participated in Federal Work Study (FWS) during the fiscal year. Of those 25, seven students were paid an amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student. Another student was paid $12 per hour when only $10 was authorized. During the year, the University engaged a consultant to review the FWS program who noted these discrepancies updated any authorization form that was not in compliance at the time the student was paid. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student pay to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the Work Study Program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2022-001 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Individual Program Compliance ? Federal Work Study Programs ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 675.19 establish rules governing the administration of a Federal Work Study program, including payments to students, fiscal procedures, and records. These rules require that the University establish and maintain an internal control system to ensure compliance, including communication with the student to notify them of the amount of funds authorized and how they will be paid, and fiscal responsibility to maintain records to support the amounts earned and paid to the student. Condition: We tested 25 students who participated in Federal Work Study (FWS) during the fiscal year. Of those 25, seven students were paid an amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student. Another student was paid $12 per hour when only $10 was authorized. During the year, the University engaged a consultant to review the FWS program who noted these discrepancies updated any authorization form that was not in compliance at the time the student was paid. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student pay to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the Work Study Program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2022-001 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Individual Program Compliance ? Federal Work Study Programs The Office of Student Financial Aid has hired a Federal Work Study Coordinator. The responsibilities of the coordinator are as follows: ? Determine eligibility ? Award the student for the year ? Ensure that the student has a federal work-study contract prior to starting work ? Student and supervisor must sign a work-study responsibility contract ? Student is assigned a work-study job placement ? Student enters their time into TimeClock Plus (TCP) ? Ensures the student time is correct by doing a monthly audit o Audit to ensure that the student doesn?t work more than 20 hours nor that the student works during the class schedule ? Submit information to payroll for processing Anticipated Date of Completion: Corrective action completed as of the date of this report. Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2021-002
During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2022-002 ? Internal Controls over Student Financial Aid (Significant Deficiency) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. One of the components of internal controls is risk assessment which includes defining, identifying, analyzing and responding to fraud risks. Condition: During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2022-002 ? Internal Controls over Student Financial Aid The University has a new policy and procedure in place regarding Risk Assessment within the Financial Aid Office. The University has also hired seasoned financial aid administrators to oversee all its internal control procedures. Anticipated Date of Completion: September 30, 2023 Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2021-004
We tested a sample of 10 withdrawn students. In one instance, the change in status was not reported for 62 days which is not within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2022-003 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Enrollment Reporting? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: Under the Pell grant and loan programs, institutions must update the Enrollment Reporting Roster for changes in student status, report the date the enrollment status was effective, enter the new anticipated completion date and submit the changes electronically through the batch method or the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) website. Institutions are responsible for timely reporting, whether they report directly or via a third-party servicer. These changes include reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations or approved leaves-of-absence. Condition: We tested a sample of 10 withdrawn students. In one instance, the change in status was not reported for 62 days which is not within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2022-003 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Enrollment Reporting Previously, some withdrawals were delayed as the result of electronic forms stalling within the workflow process. The Office of Records and Registration has met with the consultants and revised the process so that Records and Registration and Financial Aid is alerted immediately when a Term Withdrawal is submitted. Withdrawals are processed within 24 hours of receipt. Faculty will be trained to ensure the timeliness of them reporting students who have not been attendance so the student?s status will be updated expeditiously so they will be reported correctly. The Office of Records and Registration is working with Academic Affairs to hire staff who will be responsible for Enrollment Reporting and NSLDS. We will also report monthly to the National Student Clearinghouse in an effort to capture any changes in students? enrollment status. Anticipated Date of Completion: Corrective action completed as of the date of this report. Contact: Marie McNear Director Records and Registration mmcnear@alasu.edu 334.229-4312 The Office of Financial Aid works closely with the Office of the Registrar to ensure that all withdrawn students from the University are reported to the Clearinghouse on a monthly basis. Once the students are withdrawn and the report is generated to the Clearinghouse, the Registrar?s Office will submit a copy of those monthly reports to the Office of Financial Aid. Anticipated Date of Completion: September 30, 2023 Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2021-005
FAC accepted this audit on June 29, 2022 — management decision was due December 29, 2022.
We selected a sample of 10 students who withdrew and were receiving financial aid. Of the 10 students tested, we noted 4 exceptions. There were 3 instances in which the unearned aid was not returned timely; and 1 instance in which the incorrect amount was returned by the University. Cause: The University did not properly calculate the amount of aid earned or to be returned for 1 student, after reviewing the student?s accounts receivable detail, the student?s refund was incorrectly calculated leaving an additional $2,099 to be returned. In 3 instances the refund was not returned within the 45 day window as required. Effect: The University was not in compliance with withdrawal requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the withdrawal process to accurately document each requirement and implement checks and balances to ensure compliance with withdrawal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-001 ? Special Tests and Provisions: Withdrawal Testing (Material Weakness and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 668 establishes rules governing the student withdrawal process including the determination of withdrawal date, calculation of earned Title IV assistance and return of unearned Title IV aid within 45 days. Condition: We selected a sample of 10 students who withdrew and were receiving financial aid. Of the 10 students tested, we noted 4 exceptions. There were 3 instances in which the unearned aid was not returned timely; and 1 instance in which the incorrect amount was returned by the University. Cause: The University did not properly calculate the amount of aid earned or to be returned for 1 student, after reviewing the student?s accounts receivable detail, the student?s refund was incorrectly calculated leaving an additional $2,099 to be returned. In 3 instances the refund was not returned within the 45 day window as required. Effect: The University was not in compliance with withdrawal requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the withdrawal process to accurately document each requirement and implement checks and balances to ensure compliance with withdrawal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2021-001 ? Withdrawal Testing The University has implemented a withdrawal process which is initiated by the Registrar. The student will complete a withdrawal form and get all appropriate signatures. Once all signatures are obtained, the form is submitted back to the Registrar?s office as an official withdrawal. The financial aid office will complete the Return to Title IV calculation and authorize Grants & Contract Accounting to return the appropriate funds. Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2020-002
We tested 21 students who participated in Federal Work Study during the fiscal year. Of those 21, 2 students were paid a cumulative amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student pay to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the Work Study Program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-002 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Individual Program Compliance ? Federal Work Study Programs (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 675.19 establish rules governing the administration of a Federal Work Study program, including payments to students, fiscal procedures and records. These rules require that the University establish and maintain an internal control system to ensure compliance, including communication with the student to notify them of the amount of funds authorized and how they will be paid, and fiscal responsibility to maintain records to support the amounts earned and paid to the student. Condition: We tested 21 students who participated in Federal Work Study during the fiscal year. Of those 21, 2 students were paid a cumulative amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student pay to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the Work Study Program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2021-002 ? Individual Program Compliance for Federal Work Study Program The Office of Student Financial Aid will hire a Federal Work Study Coordinator to implement the eligibility and awarding of FWS to potential enrolled students based on allocation. The award amount will be a part of the student award notification and entered on the work study contract. The FWS Coordinator will audit all time sheets reporting accuracy and make any adjustments as needed prior to payroll processing. All FWS supervisors will receive an award balance amount after each pay period to prevent a student from working without funding eligibility. Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2020-003
Supporting documentation for all significant financial and nonfinancial data in Parts I, II, IV, and V of the FISAP Report was not provided or information provided was not consistent with amounts reported on the FISAP. Cause: Some key line items selected for testing could not be traced to supporting documentation. The supporting documentation provided by the Student Financial Aid office did not reconcile or agree to the FISAP report filed. Effect: The University did not comply with FISAP special reporting requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures for the preparation and documentation of the information reported to comply with special reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-003 ? Reporting (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: ED Form 646-1, Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate (FISAP) (OMB No. 1845-0030) is an electronic report submitted annually to receive funds for the campus-based programs by October 1st of each year. Condition: Supporting documentation for all significant financial and nonfinancial data in Parts I, II, IV, and V of the FISAP Report was not provided or information provided was not consistent with amounts reported on the FISAP. Cause: Some key line items selected for testing could not be traced to supporting documentation. The supporting documentation provided by the Student Financial Aid office did not reconcile or agree to the FISAP report filed. Effect: The University did not comply with FISAP special reporting requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures for the preparation and documentation of the information reported to comply with special reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2021-003 ? Reporting of FISAP The University has hired a new financial aid administrator who is well knowledgeable and experienced in the preparation of the FISAP reporting requirements. Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2020-004
During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-004 ? Internal Controls over Student Financial Aid (Significant Deficiency) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. One of the components of internal controls is risk assessment which includes defining, identifying, analyzing and responding to fraud risks. Condition: During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report
Finding 2021-004 ? Internal Control The University has hired a Quality Control/Financial Aid Auditor who is responsible for internal control of risk assessment. The policies and procedures manual is in the process of being updated. Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2020-005
We tested a sample of 10 withdrawn students. In one instance, the change in status was never reported to the U.S. Department of Education and in two instances the change in status was not reported within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2021-005 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Enrollment Reporting (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: Under the Pell grant and loan programs, institutions must update the Enrollment Reporting Roster for changes in student status, report the date the enrollment status was effective, enter the new anticipated completion date and submit the changes electronically through the batch method or the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) website. Institutions are responsible for timely reporting, whether they report directly or via a third-party servicer. These changes include reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations or approved leaves-of-absence. Condition: We tested a sample of 10 withdrawn students. In one instance, the change in status was never reported to the U.S. Department of Education and in two instances the change in status was not reported within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2021-005 ? Enrollment Reporting The University?s Registrar office will ensure timely and accurate reporting of enrollment changes and make any adjustments biweekly to ensure correct enrollment statuses of all students. Contact: K. Michael Francois Associate Vice President for Student Affairs/Financial Aid kfrancois@alasu.edu 334.229.4826
2020-008
FAC accepted this audit on June 23, 2021 — management decision was due December 23, 2021.
We selected a sample of 14 students who withdrew from the University. 12 of these students received a loan during the year or during their career at the University. Out of the 12 students, 10 students did not have documentation of exit counseling on file. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that the required exit counseling interviews were completed or the University attempted to contact the borrower to complete the required counseling. Effect: The University was not in compliance with requirements to counsel student borrowers. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding conducting and documenting exit counseling to comply with direct loan counseling requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-001 ? Special Tests and Provisions: Exit Counseling (Material Weakness and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 685.304 requires an institution to ensure that exit counseling is conducted with each Direct Subsidized Loan or Direct Unsubsidized Loan borrower and graduate or professional student Direct PLUS Loan borrower shortly before the student borrower ceases at least half-time study at the school. Condition: We selected a sample of 14 students who withdrew from the University. 12 of these students received a loan during the year or during their career at the University. Out of the 12 students, 10 students did not have documentation of exit counseling on file. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that the required exit counseling interviews were completed or the University attempted to contact the borrower to complete the required counseling. Effect: The University was not in compliance with requirements to counsel student borrowers. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding conducting and documenting exit counseling to comply with direct loan counseling requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-001 ? Exit Counseling Students withdrawing from the University will be referred by the Office of Records and Registration to complete the online Withdrawal form which includes a weblink for students to complete the mandatory exit counseling. In addition, all graduating students will be instructed to complete their mandatory exit counseling. This information is a key component of the the Graduation Clearance Checklist. Graduating students also receive emails with instructions on how to complete Exit Counseling can also complete their mandatory Exit Counseling at the self-service computer area in Financial Aid or in the University Bookstore during Senior Check-Out week. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-004
We selected a sample of 14 students who withdrew and were receiving financial aid. Of the 14 students tested, 9 students were noted with exceptions, and some students had more than one exception noted. There were 6 instances in which the University did not prepare a return of Title IV funds calculation; 4 instances in which the unearned aid was not returned; 1 instance in which the unearned aid was not returned timely; and 4 instances in which the incorrect amount was returned by the University. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs totaled $14,295 in Title IV aid to be returned, the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not properly calculate the amount of aid earned or to be returned for 6 students, because a student begins earning Title IV funds on the first day of attendance, even if a student withdraws before the school?s census date or later the calculation must be performed for all forms of Title IV disbursed or could be disbursed. In 4 instances the refunds, totaling $17,513, were never returned. In one instance the refund was not returned within the 45 day window as required. After reviewing the student accounts receivable detail, 1 student?s refund was correctly calculated but the incorrect amount was returned leaving an additional $833 to be returned. And lastly, 2 students were entitled to additional funds that were incorrectly returned, totaling $4,051. Effect: The University was not in compliance with withdrawal requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the withdrawal process to accurately document each requirement and implement checks and balances to ensure compliance with withdrawal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-002 ? Special Tests and Provisions: Withdrawal Testing (Material Weakness and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 668 establishes rules governing the student withdrawal process including the determination of withdrawal date, calculation of earned Title IV assistance, and return of unearned Title IV aid within 45 days. Condition: We selected a sample of 14 students who withdrew and were receiving financial aid. Of the 14 students tested, 9 students were noted with exceptions, and some students had more than one exception noted. There were 6 instances in which the University did not prepare a return of Title IV funds calculation; 4 instances in which the unearned aid was not returned; 1 instance in which the unearned aid was not returned timely; and 4 instances in which the incorrect amount was returned by the University. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs totaled $14,295 in Title IV aid to be returned, the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not properly calculate the amount of aid earned or to be returned for 6 students, because a student begins earning Title IV funds on the first day of attendance, even if a student withdraws before the school?s census date or later the calculation must be performed for all forms of Title IV disbursed or could be disbursed. In 4 instances the refunds, totaling $17,513, were never returned. In one instance the refund was not returned within the 45 day window as required. After reviewing the student accounts receivable detail, 1 student?s refund was correctly calculated but the incorrect amount was returned leaving an additional $833 to be returned. And lastly, 2 students were entitled to additional funds that were incorrectly returned, totaling $4,051. Effect: The University was not in compliance with withdrawal requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the withdrawal process to accurately document each requirement and implement checks and balances to ensure compliance with withdrawal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-002 ? Withdrawal Testing Key personnel responsible for completing R2T4 calculations are no longer with the institution. This gap in employment caused major constraints on the office of student financial aid and the R2T4 calculation process has not being adequately audited since the employees last dates of employment. The unearned portion of the R2T4 calculation identified during the sample audit will be return immediately. Additionally, the Directors of Financial Aid will complete a self-audit of R2T4 calculations for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 aid years up to 10% of all completed calculations. Moving forward, R2T4 calculations will be assigned to the newly posted Senior Financial Aid Counselor and at least one other staff member in the office will be cross trained to assist with checks and balance and accuracy of R2T4 calculations. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-005
The University uses a work study authorization form to communicate the authorized amount, time period, hourly rate, and department in which the student will work. The University uses approved timesheets to capture and document the hours worked by the student to be paid. We tested 19 students who participated in Federal Work Study during the fiscal year. Of those 19, 11 students were paid a cumulative amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student, and 5 students did not have an authorization form on file. In addition, in March of 2020 when the school was forced to temporarily shut down due to the pandemic, the University was allowed to continue to pay work study students even though they were not working. The University determined since they would not have time sheets to support the amounts paid in March and April, they would pay the students the same amount they were earning in the previous months. 4 students tested were paid more in March and April than they earned in previous months. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in Federal Work Study pay totaled $20,777; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student pay to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the Work Study Program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-003 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Individual Program Compliance ? Federal Work Study Programs (Material Weakness and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 675.19 establish rules governing the administration of a Federal Work Study program, including payments to students, fiscal procedures and records. These rules require that the University establish and maintain an internal control system to ensure compliance, including communication with the student to notify them of the amount of funds authorized and how they will be paid, and fiscal responsibility to maintain records to support the amounts earned and paid to the student. Condition: The University uses a work study authorization form to communicate the authorized amount, time period, hourly rate, and department in which the student will work. The University uses approved timesheets to capture and document the hours worked by the student to be paid. We tested 19 students who participated in Federal Work Study during the fiscal year. Of those 19, 11 students were paid a cumulative amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student, and 5 students did not have an authorization form on file. In addition, in March of 2020 when the school was forced to temporarily shut down due to the pandemic, the University was allowed to continue to pay work study students even though they were not working. The University determined since they would not have time sheets to support the amounts paid in March and April, they would pay the students the same amount they were earning in the previous months. 4 students tested were paid more in March and April than they earned in previous months. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in Federal Work Study pay totaled $20,777; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student pay to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the Work Study Program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-003 ? Federal Work-study Programs The Office of Financial Aid continues to make improvements to the Federal Work Study Program, to enhance its accuracy and efficiency. Under the direction of the Director of Financial Aid and one Financial Aid Counselor (whose main responsibility it is to oversee the Federal Work Study Program), processes have been put into place that include: 1) a virtual mandatory orientation that is offered multiple times during the academic year, for both student workers and institutional/external supervisors; 2) the development of a Federal Work Study Supervisor's Guide/Manual; and, 3) a streamlining of students' employment contracts, timesheets and demonstrated hours of work. An email amount will be used for only work-study concerns that serve as the main means of communication. The Financial Aid Counselor also manages and reviews submitted timesheets, ensuring that work hours, that are reported, are in congruence with payment amounts. Biweekly email reminders are sent to all students and supervisors to alleviate missed deadlines; and, increased communication with the Payroll Office remains in effect. The implementation of TimeClock Plus, an electronic timekeeping system, will assist in monitoring the number of hours worked. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-008
Supporting documentation for all significant financial and nonfinancial data in Parts I, II, IV, and V of the FISAP Report was not provided or information provided was not consistent with amounts reported on the FISAP. Cause: Some key line items selected for testing could not be traced to supporting documentation. The supporting documentation provided by the Student Financial Aid office did not reconcile or agree to the FISAP report filed. Effect: The University did not comply with FISAP special reporting requirements.Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures for the preparation and documentation of the information reported to comply with special reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-004 ? Reporting (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: ED Form 646-1, Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate (FISAP) (OMB No. 1845-0030) is an electronic report submitted annually to receive funds for the campus-based programs by October 1st of each year. Condition: Supporting documentation for all significant financial and nonfinancial data in Parts I, II, IV, and V of the FISAP Report was not provided or information provided was not consistent with amounts reported on the FISAP. Cause: Some key line items selected for testing could not be traced to supporting documentation. The supporting documentation provided by the Student Financial Aid office did not reconcile or agree to the FISAP report filed. Effect: The University did not comply with FISAP special reporting requirements.Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures for the preparation and documentation of the information reported to comply with special reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-004 ? Reporting Supporting documentation was not provided by the Office of Financial Aid that reflects the information provided on the FISAP partially due to the COVID-19 pandemic, additional stresses were added to our office there were unpredictable. Currently there is only one level of management in the Office of Financial Aid. With the lack of management in this area, the Director of Financial Aid is responsible to complete the tasks for at least two full time employees. Recently, the Office of Financial Aid posted a position to hire a second level of management to assist with duties that would include adequate completion of the FISAP and other reporting tasks. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-001
During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. It was also noted during student award testing that the award listing used to select a sample was inconsistent with actual awarding. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. The award listing provided to select a testing sample did not report all types of aid the student received in 5 instances. The student financial aid department does not currently have a process to reconcile and ensure award reporting is complete and accurate. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-005 ? Internal Controls over Student Financial Aid (Significant Deficiency) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. One of the components of internal controls is risk assessment which includes defining, identifying, analyzing, and responding to fraud risks. Condition: During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. It was also noted during student award testing that the award listing used to select a sample was inconsistent with actual awarding. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. The award listing provided to select a testing sample did not report all types of aid the student received in 5 instances. The student financial aid department does not currently have a process to reconcile and ensure award reporting is complete and accurate. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-005 ? Internal Controls over Student Financial Aid The Office of Financial Aid has created a worksheet that the Financial Aid Counselors will complete when manually awarding students. By completing this worksheet, it will assist in the process of awarding federal financial aid and reduce awarding errors. The Office of Financial Aid will also create a self-audit of up to 10% of federal financial aid awards. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-006
We tested 60 students for compliance with eligibility requirements. One male student was not registered for military selective service and one student did not have documentation of completing high school. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $6,651; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University awarded financial aid to students who did not meet all the eligibility requirements. Effect: The University did not comply with Student Financial Aid eligibility requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the eligibility determination part of the awarding process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-006 ? Eligibility (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR 668 through 690 establishes various requirements to be eligible to receive financial aid. Two of those requirements are that male students register for military selective service and all students must have a high school diploma or a recognized equivalent. Condition: We tested 60 students for compliance with eligibility requirements. One male student was not registered for military selective service and one student did not have documentation of completing high school. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $6,651; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University awarded financial aid to students who did not meet all the eligibility requirements. Effect: The University did not comply with Student Financial Aid eligibility requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the eligibility determination part of the awarding process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-006 ? Eligibility The Office of Financial Aid will establish internal controls that will not allow federal financial aid to disburse until a student is fully admitted to the university. The office will establish a thorough review process for students who have comment codes on their FAFSA applications. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
From our sample of 60 students, 22 were selected by the central processor for verification. Of those 22, acceptable verification documentation was not provided. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that they consistently obtained appropriate documentation, matched the information on the documentation to the student application, and submitted necessary corrections to the central processor. Effect: The University did not comply with verification requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-007 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Verification (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 668 subpart E requires written policies and procedures that incorporate the provisions of 34 CFR parts 668.51 through 668.61 for verifying applicant information. The University shall require each applicant whose application is selected by the central processor to verify the information specified in 34 CFR part 668.56. Condition: From our sample of 60 students, 22 were selected by the central processor for verification. Of those 22, acceptable verification documentation was not provided. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that they consistently obtained appropriate documentation, matched the information on the documentation to the student application, and submitted necessary corrections to the central processor. Effect: The University did not comply with verification requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-007 ? Verification The Office of Financial Aid has both refined and streamlined the Verification process for students, by making the process paperless to ensure accuracy. When a student has been notified via email that he or she has been selected for Verification, then that student completes the Verification Worksheet on-line and submits all relevant materials. Likewise, specific instructions are provided to students in their email, and, when more information is needed, they are then contacted by their assigned Financial Aid Counselor by phone and/or email. Supporting documentation that is received will be retained in an assigned folder and safeguarded. The financial aid email account will be used as the main mode of communication to students. By only using this email account, all Financial Aid Counselors will be able to review the emails to retrieve any submitted documents. By employing these methods, including obtaining and matching Verification documentation; correcting any information according to SFA and utilizing the central processor; and, conducting sample, internal reviews of required items and files, there should be an alleviation of ongoing issues and reduction/elimination of errors. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-009
We tested a sample of 14 withdrawn students. In one instance, the change in status was never reported to the U.S. Department of Education and in one instance the change in status was not reported within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-008 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Enrollment Reporting (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: Under the Pell grant and loan programs, institutions must update the Enrollment Reporting Roster for changes in student status, report the date the enrollment status was effective, enter the new anticipated completion date, and submit the changes electronically through the batch method or the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) website. Institutions are responsible for timely reporting, whether they report directly or via a third-party servicer. These changes include reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations, or approved leaves-of absence. Condition: We tested a sample of 14 withdrawn students. In one instance, the change in status was never reported to the U.S. Department of Education and in one instance the change in status was not reported within the required 60-day time frame. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-008 ? Enrollment Reporting The Records Office will work with OTS to be sure that enrollment and withdrawal queries are accurate. The Office of Records and Registration will continue to work in partnership with the Office of Institutional Research, Financial Aid, and Student Accounts to be sure that withdrawals are processed and reported accurately. We will ensure enrollments and withdrawals during the summer will be reported to the National Student Clearinghouse in the exact same manner used for fall and spring semester report. Contact: Marie McNear Director, Office of Records and Registration Phone (334) 229-4312 mmcnear@alasu.edu
2019-003
We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 49 received a subsidized loan, unsubsidized loan or both; 4 students do not have documentation of a completed entrance counseling prior to being awarded a subsidized and unsubsidized loan. Cause: The University did not ensure entrance counseling was completed prior to disbursing loan funds to student borrowers. Effect: The University did not comply with Direct Loan Program requirements for entrance counseling. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the counseling of student borrowers to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s view and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-009 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Entrance Counseling (Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 685.304 requires the institution to ensure that entrance counseling is conducted with each Direct Subsidized Loan or Direct Unsubsidized Loan student borrower prior to making the first disbursement of the proceeds of a loan to a student borrower. Condition: We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 49 received a subsidized loan, unsubsidized loan or both; 4 students do not have documentation of a completed entrance counseling prior to being awarded a subsidized and unsubsidized loan. Cause: The University did not ensure entrance counseling was completed prior to disbursing loan funds to student borrowers. Effect: The University did not comply with Direct Loan Program requirements for entrance counseling. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the counseling of student borrowers to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s view and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2020-009 ? Entrance Counseling The Office of Financial Aid will manage and strengthen internal procedures that will comply with mandatory Entrance Counseling within the Office of Financial Aid's self-service computer area-upon the receipt of a subsidized or unsubsidized loan. Additional checklist list items will be added to the student?s account in Financial Aid regarding the Entrance Loan Counseling that must be completed before federal loans will disburse. The Office of Financial Aid will host virtual Entrance Loan Counseling workshops after each New Student Orientation and throughout the academic year on a consistent basis. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-012
We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 2 students were under awarded Pell grant funds; 1 student was over awarded Pell grant funds; and 1 student was over awarded unsubsidized loans. In addition, of the students who received loans, 16 of them were first-time borrowers. Of those 16, loan proceeds for 3 students were not delayed the required 30 days. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in direct subsidized loans totaled $1,000; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not correctly increase the amount of Pell grant funds awarded for the semester resulting from an enrollment status change and the student was under awarded $774; one student?s first enrollment was for a summer semester making them eligible for the semester
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2020-010 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Student Awarding and Processing (Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: The University is required to comply with individual program requirements when awarding a student a financial aid package. Federal Pell grants should be calculated in accordance with 34 CFR part 690.63 using the Pell Grant payment schedule and the student?s enrollment status of fulltime, three-quarters time, half-time, or less than half-time. Students must be enrolled at the University for at least 6 credit hours (half-time) to qualify for financial aid. 34 CFR part 685.203 establishes annual loan limits for direct subsidized, direct unsubsidized loans, and direct PLUS loans based on several factors including academic year, dependence, cost of attendance, or if a parent is denied a PLUS loan, they could be awarded additional unsubsidized loans. 34 CFR685.303 establishes rules for first-time borrowers. Condition: We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 2 students were under awarded Pell grant funds; 1 student was over awarded Pell grant funds; and 1 student was over awarded unsubsidized loans. In addition, of the students who received loans, 16 of them were first-time borrowers. Of those 16, loan proceeds for 3 students were not delayed the required 30 days. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in direct subsidized loans totaled $1,000; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not correctly increase the amount of Pell grant funds awarded for the semester resulting from an enrollment status change and the student was under awarded $774; one student?s first enrollment was for a summer semester making them eligible for the semester
Finding 2020-010 ? Student Awarding and Processing The Office of Financial Aid has created a Student Federal Eligibility worksheet that the Financial Aid Counselors will complete when manually awarding students. By completing this worksheet, it will aid in the process of awarding federal financial aid and reduce awarding errors. The Office of Financial Aid will also create a self-audit of up to 10% of federal financial aid awards. Contact: Robyn Siddell Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 rsiddell@alasu.edu
2019-013
FAC accepted this audit on March 8, 2020 — management decision was due September 8, 2020.
Supporting documentation for all significant financial and nonfinancial data in Parts I, II, IV, and V of the FISAP Report was not provided or information provided was not consistent with amounts reported on the FISAP. Cause: Some key line items selected for testing could not be traced to supporting documentation. The supporting documentation provided by the Student Financial Aid office did not reconcile or agree to the FISAP report filed. Effect: The University did not comply with FISAP special reporting requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures for the preparation and documentation of the information reported to comply with special reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-001 ? Reporting (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: ED Form 646-1, Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate (FISAP) (OMB No. 1845-0030) is an electronic report submitted annually to receive funds for the campus-based programs by October 1st of each year. Condition: Supporting documentation for all significant financial and nonfinancial data in Parts I, II, IV, and V of the FISAP Report was not provided or information provided was not consistent with amounts reported on the FISAP. Cause: Some key line items selected for testing could not be traced to supporting documentation. The supporting documentation provided by the Student Financial Aid office did not reconcile or agree to the FISAP report filed. Effect: The University did not comply with FISAP special reporting requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures for the preparation and documentation of the information reported to comply with special reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-001 ? Reporting (Fiscal Operations Report) ? Repeat Finding Corrective Action: The Office of Financial Aid, and in particular the Director and Assistant Director of Financial Aid, will safeguard and ensure that all supporting documentation will be organized, scanned and stored, before the completion of the annual FISAP. Once completed, the Director of Financial Aid will then forward the FISAP report and all supporting documentation to the Office of the Chief of Staff, as well as the Office of the President, for final review, before its submission. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
2018-008
The University has procedures in place in which the proper supporting documentation is required and approvals include the grant director or principal investigator, the Dean or Department Head, and a grant accountant. During our control testing procedures, we examined 86 disbursements for adequate support and approvals for disbursements. Out of 86 disbursements we tested, 5 were missing adequate supporting documentation and 28 were missing one or more of the required approvals Cause: For the 5 missing proper support: 3 were travel expenses where the amount charged to the grant did not agree to receipts provided and the unsupported balance was not adjusted off the grant; and 2 were payroll items where the time and effort report allocation was significantly different from the actual allocation to the grant. 20 of the 28 exceptions for inadequate approvals noted were payroll-related items. For the 20 payroll related items, Principal investigators did not sign the employee contract authorizing this pay to be charged to the grant. For the 8 other disbursements, 5 were approved by an employee not authorized to approve that expense as principal investigator, Dean or Department Head, or president, 2 were missing the principal investigator?s or president?s approval, and 1 was missing the principal investigator?s, Dean or Department Head?s, and grant accountant?s approval due to lack of supporting documentation. Effect: The University?s system of internal controls for federal grant expenses was not properly implemented. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding all required approvals of grant expenditures. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-002 ? Internal Controls over Grant Management (Material Weakness)- Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: Research and Development Cluster and Trio Cluster Criteria: The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations Internal Control Framework requires organizations to develop and maintain a system of internal control. The five components are control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring activities. Control activities in place for activities allowed and allowable costs require the proper supporting documentation and approval of transactions reimbursed by federal grants. Condition: The University has procedures in place in which the proper supporting documentation is required and approvals include the grant director or principal investigator, the Dean or Department Head, and a grant accountant. During our control testing procedures, we examined 86 disbursements for adequate support and approvals for disbursements. Out of 86 disbursements we tested, 5 were missing adequate supporting documentation and 28 were missing one or more of the required approvals Cause: For the 5 missing proper support: 3 were travel expenses where the amount charged to the grant did not agree to receipts provided and the unsupported balance was not adjusted off the grant; and 2 were payroll items where the time and effort report allocation was significantly different from the actual allocation to the grant. 20 of the 28 exceptions for inadequate approvals noted were payroll-related items. For the 20 payroll related items, Principal investigators did not sign the employee contract authorizing this pay to be charged to the grant. For the 8 other disbursements, 5 were approved by an employee not authorized to approve that expense as principal investigator, Dean or Department Head, or president, 2 were missing the principal investigator?s or president?s approval, and 1 was missing the principal investigator?s, Dean or Department Head?s, and grant accountant?s approval due to lack of supporting documentation. Effect: The University?s system of internal controls for federal grant expenses was not properly implemented. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding all required approvals of grant expenditures. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-002 ? Internal Controls over Grant Management (Approvals) ? Repeat Finding Corrective Action: The Office of Research and Sponsored Programs in coordination with the Human Resources Department has reviewed and revised its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding all required approvals of grant expenditures. The Human Resources Department has performed a file review on all contracts for the current fiscal year to insure that all contracts have all the appropriate signatures required. Contact Person: Derrick Carr Assistant Vice President for Human Resources 334-229-6747 dcarr@alasu.edu
2018-001
We tested a sample of 25 withdrawn students, 24 who received financial aid. In 2 instances, the change in status was not reported to the U.S. Department of Education. In 14 instances, changes in status were not reported to the U.S. Department of Education within the required 60-day time frame. And finally, one student?s name was incorrectly reported to the Department of Education. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-003 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Enrollment Reporting (Material Weakness and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: Under the Pell grant and loan programs, institutions must update the Enrollment Reporting Roster for changes in student status, report the date the enrollment status was effective, enter the new anticipated completion date, and submit the changes electronically through the batch method or the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) website. Institutions are responsible for timely reporting, whether they report directly or via a third-party servicer. These changes include reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations, or approved leaves-ofabsence. Condition: We tested a sample of 25 withdrawn students, 24 who received financial aid. In 2 instances, the change in status was not reported to the U.S. Department of Education. In 14 instances, changes in status were not reported to the U.S. Department of Education within the required 60-day time frame. And finally, one student?s name was incorrectly reported to the Department of Education. Cause: The Enrollment Reporting Roster file is not being submitted timely or accurately to report changes in student enrollment status. Effect: The University did not comply with special tests and provisions compliance requirements related to enrollment reporting. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures related to enrollment reporting requirements to comply with the regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-003 ? Special Test and Provisions-Enrollment Reporting-Repeat Finding Corrective Action: Alabama State University has made changes to the enrollment reporting process and responsibility to ensure that past issues are corrected. First, responsibility for enrollment reporting has changed. Previously, a single employee was responsible with little oversight. That individual has retired and a new team was created to ensure cross-training, checks, and oversight of the process. The new team includes the Registrar who has oversight of the process and works with Institutional Research and the Financial Aid Analyst to ensure accurate data is reported and the reports are submitted in a timely manner. Team members have participated in two trainings related to the Clearinghouse and Enrollment Reporting: (1) a site visit by the National Student Clearinghouse (July 9, 2019) that included a webinar with the Clearinghouse technical team to review past reporting issues, the proper process, and a plan for the future and (2) a regional training in Birmingham hosted by the National Student Clearinghouse (October 23, 2019). Since this new team took responsibility for the enrollment reporting process starting August 1, 2019, there has been new procedures to eliminate audit finding regarding enrollment reporting to the National Student Clearinghouse. This team has implemented ways to streamline the enrollment reporting process to help further improve accuracy and timeliness. Contact Person: Marie McNear Director Records and Registration 334-229-4243 mmcnear@alasu.edu
2018-002
We selected a sample of 25 students that graduated from the University and 24 students who withdrew from the University. In both cases, the students were leaving the University and received a loan during the year or during their career at the University. Out of the 49 students tested, 20 students did not have documentation of exit counseling on file. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that the required exit counseling interviews were completed or the University attempted to contact the borrower to complete the required counseling. Effect: The University was not in compliance with requirements to counsel student borrowers. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding conducting and documenting exit counseling to comply with direct loan counseling requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-004 ? Special Tests and Provisions: Exit Counseling (Material Weakness and Noncompliance) Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 685.304 requires an institution to ensure that exit counseling is conducted with each Direct Subsidized Loan or Direct Unsubsidized Loan borrower and graduate or professional student Direct PLUS Loan borrower shortly before the student borrower ceases at least half-time study at the school. Condition: We selected a sample of 25 students that graduated from the University and 24 students who withdrew from the University. In both cases, the students were leaving the University and received a loan during the year or during their career at the University. Out of the 49 students tested, 20 students did not have documentation of exit counseling on file. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that the required exit counseling interviews were completed or the University attempted to contact the borrower to complete the required counseling. Effect: The University was not in compliance with requirements to counsel student borrowers. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding conducting and documenting exit counseling to comply with direct loan counseling requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-004 ? Special Test and Provisions-Exit Counseling Corrective Action: The high turnover rate of employees in the Office of Financial Aid resulted in excessive inefficiencies within the office. Students withdrawing from the University will be referred by the Office of Records and Registration to the Office of Financial Aid to complete their mandatory exit counseling. The students will be directed to the self-service computer area to complete their exit counseling prior to their official withdrawal. In addition, all graduating students will be instructed to complete their mandatory exit counseling. Graduating students can also complete their mandatory Exit Counseling at the self-service computer area in Financial Aid or in the University Bookstore during Senior Check-Out week. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
We selected a sample of 25 students who withdrew and were receiving financial aid; 24 of these students received Title IV aid. Of the 24 students tested, 9 exceptions were noted: 5 instances the University did not correctly calculate the refund due; 2 instances in which the unearned aid was not returned; 1 instance in which the unearned aid was not returned timely; and 1 instance in which the return calculation was done correctly but the University did not return the entire amount. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs totaled $10,296 in Title IV aid to be returned. Cause: The University did not properly calculate the amount of aid earned or to be returned, and did not return the accurate amount in a timely manner. For 5 students, the University used 113 days in the calculation rather than 110. Per the student financial aid handbook, weekends are excluded as well as weekdays if there is a scheduled break of 5 or more days. This calculation resulted in the students earning a total of $1,962 less than they were entitled. After reviewing the student accounts receivable detail, the refunds totaling $10,615 were not returned for 2 students; 1 student?s refund was not returned until 4 months later; and 1 student?s refund was correctly calculated to be $2,452 but only $1,011 was returned. Effect: The University was not in compliance with withdrawal requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the withdrawal process to accurately document each requirement and implement checks and balances to ensure compliance with withdrawal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-005 ? Special Tests and Provisions: Withdrawal Testing (Material weakness and Noncompliance) ? Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 668 establishes rules governing the student withdrawal process including the determination of withdrawal date, calculation of earned Title IV assistance, and return of unearned Title IV aid within 45 days. Condition: We selected a sample of 25 students who withdrew and were receiving financial aid; 24 of these students received Title IV aid. Of the 24 students tested, 9 exceptions were noted: 5 instances the University did not correctly calculate the refund due; 2 instances in which the unearned aid was not returned; 1 instance in which the unearned aid was not returned timely; and 1 instance in which the return calculation was done correctly but the University did not return the entire amount. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs totaled $10,296 in Title IV aid to be returned. Cause: The University did not properly calculate the amount of aid earned or to be returned, and did not return the accurate amount in a timely manner. For 5 students, the University used 113 days in the calculation rather than 110. Per the student financial aid handbook, weekends are excluded as well as weekdays if there is a scheduled break of 5 or more days. This calculation resulted in the students earning a total of $1,962 less than they were entitled. After reviewing the student accounts receivable detail, the refunds totaling $10,615 were not returned for 2 students; 1 student?s refund was not returned until 4 months later; and 1 student?s refund was correctly calculated to be $2,452 but only $1,011 was returned. Effect: The University was not in compliance with withdrawal requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the withdrawal process to accurately document each requirement and implement checks and balances to ensure compliance with withdrawal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-005 ? Special Test and Provisions-Return of Title IV-Repeat Finding Corrective Action: Due to high turnover rate in the Office of Financial Aid, this has led to high inefficiencies within the office. The accurate number of days have been updated, the percentage of attendance is correctly reflected in the system, thus causing the calculation to be performed correctly. Retraining will also be provided for the R2T4 calculation to the Financial Aid Counselor by the Director of Financial Aid. Alabama State University has a partnership with the Federal Department of Education?s Minority Serving and Under-Resourced School Division (MSURSD) that provides special support and assistance to institutions that are currently participating in the Title IV Federal Student Aid (FSA) programs. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
2018-006
During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. It was also noted during student award testing that the award listing used to select a sample was incomplete. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. The student financial aid department does not currently have a process to reconcile and ensure award reporting is complete and accurate. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-006 ? Internal Controls over Student Financial Aid (Significant Deficiency) Information on the federal program: Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. One of the components of internal controls is risk assessment which includes defining, identifying, analyzing, and responding to fraud risks. Condition: During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, it was determined that proper risk assessment controls are not in place. It was also noted during student award testing that the award listing used to select a sample was incomplete. Cause: The student financial aid department currently does not have a process of identifying, defining, analyzing or responding to compliance risks. The student financial aid department does not currently have a process to reconcile and ensure award reporting is complete and accurate. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding the student financial aid program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding student financial aid. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report
Finding 2019-006 ? Internal Controls (Risk Assessment) Corrective Action: The University engaged Carr, Riggs and Ingram, CPA and Advisors to conduct an Inherent Risk Assessment for the Office of the Vice President of Business and Finance, including the Office of Student Financial Aid and received the report on January 15, 2019. Carr, Riggs and Ingram have been contacted for a proposal to follow up on the Inherent Risk Assessment with a Design Evaluation of existing internal controls and an evaluation of the Operating Effectiveness of those controls. The report identified 3 areas of prime concern, one of which had to do with the management of the default rate. The University has contracted with Inceptia to provide default management services that include Repayment Wellness Solutions/Grace Counseling Services and Outreach, Repayment Counseling Outreach, Smart Borrowing/Loan Summary counseling for students. ASU needs to develop stronger IC controls surrounding the Student Financial Aid Program. The Office of Financial Aid, with the assistance of Enrollment Management, has revised the internal procedures to ensure the award listing is consistent with Account Receivable reports. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, we selected 26 participants across the Upward Bound, Talent Search, and Student Support Services programs. Of the 26 tested, 2 students lacked proper approval for participation in the program. Cause: For each participant, the student file was reviewed for documentation of eligibility requirements and approval by the program Director. In 2 instances, the application for admission was not signed as approved. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding eligibility approval for the Trio program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding eligibility. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the reports.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-007 ? Internal Controls over Eligibility (Significant Deficiency) Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Trio Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. 2 CFR part 200.514 (c) requires auditors to obtain an understanding, assess risk, and test controls related to compliance requirements. For eligibility, one significant control was that eligibility determinations for participation in a Trio program were made by an individual with proper authority. Condition: During procedures developed to obtain an understanding of internal controls sufficient to plan the audit, we selected 26 participants across the Upward Bound, Talent Search, and Student Support Services programs. Of the 26 tested, 2 students lacked proper approval for participation in the program. Cause: For each participant, the student file was reviewed for documentation of eligibility requirements and approval by the program Director. In 2 instances, the application for admission was not signed as approved. Effect: The University is not in compliance with federal requirements to establish and maintain adequate controls surrounding eligibility approval for the Trio program. Recommendation: The University should review and revise its current policies and procedures to ensure that it has properly designed and maintained a strong internal control system surrounding eligibility. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the reports.
Finding 2019-007 ? Internal Controls over Eligibility Corrective Action: TRIO has a strong policy in place that requires the final approval of the TRIO Director for all student program enrollment. Counselors are responsible for conducting all assessment and pre-eligibility screening and the files are forwarded to the TRIO director for final approval. To further ensure that the current process is improved and further oversight of TRIO Director Approval is minimized, the following steps will be added. 1. All candidates for enrollment will sign-in upon arrival for their interview. 2. All candidates that pass the pre-screening checks, files will be forwarded to the respective TRIO program coordinator for processing and data entry. 3. The above sign-in sheet will be matched to all new students processed for enrollment in the Blumen data. 4. The coordinator will be responsible for ensuring all new student files are forwarded to the TRIO director for final review and signature. Contact Person: Acquanetta Pinkard, PhD Director of TRIO Programs 334-229-6031 amccants@alasu.edu
The University uses a work study authorization form to communicate the authorized amount, time period, hourly rate, and department in which the student will work. The University used approved timesheets to capture and document the hours worked by the student to be paid. We tested 19 students who participated in Federal Work Study during the fiscal year. Of those 19, 2 students were paid a cumulative amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student. Per the FISAP, the University only employed 8 out of 541 students (1.48%) who participated in Federal Work Study, these students were compensated $19,372 out of the $1,025,638 (1.89%) total work study paid to students; failing to meet the required 7%. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in Federal Work Study pay totaled $248; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student?s cumulative pay or monitoring student employment type to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the work study program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-008 ? Special Tests and Provisions- Individual Program Compliance ? Federal Work Study Programs (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance) Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 675.16 and 34 CFR part 675.19 establish rules governing the administration of a Federal Work Study program, including payments to students, fiscal procedures and records. These rules require that the University establish and maintain an internal control system to ensure compliance, including communication with the student to notify them of the amount of funds authorized and how they will be paid and fiscal responsibility to maintain records to support the amounts earned and paid to the student. 34 CFR part 675.18 requires an institution to use at least seven percent of the sum of its Federal Work Study allocations for an award year to compensate students employed in community service activities. Condition: The University uses a work study authorization form to communicate the authorized amount, time period, hourly rate, and department in which the student will work. The University used approved timesheets to capture and document the hours worked by the student to be paid. We tested 19 students who participated in Federal Work Study during the fiscal year. Of those 19, 2 students were paid a cumulative amount greater than the authorized amount on the work study authorization form signed by the supervisor and the student. Per the FISAP, the University only employed 8 out of 541 students (1.48%) who participated in Federal Work Study, these students were compensated $19,372 out of the $1,025,638 (1.89%) total work study paid to students; failing to meet the required 7%. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in Federal Work Study pay totaled $248; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University is not properly tracking student?s cumulative pay or monitoring student employment type to ensure compliance, therefore, the control system in place is not functioning effectively. Effect: The University did not comply with special test and provision requirements of administering the Federal Work Study Program. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the administration of the work study program to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-008 ? Special Test and Provisions-Federal Work Study Corrective Action: Due to high turnover rate in the Office of Financial Aid, this has led to high inefficiencies within the office. The Office of Financial Aid continues to make improvements to the Federal Work Study Program, to enhance its accuracy and efficiency. Under the direction of the Director of Financial Aid and one Financial Aid Counselor (whose main responsibility it is to oversee the Federal Work Study Program), processes have been put into place that include: 1) a mandatory orientation that is offered multiple times during the academic year, for both student workers and institutional/external supervisors; 2) the development of a Federal Work Study Supervisor?s Guide/Manual; and, 3) a streamlining of students? employment contracts, timesheets and demonstrated hours of work. The Financial Aid Counselor also manages and reviews submitted timesheets, ensuring that work hours, that are reported, are in congruence with payment amounts. Monthly email reminders are sent to all students and supervisors to alleviate missed deadlines; and, increased communication with the Payroll Office remains in effect. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
From our testing of 60 students, 28 were selected by the central processor for verification. Of those 28, verification documentation was not provided or acceptable documentation was not provided for 3 students. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that they obtained documentation, matched the information on the documentation to the student application, and submitted necessary corrections to the central processor consistently. Effect: The University did not comply with verification requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-009 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Verification (Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance)- Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster. Criteria: 34 CFR part 668 subpart E requires written policies and procedures that incorporate the provisions of 34 CFR parts 668.51 through 668.61 for verifying applicant information. The University shall require each applicant whose application is selected by the central processor to verify the information specified in 34 CFR part 668.56. Condition: From our testing of 60 students, 28 were selected by the central processor for verification. Of those 28, verification documentation was not provided or acceptable documentation was not provided for 3 students. Cause: The University could not provide documentation that they obtained documentation, matched the information on the documentation to the student application, and submitted necessary corrections to the central processor consistently. Effect: The University did not comply with verification requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-009 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Verification-Repeat Finding Corrective Action: Due to high turnover rate in the Office of Financial Aid, this has led to high inefficiencies within the office and documents that were possibly emailed to previous staff. The Office of Financial Aid has both refined and streamlined the Verification process for students, by making the process paperless and to ensure accuracy. If a student has been notified via email, that he or she has been selected for Verification, then that student can now complete the Verification Worksheet on-line and submit all relevant materials. Likewise, specific instructions are provided to students in their email, and when more information is needed, then they are contacted, by phone and/or email, by their assigned Financial Aid Counselor. Supporting documentation that is received will be retained in an assigned folder and safeguarded. By employing these methods, including obtaining and matching Verification documentation; correcting any information according to SFA and utilizing the central processor; and, conducting sample, internal reviews of required items and files, there should be an alleviation of ongoing issues and reduction/elimination of errors. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
2018-003
We selected 86 disbursements to test for allowable cost requirements. In 10 instances, the expense did not meet the criteria above. 3 disbursements for travel and 1 disbursement to host a banquet were approved and paid based on an estimated cost. The actual costs were less than the estimated amounts and the amount was not adjusted on the grant. In 3 instances salary and benefits allocated to the grant were not properly supported by percentage of time and effort reported by the employee. We also selected 4 Research and Development indirect cost calculations to ensure the calculations were accurate based on the terms of the grant award. In 2 instances, the amount used as the total indirect cost budget for the fiscal year did not agree to the grant award and documentation of budget revisions were not available. 1 payroll disbursement contained 3 student workers but the award budget did not allow student employment. Cause: Travel costs were charged to the grant based on a purchase order of estimated costs, but the actual costs were less than the purchase order and the grant expenses were not reduced. Banquet costs were charged to the grant based on a price quote, the actual costs were less than the purchase order but the grant expenses were not reduced. 1 employee?s time was allocated to the grant at 42% per the employment contract, however the time and effort certified by the employee reflected 75% of their time was spent on grant activities; 1 employee received additional pay that was paid 100% from the grant to perform grant objectives, however the time and effort certified by the employee only reflected 10% of their time was spent on grant activities. Neither of the employee?s allocation was changed to reflect the difference. Student workers received amounts that were 100% allocated to the grant but time and effort reports only reflect 5%. The budgets in the accounting system for total indirect costs did not agree to the grant awards and the adjustment was not properly documented and supported. The subaward budget allowed for student participant support costs such as stipends and travel, but not salaries or wages. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs totaled $5,931; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Effect: The University did not comply with allowable cost requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the method of documenting and charging costs to federal grants to ensure compliance with allowable cost standards. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-010 ? Allowable Costs (significant deficiency and noncompliance)- Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: Research and Development Cluster and U.S. Department of Education Trio Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 220, subpart E establishes guidelines and criteria for direct and indirect costs to be considered allowable under a federal grant. These criteria include being necessary and reasonable, conform to limitations or exclusions of subpart E, and adequately documented and supported. Institutions of Higher Education may allocate payroll costs to federal grants based on the Plan-Confirmation method, which provides for the distribution of salaries and wages to sponsored agreements based on budgeted, planned, or assigned work activity with updates to reflect any significant changes in work distribution. The Plan-Confirmation method adopted must determine that costs allocated represent actual costs and such costs be confirmed by a responsible person with the knowledgeable means to verify their allowability. For indirect costs, the University must ensure the calculation of the claims are in accordance with the award-specific terms such as rate, budget, and applicable base. Allowable activities are unique to each Federal program and are found in the regulations and award documents. Condition: We selected 86 disbursements to test for allowable cost requirements. In 10 instances, the expense did not meet the criteria above. 3 disbursements for travel and 1 disbursement to host a banquet were approved and paid based on an estimated cost. The actual costs were less than the estimated amounts and the amount was not adjusted on the grant. In 3 instances salary and benefits allocated to the grant were not properly supported by percentage of time and effort reported by the employee. We also selected 4 Research and Development indirect cost calculations to ensure the calculations were accurate based on the terms of the grant award. In 2 instances, the amount used as the total indirect cost budget for the fiscal year did not agree to the grant award and documentation of budget revisions were not available. 1 payroll disbursement contained 3 student workers but the award budget did not allow student employment. Cause: Travel costs were charged to the grant based on a purchase order of estimated costs, but the actual costs were less than the purchase order and the grant expenses were not reduced. Banquet costs were charged to the grant based on a price quote, the actual costs were less than the purchase order but the grant expenses were not reduced. 1 employee?s time was allocated to the grant at 42% per the employment contract, however the time and effort certified by the employee reflected 75% of their time was spent on grant activities; 1 employee received additional pay that was paid 100% from the grant to perform grant objectives, however the time and effort certified by the employee only reflected 10% of their time was spent on grant activities. Neither of the employee?s allocation was changed to reflect the difference. Student workers received amounts that were 100% allocated to the grant but time and effort reports only reflect 5%. The budgets in the accounting system for total indirect costs did not agree to the grant awards and the adjustment was not properly documented and supported. The subaward budget allowed for student participant support costs such as stipends and travel, but not salaries or wages. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs totaled $5,931; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Effect: The University did not comply with allowable cost requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the method of documenting and charging costs to federal grants to ensure compliance with allowable cost standards. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management's View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-010 ? Allowable Costs-Repeat Finding Corrective Action: There were two instances in question. Due to the individuals that were cited in the audit, the University will enhance its time and effort process for additional pay. The enhancement is designed to ensure no one has inaccurate percent of effort and ensure the percent of effort is equivalent to the percentage of salary charged to the grant. When the individual sends a request for additional pay, they will properly document the hours worked. If effort involves additional pay, the University will use a different form to show they are working outside of normal business hours. The University will have a different form for additional pay and we will make sure the percent of effort matches the salary. The ORSP will develop a new form to distinguish additional pay. We will identify employees with additional pay, compile a listing of individuals and have working session so they will know how to properly document their effort for additional pay. The session is tentatively scheduled for the end of February. Contact Person: Ella M. Temple, PhD Director of the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs 334-229-4234 etemple@alasu.edu Indirect Cost Recovery and Travel Corrective Action: Due to staff turnover, budget transfer forms could not be located for prior year transactions related to indirect cost recovery. This is not a reflection of current year practices. Currently, the forms are required for all budget transfers and filed upon receipt. In addition, the University will record receivables for pending travel reimbursements. In addition, the expense was scheduled to be reduced in the next fiscal year after receiving the refund check from vendors. The change in the current process to record receivables will prevent all of the travel related issues identified. Contact Person: Annette Thomas Chief Accountant, Grants and Contracts Accounting 334-229-4739 athomas@alasu.edu
2018-005
From our testing of 60 students, 42 had a credit balance in which a refund should have been issued, 1 student had a credit balance over $200 that was not paid to the student or parent and 1 student?s account had an incorrect tuition credit posted resulting in a refund issued to the student that had to be returned. Cause: The credit balance resulting from financial aid was not identified and not paid to the student. Effect: The University is not in compliance with student assistance provisions for disbursing funds Title IV funds. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the identification of credit balances on student accounts resulting from financial aid and disbursing the credit within the required timeframe. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-011 ? Special Tests and Provisions ? Disbursing Credit Balances (Noncompliance) Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR part 668.164 (e)(1) requires an institution to pay a credit balance directly to the student or parent as soon as possible but no later than 14 days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or no later than 14 days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition: From our testing of 60 students, 42 had a credit balance in which a refund should have been issued, 1 student had a credit balance over $200 that was not paid to the student or parent and 1 student?s account had an incorrect tuition credit posted resulting in a refund issued to the student that had to be returned. Cause: The credit balance resulting from financial aid was not identified and not paid to the student. Effect: The University is not in compliance with student assistance provisions for disbursing funds Title IV funds. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the identification of credit balances on student accounts resulting from financial aid and disbursing the credit within the required timeframe. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-11 ? Special Test and Provisions-Credit Balances Corrective Action: The University is working on an automated process to ensure that prior balances are not deducted from current semester credit balances. Currently, the University is reviewing all credit balances to ensure that prior semester balances are not deducted from the credit balance. The one out of 60 instances identified by the auditors has been paid to the student. Contact Person: Khadine Sherman Accounts Receivable Supervisor 334-229-4258 ksherman@alasu.edu
We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 53 received a subsidized loan, unsubsidized loan or both; 2 students did not complete entrance counseling prior to being awarded a subsidized and unsubsidized loan and 3 students have no record of receiving entrance counseling. Cause: The University did not ensure entrance counseling was completed prior to disbursing loan funds to student borrowers. Effect: The University did not comply with Direct Loan Program requirements for entrance counseling. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the counseling of student borrowers to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s view and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-012 ? Special Tests and Provisions-Entrance Counseling (Noncompliance) Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: 34 CFR 685.304 requires the institution to ensure that entrance counseling is conducted with each Direct Subsidized Loan or Direct Unsubsidized Loan student borrower prior to making the first disbursement of the proceeds of a loan to a student borrower. Condition: We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 53 received a subsidized loan, unsubsidized loan or both; 2 students did not complete entrance counseling prior to being awarded a subsidized and unsubsidized loan and 3 students have no record of receiving entrance counseling. Cause: The University did not ensure entrance counseling was completed prior to disbursing loan funds to student borrowers. Effect: The University did not comply with Direct Loan Program requirements for entrance counseling. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the counseling of student borrowers to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s view and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-12 ? Special Test and Provisions-Entrance Counseling Corrective Action: Due to high turnover rate in the Office of Financial Aid, this has led to high inefficiencies within the office. The Office of Financial Aid, under the direction of the Financial Aid Director, will manage and strengthen internal procedures that will comply with mandatory Entrance Counseling within the Office of Financial Aid?s self-service computer area?upon the receipt of a subsidized or unsubsidized loan. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 5 students were over awarded Pell grant funds; 1 student was over-awarded FSEOG based on the annual limits; 1 student was awarded PLUS loan funds exceeding the student?s cost of attendance less other estimated financial assistance; and 2 students were over-awarded unsubsidized loans. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in Pell grant over-awards totaled $6,496; know questioned costs in FSEOG over-awards totaled $500; known questioned costs in PLUS overawards totaled $3,162; known questioned costs in direct unsubsidized loans totaled $7,128; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not correctly reduce the amount of Pell grant funds awarded for the semester resulting from an enrollment status change; a student received a total of $4,500 in FSEOG during the school year tested; student received a total of $27,171 combined federal aid but cost of attendance was only $24,009; and the students did not have a PLUS denial on file to support the additional unsubsidized loans awarded to the students. Effect: The University did not comply with the individual program requirements when awarding student financial aid packages noted above. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the packaging and awarding process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-013 ? Special Tests and Provisions-Student Awarding (Noncompliance)- Repeat Finding Information on the federal program: U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Aid Cluster Criteria: The University is required to comply with individual program requirements when awarding a student a financial aid package. Federal Pell grants should be calculated in accordance with 34 CFR part 690.63 using the Pell Grant payment schedule and the student?s enrollment status of fulltime, three-quarters time, half-time, or less than half-time. Students must be enrolled at the University for at least 6 credit hours (half-time) to qualify for financial aid. An institution may award no more than $4,000 FSEOG for an academic year in accordance with 34 CFR part 676.20. And lastly, 34 CFR part 685.203 establishes annual loan limits for direct subsidized, direct unsubsidized loans, and direct PLUS loans based on several factors including their academic year, dependence, cost of attendance, or if their parent is denied a PLUS loan they could be awarded additional unsubsidized loans. Condition: We tested 60 students for compliance with proper awarding. Out of those 60 tested, 5 students were over awarded Pell grant funds; 1 student was over-awarded FSEOG based on the annual limits; 1 student was awarded PLUS loan funds exceeding the student?s cost of attendance less other estimated financial assistance; and 2 students were over-awarded unsubsidized loans. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs in Pell grant over-awards totaled $6,496; know questioned costs in FSEOG over-awards totaled $500; known questioned costs in PLUS overawards totaled $3,162; known questioned costs in direct unsubsidized loans totaled $7,128; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not correctly reduce the amount of Pell grant funds awarded for the semester resulting from an enrollment status change; a student received a total of $4,500 in FSEOG during the school year tested; student received a total of $27,171 combined federal aid but cost of attendance was only $24,009; and the students did not have a PLUS denial on file to support the additional unsubsidized loans awarded to the students. Effect: The University did not comply with the individual program requirements when awarding student financial aid packages noted above. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the packaging and awarding process to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-13 ? Special Test and Provisions-Student Awarding-Repeat Finding Student Awarding ? Pell CFR 690.63 Corrective Action: Due to high turnover rate in the Office of Financial Aid, this has led to high inefficiencies within the office. The Office of Financial Aid and Records and Registration will work collaboratively to establish a reporting system identifying students with status changes after the census date. Any necessary adjustments will be made to the student?s account. This corrective action has been fully implemented. Contact Person: Tallya Reaux Director of Financial Aid 334-229-4862 treaux@alasu.edu
2018-013
We selected 55 Research and Development disbursements to test for period of performance requirements. In 4 instances, the costs were incurred outside the period of performance established in the grant award. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs totaled $7,586; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: These grants were operating under a no-cost extension and the University had encumbered the expenses but they were not incurred until after the end of the grant period. Effect: The University did not comply with period of performance requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the monitoring of expenses near the end of a grant cycle to ensure costs are incurred during the period of performance as required. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴Finding 2019-014 ? Period of Performance (Noncompliance) Information on the federal program: Research and Development Cluster Criteria: 2 CFR part 200.309 establishes standards for financial and program management of federal awards. Non-federal entities may charge allowable costs incurred during the period of performance. Incurred means orders placed for goods and services, contracts and subawards made, or other similar transactions that require payment during the 90 day liquidation period. Condition: We selected 55 Research and Development disbursements to test for period of performance requirements. In 4 instances, the costs were incurred outside the period of performance established in the grant award. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs totaled $7,586; the sample was not intended to be and was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: These grants were operating under a no-cost extension and the University had encumbered the expenses but they were not incurred until after the end of the grant period. Effect: The University did not comply with period of performance requirements. Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its policies and procedures surrounding the monitoring of expenses near the end of a grant cycle to ensure costs are incurred during the period of performance as required. Views of Responsible Officials: See Management?s View and Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2019-14 ? Period of Performance-Allowable Cost At the end of each grant period, all requisitions must be submitted 30 days prior to the end date. This will allow time for purchase orders to be processed and expenses incurred before the end of the grant period. Contact Person: Boakai Robertson Professor 334-229-4223 brobertson@alasu.edu Shree Singh Professor 334-229-4958 ssingh@alasu.edu Annette Thomas Chief Accountant, Grants and Contracts Accounting 334-229-4739 athomas@alasu.edu
FAC accepted this audit on June 26, 2019 — management decision was due December 26, 2019.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-002
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-003
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-004
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2017-001
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴FAC accepted this audit on June 19, 2018 — management decision was due December 19, 2018.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2016-003
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
FAC accepted this audit on May 25, 2017 — management decision was due November 25, 2017.
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-001
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
2015-004
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Show full finding ▾Hide full finding ▴GSA_MIGRATION
GSA_MIGRATION
Data source: This information comes from the Federal Audit Clearinghouse, the official repository of Single Audit data. All data is public domain. Verify this organization's audit history at fac.gov.
Track your findings and corrective action plans across audit cycles.
Start tracking findings →Monitor subrecipient audit findings and compliance status.
Start monitoring →© 2026 Single Audit Intelligence. All data is public domain.