State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions, 2012 · Meredith Hackney, Bureau Chief,...

A publication of The National

Association of State Auditors,

Comptrollers and Treasurers

State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions 2012 Edition

cover.indd 2 10/30/2012 3:10:54 PM

State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions __________________________________

2012 Edition

R. Kinney Poynter Executive Director

Kim O’Ryan NASC Association Manager

Glenda Johnson Communications Manager

Adrian Puryear IT and Web Manager

National Association of

State Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasurers

National Association of State Comptrollers Copyright2012

The National Association of State Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasurers

449 Lewis Hargett Circle Suite 290

Lexington, KY 40503 www.nasact.org

Manufactured in the United States of America

Price: $100.00

State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions

2012 edition

INTRODUCTION The 2012 edition of State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions provides new material about the scope of activities and responsibilities in state comptrollers’ offices across the United States as well as how the comptrollers are meeting those responsibilities. This edition has current information that was collected in 2012. Prior editions are available on NASACT’s website at www.nasact.org. The Advisory Committee for State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions reviewed the survey instrument and made some revisions to the questionnaire. However, because comptrollers continue to authorize disbursements, oversee pre-audit and post-audit of payments, process payroll and maintain accounting records, most of the questions for this edition remained the same. The prior responses to the survey were pre-populated for the offices that responded to the 2010 survey. This made responding to the 2012 survey much simpler because the states updated the responses that changed since the prior survey. A few new questions were added that required responses from all states.

We welcome comments about this book and suggestions both about information that may not be useful in future editions and about additional data that would be interesting and beneficial to state comptrollers and their staffs.

Lexington, Kentucky September 2012

State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions

2012 edition

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The National Association of State Comptrollers extends its thanks to the members of the Advisory Committee for State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions for their assistance with this work. The members of the Advisory Committee were:

Anna Maria Kiehl, State Comptroller/Chief Accounting Officer, Pennsylvania, chair Afranie Adomako, Director, Department of Administration, Louisiana Terry Brann, State Controller, Maine Steve Funck, Deputy State Comptroller, Oklahoma Meredith Hackney, Bureau Chief, Bureau of Systems Administration, Idaho Diane Langham, Financial Management Director, Mississippi

The committee started its work in June 2011 and had completed the survey by the end of February 2012 for both the short-term (Chapters 1-7) and long-term (Chapters 8-14) sections of the book. We thank all of these committee members for their time and participation in order to make the results more useful to state comptrollers and their staffs.

NASC also extends its gratitude to the many state comptrollers and their staffs who took the time to complete the survey in order to make this information available to members of the community of state government finance professionals.

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE COMPTROLLERS State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions

2012 Edition

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction and Acknowledgements

CURRENT DATA

Chapter 1 State Comptrollers in State Government ....................................................................... 1

Table 1 Incumbent State Comptrollers on January 31, 2012 .......................................................... 3

Chapter 2 Annual Financial Reporting ........................................................................................... 11

Table 2 Current Audits ................................................................................................................... 13 Table 3 Basis of Accounting and Compliance with GAAP ............................................................. 17 Table 4 Costs and Distribution of the CAFR .................................................................................. 21 Table 4a Number of Funds by Fund Type ....................................................................................... 23 Table 5 Costs and Distribution of Popular or Citizen-Centric Reports ........................................... 27

Chapter 3 Recent Developments in Internal Control .................................................................... 29

Table 6 Internal Control: Use of Frameworks ................................................................................ 31 Table 7 Internal Control: Risk Assessment .................................................................................... 43 Table 8 Internal Control: Reforms and Statutes............................................................................. 53

Chapter 4 Reimbursement for Business Travel Expenses .......................................................... 61

Table 9 Reimbursement for In-State Meals Expense .................................................................... 63 Table 10 Reimbursement for In-State Lodging and Out-of-State Travel Expenses ........................ 67 Table 11 Mileage Reimbursement Policies and New Programs Related to Travel ......................... 75

Chapter 5 Relations with the Federal Government ....................................................................... 85

Table 12 Federal Liaison: State Officers Charged with SWCAP and CMIA .................................... 87 Table 13 Federal Liaison: State Officers Charged with ARRA and FFATA ..................................... 97

Chapter 6 Funding and Staffing the Comptroller’s Office .......................................................... 105

Table 14 Functions in “Comptroller Operations,” Fiscal Year 2012 ............................................... 107 Table 15 Funding for the Comptroller’s Office, Fiscal Year 2012 .................................................. 111 Table 16 Staffing the Comptroller’s Office, Fiscal Year 2012 ........................................................ 115 Table 16a Staffing the Comptroller’s Office; Training and Staff Turnover ....................................... 123 Table 17 Annual Salaries in State Comptrollers’ Offices ............................................................... 127

Chapter 7 Consultants, Foregone Initiatives, Legislation and Demographics ........................ 133

Table 18 Use of Consultants and Foregone Initiatives .................................................................. 135 Table 19 Recent Legislation and Demographic Data .................................................................... 141

LONG-TERM DATA

Chapter 8 The Position of the State Comptroller in State Government .................................... 147

Table 20 Legal Basis for Office, Method of Selection and Reporting ............................................ 149 Table 21 Term of Office and Succession; Civil Service/Merit System ........................................... 153 Table 22 Qualifications for Office ................................................................................................... 157 Table 23 Service on Boards and Commissions; Prohibitions against Working Outside State Government ........................................................................................................... 161

Chapter 9 State Comptrollers and the Financial Management of State Government .............. 167

Tables 24a-f Performance of Financial Management Functions in State Government ....................... 171 Table 25 State Payroll

a. Time and Attendance, Leave Accruals and Maintenance of Records ..................... 213 b. Direct Deposit, Distribution of Checks, Self-Service and Processing of W-2s, 1099s, etc. ................................................................................................................ 221

Table 26 Interim Financial Reporting: Analysis and Availability .................................................... 227 Table 27 Pre-Audit ......................................................................................................................... 237 Table 28 State Disbursement Activities

a. Inter-Agency Payments; Methods of Payment and Issuer ....................................... 241 b. Authorization, Distribution and Lapse Period ........................................................... 247 c. Carry-Forward and Central Vendor Files ................................................................. 255

Table 29 Management of Debt Collection a. Location of Function and Methods of Collection ...................................................... 259 b. Central Offset Programs ........................................................................................... 265

Table 30 Post-Audit ........................................................................................................................ 269 Chapter 10 Administrative Responsibilities .................................................................................. 275 Table 31 Guidance/Tools on Best Practices and Ethics ................................................................ 277 Table 32 Performance Reporting ................................................................................................... 283 Table 33 State Travel Policies and State Regulation of Local Governments’ Financial Practices .......................................................................................................... 289 Chapter 11 Enterprise Resource Planning and Other Financial Management Systems ......... 295 Table 34 ERP Systems .................................................................................................................. 297 Table 35 ERP: Hosting and Governing .......................................................................................... 301 Table 36 ERP Information

a. Implementation, System and Vendors ..................................................................... 307 b. Integrator, Cost, Budget Development and Control. ................................................ 311

Table 37a-b Functions Implemented ................................................................................................... 315 Table 38 ERP: Customization, Scope, Duration and Re-Engineering ........................................... 323 Table 39 ERP: Budget, Deployment, Enhancements and Agency Information ............................. 327 Table 40 ERP: Transaction Entry, Payroll Handling, Method of Data Entry and Modifications ................................................................................................................... 333 Table 41 ERP: Customization and Platforms ................................................................................. 337 Table 42 ERP: Records, Applications and Data Warehouses ....................................................... 341 Table 43 ERP: Customer-Focused Web Applications and Business Intelligence ......................... 347 Table 44 ERP: Implementation, Lessons Learned, Challenges and Employee Retention ........... 353

Chapter 12 State Accounting Principles ........................................................................................ 361 Table 45 Accounting Principles and State Accounting Manual ..................................................... 363 Table 46 Tax Accrual at Fiscal Year-End ...................................................................................... 367 Chapter 13 Internal Control ............................................................................................................. 373 Table 47 Use of Internal Auditors; Establishment and Review of Internal Control ........................ 375 Table 48 State Manuals on Internal Control .................................................................................. 381 Table 49 Internal Control: Reports and Sanctions ......................................................................... 385 Chapter 14 Annual Financial Reports ............................................................................................. 391 Table 50 Preparation and Publication of Annual Financial Reports .............................................. 393 Table 51 Other Financial Reporting ............................................................................................... 401

APPENDICES

Appendix A: Survey of State Comptrollers’ Technical Activities and Functions, short-term portion Appendix B: Survey of State Comptrollers’ Technical Activities and Functions, long-term portion

State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions, 2012

1

Chapter 1. State Comptrollers in State Government Table 1. Incumbent State Comptrollers on January 31, 2012 Table 1 lists the names and titles of those serving as state comptrollers on January 31, 2012. About 44 percent of these individuals hold the title of controller or comptroller; 26 of 59 officers have one of these titles. Fifteen officers have the title of director (25 percent). Elected officers in Arkansas, Indiana, West Virginia and Wyoming have the title of state auditor. The title of commissioner is used in Louisiana, Minnesota, South Dakota and Vermont. Ten officers hold various other titles including administrator, chief operating officer, chief accounting officer and secretary of finance.

Titles of State Comptrollers

Controller/Comptroller

Director

Auditor

Commissioner

Other

The table also lists the dates of first service, the dates on which terms expire, as well as consecutive time in office. Of the 53 offices for which time in office is provided, 36 (68 percent) have served five years or fewer, and 46 (87 percent) have been in office for ten years or fewer. On January 31, 2012, the two longest serving officials were Edgar Ross (Kentucky) with 37 years of service and Glen Gainer III (West Virginia) with 20 years of service.

Length of Service

> 20 years

16 ‐ 20 years

11 ‐ 15 years

6 ‐ 10 years

1 ‐ 5 years

< 1 year

The number of women that held the position of comptroller (NASC member) at various times over the last 15 years were:

December 1995: 11 December 1999: 13 January 2002: 14 January 2005: 12 January 2008: 14 January 2010: 18* January 2012: 16*

*(Includes Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands) Twenty-five state comptrollers are certified public accountants and five are certified government financial managers. Among these, the comptrollers in Arizona, Tennessee and Virginia hold both certifications. Four comptrollers are attorneys. Responses for this question were obtained from 45 offices.

0369

1215182124

Certifications of State

Comptrollers


2

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY.

Table 1 INCUMBENT STATE COMPTROLLERS ON JANUARY 31, 2012

(Chapter 1)


3

State and Office

State Official in the Comptroller Position

Name, Title and Email Address

Date of First

Service Current

Term Ends Time in Office

Professional Certifications

Educational Background

NASC Representative Name, Title and Email Address

Secondary Contact Name, Title and Email Address

Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Thomas White, Jr. State Comptroller [email protected]

January 2010

N/A 2 years CPA B.S. in business administration & accounting

Thomas L. White, Jr. State Comptroller [email protected]

Janice A. Hamm Deputy State Comptroller [email protected]

Alaska Division of Finance

Scot Arehart Division Director [email protected]

May 2011 Serves at the pleasure of the governor

1 year PMP B.B.S. Scot Arehart Director [email protected]

Lisa Pusich Deputy Director [email protected]

Arizona* General Accounting Office

D. Clark Partridge State Comptroller [email protected]

April 2002 N/A 10 years CPA, CGFM B.S. in accounting

Mike Smarik Deputy State Comptroller [email protected]

Arkansas* Department of Finance and Administration

Richard A. Weiss Chief Fiscal Officer, Director [email protected]

May 2002 Serves at the pleasure of the governor.

9 years None B.A. in liberal arts

Paul Louthian Administrator, Office of Accounting [email protected]

Arkansas* Office of the State Auditor

Charlie Daniels State Auditor [email protected]

January 2011

1 year

California Office of the State Controller

John Chiang State Controller [email protected]

January 2007

December 2014

5 years Attorney B.S. in finance, J.D.

George Lolas Chief, Division of Accounting and Reporting [email protected]

California* Department of Finance

Todd Jerue Chief Operating Officer [email protected]

June 2011 1 year

Colorado Department of Personnel and Administration

David McDermott State Controller [email protected]

April 2008 June 2012 4 years CPA B.S. David J. McDermott State Controller [email protected]

Robert Jaros Deputy State Controller [email protected]

Connecticut* Office of the Comptroller

Kevin Lembo Comptroller [email protected]

January 2011

1 year

Delaware Department of Finance

Kristopher Knight Director, Division of Accounting [email protected]

January 2011

N/A 1 year CPA B.B.A. in accounting

Kristopher Knight Director, Division of Accounting [email protected]

Florida Department of Financial Services

Jeff Atwater Chief Financial Officer [email protected]

January 2011

January 2015 1 year None B.S. in finance, M.B.A.

Jeff Atwater Chief Financial Officer [email protected]

Robert C. Kneip, Ph.D. Chief of Staff [email protected]

Georgia State Accounting Office

Alan Skelton1

State Accounting Officer [email protected]

July 2012 N/A 0 years CPA B.S. Alan Skelton State Accounting Officer [email protected]

Kris Martins Director of Financial Reporting [email protected]


(Chapter 1)


4

State and Office



Date of First

Service Current






Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services

Dean Seki2

State Comptroller [email protected]

April 2012 December 2014

1 month None B.S.

Idaho Office of the State Controller

Donna M. Jones State Controller [email protected]

January 2007

January 2015 5 years CPM Some college Donna Jones Idaho State Controller [email protected]

Brandon Woolf Chief Deputy Controller [email protected]

Illinois Office of the State Comptroller

Judy Baar Topinka State Comptroller [email protected]

January 2011

January 2015 1 year B.S. Josh Potts Strategic Initiatives Director [email protected]

Indiana* Office of the Auditor of State

Tim Berry Auditor of State [email protected]

January 2007

5 years B.S. in business administration, M.B.A.

Iowa State Accounting Enterprise

Calvin McKelvogue Chief Operating Officer [email protected]

May 2004 N/A 8 years CGFM B.S. in business administration

Calvin McKelvogue Chief Operating Officer [email protected]

Jay Cleveland Division Administrator [email protected]

Kansas* Office of Management, Analysis and Standards

Martin Eckhardt Director, Office of Management, Analysis and Standards [email protected]

August 2011

< 1 year

Kentucky Office of the Controller

Edgar C. Ross Controller [email protected]

June 1975 N/A 37 years None B.S. in accounting

Edgar C. Ross Controller [email protected]

Donald Sweasy Assistant State Controller [email protected]

Louisiana Division of Administration

Paul W. Rainwater Commissioner of Administration [email protected]

June 2010 Serves at pleasure of the Governor

2 years Bachelor's degree in government, master's degree in international relations

Afranie Adomako State Accounting System Director [email protected]

Devery S. Pierce, State Accounting System Assistant Director [email protected]

Maine Office of the State Controller

Terry Brann State Controller [email protected]

August 2009

N/A 2 years CPA B.S. in accounting

Terry Brann, State Controller [email protected]

Douglas Cotnoir Deputy State Controller [email protected]

Maryland Office of the Comptroller

Peter Franchot State Comptroller [email protected]

January 2007

January 2015 5 years Attorney B.A., J.D. Linda L. Tanton Deputy Comptroller [email protected]

Linda L. Tanton Deputy Comptroller [email protected]

Massachusetts Office of the Comptroller

Martin J. Benison Comptroller [email protected]

January 1999

13 years CGFM B.A., M.P.A. Martin J. Benison Comptroller [email protected]

Howard Merkowitz Deputy Comptroller [email protected]


(Chapter 1)


5

State and Office



Date of First

Service Current






Michigan Office of Financial Management

Michael J. Moody Director [email protected]

August 2002

April 2013 11.5 years CPA B.S. in business admin, A.S. in data processing

Mike Moody Office Director, State Comptroller [email protected]

Lora Mikula Director, Accounting & Financial Reporting

Minnesota* Management and Budget

James Schowalter Commissioner [email protected]

January 2011

1 year

Mississippi Department of Finance and Administration

Diane Langham Director, Office of Fiscal Management [email protected]

July 2011 1 year CPA Bachelor and master of professional accountancy

Diane Langham Director, Office of Fiscal Management [email protected]

Melissa Womack Financial Reporting Director [email protected]

Missouri Division of Accounting

Stacy Neal Director of Accounting [email protected]

May 2011 N/A 1 year CPA B.S. in accounting

Stacy Neal Director [email protected]

Jessica Opie Assistant Director [email protected]

Montana State Accounting Division

Paul Christofferson Administrator [email protected]

June 2004 N/A 7 years CPA B.S. in accounting and business administration

Paul Christofferson State Accounting Division Administrator [email protected]

Julie Feldman Accounting Bureau Chief [email protected]

Nebraska

Department of Administrative Services

Wes Mohling Acting State Accounting Administrator [email protected]

January 2012

N/A 1 year None B.S. in business administration/ accounting; M.B.A.

Wes Mohling Acting State Accounting Administrator [email protected]

Bruce Snyder Systems Manager [email protected]

Nevada Office of the State Controller

Kim R. Wallin State Controller [email protected]

January 2007

January 2015 5.5 years CPA, CMA, CFM

B.B.A. in accounting

Kim Wallin State Controller [email protected]

Susan Hart Chief Deputy Controller [email protected]

New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services

Edgar R. Carter State Comptroller [email protected]

October 2009

June 2012 2.5 years CPA B.S., B.A. in accounting, M.B.A.

Edgar R. Carter Comptroller [email protected]

Stephen Smith Administrator [email protected]

New Jersey Office of Management and Budget

Charlene M. Holzbaur State Comptroller [email protected]

December 1999

No limit 12 years None B.S. in commerce, M.B.A.

James F. Kelly Manager [email protected]

Robert L. Peden Deputy Director [email protected]

New Mexico Financial Control Division

Ricky Bejarano State Controller [email protected]

October 2012

N/A < 1 year CPA B.S. in accounting, M.B.A.

Ricky A. Bejarano State Controller [email protected]

Steve Gonzales Deputy Director [email protected]

New York Office of the State Comptroller

Thomas P. DiNapoli State Comptroller

February 2007

December 2014

5 years None B.A. in history, master’s in human resources management

Joan M. Sullivan Executive Deputy Comptroller [email protected]

Joan M. Sullivan Executive Deputy Comptroller [email protected]


(Chapter 1)


6

State and Office



Date of First

Service Current






North Carolina Office of the State Controller

David T. McCoy State Controller [email protected]

August 2008

June 2015 4 years Attorney J.D., M.P.H., M.Ed., B.S.

David T.McCoy State Controller [email protected]

John Barfield Mgr. Accounting and Financial Reporting [email protected]

North Dakota Office of Management and Budget

Pam Sharp Director [email protected]

January 2003

Serves at the will of the governor

9 years CPA B.S. in accounting, master’s in management

Pam Sharp OMB Director [email protected]

Sheila Peterson Director of Fiscal Management [email protected]

Ohio Office of Budget and Management

Timothy S. Keen Director [email protected]

January 2011

January 2015 1 year None Bachelor’s degree in communications, master’s degree in public policy

Timothy S. Keen Director [email protected]

Janet Conkey Senior Deputy Director [email protected]

Oklahoma Office of State Finance

Lynne Bajema3 State Comptroller [email protected]

April 2012 N/A 0 years CPA B.S. in accounting

Lynne Bajema State Comptroller [email protected]

Steve Funck Deputy State Comptroller [email protected]

Oregon State Controller’s Division

Joy Sebastian Acting State Controller [email protected]

November 2011

June 2012 < 1 year None Master’s of accounting

Joy Sebastian Acting State Controller [email protected]

Kathryn Ross Manager - Statewide Accounting and Reporting [email protected]

Pennsylvania Office of the Budget/ Comptroller Operations

Anna Maria Kiehl Chief Accounting Officer [email protected]

December 2007

December 2012

4 years CPA B.S. in business administration

Anna Maria Kiehl Chief Accounting Officer [email protected]

Michael Burns Director, Bureau of Financial Management [email protected]

Rhode Island Office of Accounts and Control

Marc Leonetti State Controller [email protected]

June 2008 4 years CPA M.B.A. in finance Marc Leonetti State Controller [email protected]

Peter Keenan Associate Controller [email protected]

South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General

Richard Eckstrom Comptroller General [email protected]

January 2003

January 2015 9 years CPA B.S., M.B.A., Master's of accountancy

Richard Eckstrom Comptroller General [email protected]

Jim Holly Chief of Staff [email protected]

South Dakota Office of the State Auditor

Steve Barnett State Auditor [email protected]

March 2008

N/A 4 years CPA B.S. in accounting & economics

Steve Barnett State Auditor [email protected]


(Chapter 1)


7

State and Office



Date of First

Service Current






South Dakota* Bureau of Finance and Management

Jason Dilges Commissioner [email protected]

Keith Senger Director of Accounting Analysis and Financial Reporting [email protected]

Robert Norwick Chief Accounting Analyst [email protected]

Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration

Jan I. Sylvis Chief of Accounts [email protected]

December 1995

N/A 16 years CPA, CGFM B.B.A. Jan I. Sylvis Chief of Accounts [email protected]

Mike Corricelli Director of Statewide Accounting [email protected]

Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Susan Combs Comptroller of Public Accounts [email protected]

January 2007

January 2015 5 years J.D. B.A. and J.D. Martin Hubert Deputy Comptroller of Public Accounts and Chief Clerk [email protected]

Utah Division of Finance

John C. Reidhead Director [email protected]

September 2005

N/A 6.5 years CPA B.S. in accounting

John Reidhead Director, Division of Finance [email protected]

Brenda Lee Assistant Director [email protected]

Vermont* Department of Finance and Management

Jim Reardon Commissioner [email protected]

February 2005

7 years CPA B.S. in accounting

Bradley Ferland Director, Financial Operations [email protected]

Virginia Department of Accounts

David Von Moll State Comptroller [email protected]

November 2001

Serves at the pleasure of the governor

10 years CPA, CGFM B.S. in accounting, M.B.A.

David Von Moll State Comptroller [email protected]

Randy McCabe Asst. State Comptroller, Acct & Rep [email protected]

Washington* Office of Financial Management

Marty Brown Director [email protected]

West Virginia Office of the State Auditor

Glen B. Gainer III State Auditor [email protected]

January 1992

December 2012

20 years None B.S. in political science

Mack Parsons Senior Deputy State Auditor [email protected]

West Virginia Finance Division

David Mullins4 Acting Finance Director and Acting State Comptroller [email protected]

March 2012

N/A 0 years None B.A. in accounting

David Mullins Acting Finance Director and Acting State Comptroller [email protected]

Chris Sforza Manager Financial Accounting and Reporting [email protected]

Wisconsin Department of Administration

Stephen J. Censky State Controller [email protected]

August 2007

N/A 4.5 years CPA B.B.A. in accounting

Cynthia Simon Chief of Financial Reporting [email protected]

Wyoming Office of the State Auditor

Cynthia I. Cloud State Auditor [email protected]

January 2011

January 2015 1 year CPA B.S. in accounting

Cynthia I. Cloud State Auditor [email protected]

Vicci M. Colgan Deputy State Auditor [email protected]


(Chapter 1)


8

State and Office



Date of First

Service Current






District of Columbia* Office of Financial Operations and Systems

Anthony Pompa Deputy Chief Financial Officer [email protected]

June 1998 14 years B.S. in accounting

Guam* Department of Administration

Benita Manglona 5

Director [email protected]

Northern Mariana Islands* Department of Finance

Connie Agulto Acting Secretary of Finance

Puerto Rico* Office of Budget and Management

Midgalia Bonilla Mendez Audit Associate Director [email protected]

U.S. Virgin Islands* Office of Management and Budget

Debra Gottleib Director [email protected]


(Chapter 1)


9

Key A.S. Associate of Science B.A. Bachelor of Arts B.B.A. Bachelor of Business Administration B.S. Bachelor of Science B.B.S. Bachelor of Business Studies CFM Certified Financial Manager CGFM Certified Government Financial Manager CPA Certified Public Accountant

CPM Certified Public Manager J.D. Juris Doctor (law degree) M.B.A. Master of Business Administration M.Ed. Master of Education M.P.A. Master of Public Administration M.P.H. Master in Public Health PMP Project Management Professional

Notes * These offices did not respond to this part of the 2012 survey of State Comptrollers: Technical Activities and Functions. Information for this table was obtained from other sources. 1. Georgia: Greg S. Griffin held this position before Alan Skelton was appointed to the position in July 2012. 2. Hawaii: Jan Gouveia was the acting comptroller before Dean was appointed as acting comptroller in February 2012. 3. Oklahoma: Brenda Bolander held this position before Lynne Bajema was appointed to the position in April 2012. 4. West Virginia: Ross Taylor held this position before David Mullins was appointed to the position in March 2012. 5. Guam: Lourdes Perez held this position before Benita Manglona was appointed to the position in March 2012.


10



11

Chapter 2. Annual Financial Reporting Table 2. Current Audits Of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, 49 states and the District had financial audits of their comprehensive annual financial reports. New Mexico had a review. Among the states and D.C., the audits of 37 states’ CAFRs were performed by state auditors. Eleven states and D.C. contracted with private CPA firms to do the audits of their CAFRs, and in two states (Pennsylvania and South Carolina), joint audits were performed by CPA firms working in conjunction with state auditors. Table 3. Basis of Accounting and Compliance with GAAP About 52 percent of the states (22 of 42 responding states) continue to budget on a cash basis. Eight states budget per GAAP, six states budget using the modified cash basis, and six states use the modified accrual basis. Cash (14 states) and GAAP (12 states) are the main bases of accounting used for maintaining accounting records. For financial reporting, GAAP is used by all of the 42 states that responded. About 79 percent (33 of 42 responding states) responded that they have a statutory requirement for GAAP financial statements. Table 4. Costs and Distribution of the CAFR To deal with budgetary constraints and to meet the demand for timelier financial reporting, states are moving toward alternatives to the traditional bound paper CAFR. Thirty-eight of 42 reporting states prepared some printed copies of their CAFRs. All 42 states made their CAFRs available on their websites, and 12 states also offered their CAFRs on compact disks. Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio and Rhode Island did not use print for general distribution of their fiscal year 2011 CAFR, but relied on their websites instead. Twenty-one states printed 100 or fewer copies of the CAFR, 13 printed between 101 and 250, and seven printed between 251 and 500 copies. New York printed 2,000 copies. As previously noted, four states did not print any copies of their CAFR.

036912151821242730

0 ‐ 100 101 ‐ 250 251 ‐ 500 > 500

# of states

# of copies

Paper Copies of CAFR

printed mailed

The range of the per item cost of printing the CAFR was $2.90 (South Carolina) to about $105.00 (California). Thirty-six states provided cost information for their CAFRs.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

≤ $5.00

$5.01 ‐ $10.00

$10.01 ‐ $15.00

$15.01 ‐ $20.00

> $20.00

Cost of Producing the CAFR

Table 5. Costs and Distribution of Popular or Citizen-Centric Reports Sixteen of the 39 responding states produce annual popular reports, and eight of them have applied for the Government Finance Officers Association’s Award for Outstanding Achievement in Popular Annual Financial Reporting. Sixteen states make their popular reports available on their websites. Eleven states also provide printed copies. Idaho, New York and North Carolina also make their popular reports available on CDs


12


Table 2 CURRENT AUDITS

(Chapter 2: Q1 & Q7-11)


13

State and Office Name and Email Address of Person Preparing the CAFR

Financial Audit of CAFR? Who Performs?

Fiscal Year End of

Most Recent Annual Report

Issue Date of CAFR

Independent Auditor’s Opinion Applied for GFOA Certificate? Most

Recent Award (FY) Included in the CAFR? Type of Opinion and Opinion Date


Michael Hudson [email protected]

Yes, Office of the Examiner of Public Accounts

September 30, 2011

March 30, 2012 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units, March 30, 2012

Yes, 2010


Lisa Pusich [email protected]

Yes, Office of the Legislative Auditor

June 30, 2011 December 15, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units (4 opinion units)

Yes, 2010

Arizona* General Accounting Office

Yes, Office of the Auditor General

June 30, 2011 February 10, 2012

Yes

Arkansas* Department of Finance and Administration

Yes, Division of Legislative Audit

June 30, 2011 December 22, 2011

Yes


Beverly Englund [email protected]

Yes, Bureau of State Audits

June 30, 2011 March 23, 2012 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units (13 opinion units), February 24, 2012

Yes, 2010


Tammy Nelson [email protected]

Yes, Colorado State Auditor

June 30, 2011 December 16, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units (13 opinion units)

Yes, fiscal year 2009-10

Connecticut* Office of the Comptroller

Yes, Office of the Auditors of Public Accounts

June 30, 2011 February 28, 2012

Yes


Dawn Haw-Young [email protected]

Yes, KPMG LLP June 30, 2011 February 6, 2012

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units Yes, 2010


Gina Ballard [email protected]

Yes, Auditor General, State of Florida

June 30, 2011 January 25, 2012

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units (14 opinion units), January 25, 2012

No


Ellen Tate [email protected]

Yes, Department of Audits and Accounts

June 30, 2011 December 30, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units No


Wayne Horie [email protected]

Yes, Deloitte & Touche LLP

June 30, 2011 February 16, 2012



Sherrill Geddes [email protected]

Yes, Legislative Services Office, Office of the Legislative Audits

June 30, 2011 December 23, 2011



Katie Madonia [email protected]


June 30, 2010 June 30, 2011 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units Yes, 2010

Indiana* Office of the Auditor of State

Yes, State Board of Accounts

June 30, 2010 December 29, 2011

Yes


(Chapter 2: Q1 & Q7-11)


14



Fiscal Year End of


Issue Date of CAFR




Calvin McKelvogue [email protected]

Yes, Office of Auditor of State

June 30, 2011 December 29, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units (9 opinion units), December 15, 2011

Yes, 2008

Kansas* Office of Management, Analysis and Standards

Yes, Allen, Gibbs and Houlik

June 30, 2011 December 15, 2011

Yes


Kim Moore [email protected]

Yes, Office of the Auditor of Public Accounts

June 30, 2011 December 16, 2011


Louisiana* Division of Administration

Afranie Adomako [email protected]

Yes, Office of the Legislative Auditor

June 30, 2011 December 28, 2011



Heidi McDonald [email protected]

Yes, Department of Audit

June 30, 2011 December 29, 2011



J. Michael Dougherty, Jr. [email protected]

Yes, SB & Company, LLC

June 30, 2011 December 15, 2011



Howard Merkowitz [email protected]

Yes, KPMG LLP June 30, 2011 January 3, 2012


Yes, 2011


Lora Mikula [email protected]


September 30, 2011

March 9, 2012 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units Yes, 2010

Minnesota* Management and Budget

Yes, Office of the State Auditor

June 30, 2011 December 20, 2011

Yes


Melissa Womack [email protected]


June 30, 2011 December 19, 2011



Stacy Neal [email protected]


June 30, 2011 January 25, 2012

Yes Combination opinion January 25, 2011

Yes, never received due to qualification


Paul Christofferson [email protected]

Yes, Montana Legislative Audit Division

June 30, 2011 March 29, 2012 Yes Qualified opinion1 Yes, 2010 (did not apply for 2011)

Nebraska Department of Administrative Services

Bruce Snyder [email protected]


June 30, 2011 Dec 29, 2011 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units Yes, 2010


Brenda Laird [email protected]

Yes, Kafoury Armstrong & Co.

June 30, 2011 January 31, 2012



Stephen Smith [email protected]

Yes, KPMG LLP June 30, 2011 February 28, 2012



(Chapter 2: Q1 & Q7-11)


15



Fiscal Year End of


Issue Date of CAFR



New Jersey* Office of Management and Budget

James F. Kelly [email protected]


June 30, 2011 January 5, 2012



Yvonne Herrera [email protected]

No, a review of the 2011 CAFR was conducted by Moss Adams LLP.

June 30, 2011 April 30, 2012 No N/A; the CAFR is not audited. No, GFOA is performing an in-house review of 2011


Suzette Barsoum Baker [email protected]

Yes, KPMG LLP March 31, 2011 July 29, 2011 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units Yes, 2010


John Barfield [email protected]


June 30, 2011 December 8, 2011


Yes, 2010


Eileen Holwegner [email protected]


June 30, 2011 December 20, 2011



Amy Hall [email protected]

Yes, Office of the Auditor of State

June 30, 2011 January 20, 2012



Matt Clarkson [email protected]

Yes, Office of the State Auditor and Inspector

June 30, 2011 December 30, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units, December 30, 2011

Yes, 2010


Kathryn Ross [email protected]

Yes, Secretary of State, Audits Division

June 30, 2011 January 18, 2012


Yes, 2010

Pennsylvania Office of the Budget / Comptroller Operations

Michael Burns [email protected]

Yes, jointly by KPMG and the Department of the Auditor General

June 30, 2011 December 12, 2011


Yes, 2010


Peter Keenan [email protected]


June 30, 2011 December 22, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units Yes


Margaret B. McNeill [email protected]

Yes, Office of the State Auditor and CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP

June 30, 2011 December 8, 2011



(Chapter 2: Q1 & Q7-11)


16



Fiscal Year End of


Issue Date of CAFR



South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

Keith Senger [email protected]

Yes, Department of Legislative Audit

June 30, 2010 May 20, 2011 Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units No


Michelle Wilson [email protected]

Yes, Office of the Comptroller of the Treasury, Division of State Audit

June 30, 2011 December 29, 2011



Irene Lee [email protected]


August 31, 2011

February 23, 2012



Marcie Handy [email protected]

Yes, Utah Office of the State Auditor

June 30, 2011 October 28, 2011


Vermont* Department of Finance and Management


June 30, 2011 December 23, 2011

Yes


Sharon Lawrence [email protected]


June 30, 2011 December 15, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units; 11 opinion units

Yes, 2010

Washington* Office of Financial Management

Yes, Washington State Auditor's Office

June 30, 2011 November 22, 2011

Yes


Ross Taylor [email protected]

Yes, Ernst & Young LLP

June 30, 2011 February 13, 2012

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units February 13, 2012

Yes, 2010


Cynthia Simon [email protected]

Yes, Legislative Audit Bureau

June 30, 2011 December 21, 2011

Yes Unqualified opinion for all opinion units; 5 opinion units

Yes, 2010


Tom Rowe [email protected]

Yes, McGee-Hearne & Paiz LLP

June 30, 2011 December 27, 2011


District of Columbia* Office of Financial Operations and Systems

Yes, KPMG LLP September 30, 2011

January 25, 2012

Yes

Notes

* Eight states plus the District of Columbia did not respond to this part of the 2012 survey. Information for this table was obtained from other sources for Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Minnesota, New Jersey, Vermont, Washington and District of Columbia. 1. I calculate 11, auditor - 13 (2 pensions?), March 19, 2012.

Table 3 BASIS OF ACCOUNTING AND COMPLIANCE WITH GAAP

(Chapter 2: Q2-6)


17

State and Office

Which Basis of Accounting Does Your State Use for Statutory Requirement for GAAP Financial Statements?

Link to Statute Budgeting Accounting Records CAFR and Frequency


Modified cash Cash GAAP, annually Yes, http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/acas/ACASLoginIE.asp, then click on Code of Alabama tab, View, Title 41, Chapter 4, Section 41-4-3, (4)


GAAP Cash GAAP; annually Yes (Alaska Statute 37.05.210), http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/folio.asp

Arizona General Accounting Office

Yes

Arkansas Department of Finance and Administration

Yes (24-30-202(12), C.R.S.)


Modified Accrual Cash GAAP


1 GAAP 2 Annually No

Connecticut Office of the Comptroller

Yes


Cash Ledgers record entries on cash and accrual basis.

GAAP Yes (24-30-202(12), C.R.S.)


Cash GAAP GAAP; annually Yes (Sec. 216.102(1), Florida Statutes), http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/216.102


Statutory (modified accrual plus encumbrances); state funds are appropriated based on cash collections.

Statutory (modified accrual plus encumbrances)

GAAP; annually Yes, O.C.G.A. § 50-5B-3(6) http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/gacode/Default.asp


Cash Cash GAAP No


Cash Cash 3 Yes, http://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title67/T67CH10SECT67-1001.htm


4 4 GAAP Yes

Indiana Office of the Auditor of State


Modified cash Modified cash GAAP Yes, http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=IowaCode&ga=82&input=8A.502

Kansas Office of Management, Analysis and Standards


Cash Cash GAAP, annually Yes


Modified accrual, with exceptions (e.g., payroll is on cash basis)

Modified accrual, with exceptions

GAAP, annually Yes, http://legis.la.gov/lss/lss.asp?doc=96604


(Chapter 2: Q2-6)


18

State and Office




Cash with limited revenue accrual

Mostly cash in governmental funds and GAAP in proprietary.

GAAP, annually Yes, http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/5/title5sec1547.html




GAAP, annually No


Modified cash Other GAAP, annually Yes (Chapter 7A, Section 12)


GAAP GAAP GAAP Yes

Minnesota Management and Budget


Cash Both cash and GAAP reports are available in the state accounting system.

GAAP, annually Yes (Section 7-7-45 (c), Miss. Code Ann. (1972))


Cash Partially cash, partially full accrual

GAAP No


5 GAAP GAAP, annually Yes, http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/17/1/17-1-102.htm http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/17/2/17-2-110.htm


Modified accrual Modified accrual GAAP No


Cash GAAP GAAP, annually Yes, http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/NRS-353.html#NRS353Sec3245


Modified cash Modified cash GAAP, annually Yes


GAAP with some exceptions

GAAP GAAP, annually No


GAAP GAAP GAAP, annually Yes (Chapter 6-5-4.1, Annual Financial Report), http://search.nmcompcomm.us/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&2.0


Cash GAAP GAAP, quarterly and annually

Yes


Cash Cash GAAP, annually Yes, http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_143b/gs_143b-426.39.html




Cash Modified cash basis (includes accounts payable and minimal accounts receivable)

GAAP, annually Yes, http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/126.21 (reference ORC Section 126.21(A)(9))




Budgets are prepared on the cash basis utilizing encumbrance accounting.

GAAP GAAP, annually Yes (291.040), http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/291.html


(Chapter 2: Q2-6)


19

State and Office




Modified cash SAP system maintains modified cash, modified accrual and full accrual records.

GAAP No


GAAP GAAP GAAP Yes


Cash except revenues collected in advance are recorded as refundable liabilities and certain taxes are recorded on an accrual basis.

Budgetary basis modified for inclusion of capital assets

GAAP, annually Yes (audit of basic financial statements required by SC Code of Law Title 11-7-20B)


Cash Cash GAAP, annually Yes (South Dakota Codified Law 4-4-6), http://legis.state.sd.us/statutes/DisplayStatute.aspx?Type=Statute&Statute=4-4-6


Modified accrual GAAP GAAP, annually No


Cash Primarily cash with year-end GAAP adjustments.

GAAP Yes


GAAP with a few modifications.

GAAP GAAP; annually Yes (Utah Code 63A-3-103(3)), http://le.utah.gov/~code/TITLE63A/htm/63A03_010300.htm

Vermont Department of Finance and Management


Cash Cash GAAP, annually Yes (Code of Virginia Section 2.2-813 - annual report of Comptroller to Governor), http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+2.2-813

Washington Office of Financial Management




Cash Statutory (modified cash)

GAAP, annually No


Cash Cash GAAP, annually Yes (Wyoming State Statute 9-1-403)

Notes 1. Colorado: GAAP, except for June payroll, June Medicaid, and certain information technology expenditures in the

general fund, which are deferred into the following year. 2. Colorado: GAAP, except for the budgetary basis reporting of the general fund surplus which defers June payroll,

June Medicaid, and certain information technology expenditures into the following fiscal year.

3. Idaho: The CAFR is prepared in accordance with GAAP; cash basis is used for reporting from the statewide accounting system, annually.


(Chapter 2: Q2-6)


20

4. Illinois: Modified cash; cash for revenues, two-month extended period for expenditures for services which occurred prior to the end of the fiscal year or for tangible items obligated by the end of the fiscal year.

5. Montana: GAAP, but non-GAAP adjustments are made to the revenue collections, reducing them for what our budget office and Legislative Fiscal Division consider to be prior year revenues (these are considered current year revenues under GAA.

Table 4 COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE CAFR

(Chapter 2: Q12-13)


21

State and Office

Fiscal Year of the First Annual GAAP Financial Report?

In Which Forms Is the CAFR

Distributed? Number

of Copies Printed Number

of Copies Mailed Cost Per

Printed Copy Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

1991 Printed copy and on the website

50 6 $14.00


2002 Printed copy, CD and on the website

315 253 $18.90



Printed copy and on the website



265 165 $105.00



100 None Approx. $24.00 but marginal cost is lower.



250 200 hand delivered $14.00



Less than 10



20 3 $ 4.98



60 6 Approximately $15.00



350 300 $15.00



150 20 $9.16



125 90 $10.22




100 35 $13.84




200 150 $14.50



500 165 $13.33



300 279 $15.60



225 173 $26.07 (cost of 225 printed copies and 175 CDs)



350 $8.47


1987 On the website 0 0 $0




250 175 No cost to DFA, printed by another agency



60 45 $28.62

Table 4 COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF THE CAFR

(Chapter 2: Q12-13)


22

State and Office

Fiscal Year of the First Annual GAAP Financial Report?

In Which Forms Is the CAFR

Distributed? Number

of Copies Printed Number

of Copies Mailed Cost Per

Printed Copy Montana State Accounting Division


200 (125 CDs and 75 hardcopies)

77 CDs $7.98


1991 On the website, 0 0 $0



125 0 $22.70



425 50 $6.50



300 40 $18.68



20 0 about $100.00 (on high side)



2,000 1,800 $3.75



150 25 $10.48



65 5 mailed; 45 hand delivered


1988 On the website, NA NA NA



250 3 $14.13



80 0 $13.52



60 2 $10.27


More than 20 years ago

On the website,



100 10 mailed; 78 hand delivered

$2.90



50 0 $8.89



215 Approx. 120 $10.33



186 40 $8.00



200 112 $32.53


Printed copy, CD and on the website



50 8 $4.03



140 94 $19.43



40 15 $20.00



120 7 $10.17



40 26 $12.77

Table 4a Number of Funds by Fund Type

(Chapter 2: Q14)


23

State and Office Tota

l Fun

ds

Gove

rnm

enta

l Fun

ds

Gen

eral

Spe

cial R

even

ue

Cap

ital P

rojec

ts

Deb

t Ser

vice

Per

man

ent

Prop

rieta

ry F

unds

Ent

erpr

ise

Inte

rnal

Serv

ice

Fidu

ciary

Fun

ds

Age

ncy

Pen

sion

Trus

t

Priv

ate P

urpo

se T

rust

Inve

stm

ent T

rust

Com

pone

nt U

nits

Majo

r

Non

-majo

r

See F

ootn

otes


922 1 549 45 95 11 69 28 79 33 12


26 1 14 6 3 2 21 17 4 12 5 7 11 3 8 1





633 40 409 7 1 72 12 41 6 17 2



4


1 606 11 1 84 48 101 21 3


8 18 42 32



4 4 4 5 4


1 576 14 8 3 18 12 89 26



450 68 10 5 31 20 51 6 7



9 6 6 4 3


1 10 1 3 6 13 7 9 4 1 1 5


9 1 5 1 2 25 11 14 13 4 4 5


5 6 10


6




(Chapter 2: Q14)


24


l Fun

ds

Gove

rnm

enta

l Fun

ds

Gen

eral

Spe

cial R

even

ue

Cap

ital P

rojec

ts

Deb

t Ser

vice

Per

man

ent

Prop

rieta

ry F

unds

Ent

erpr

ise

Inte

rnal

Serv

ice

Fidu

ciary

Fun

ds

Age

ncy

Pen

sion

Trus

t

Priv

ate P

urpo

se T

rust

Inve

stm

ent T

rust

Com

pone

nt U

nits

Majo

r

Non

-majo

r

See F

ootn

otes



151 217 10 15 4 15 29 19 4


2 2 7 4 17 2 21 11 12 6 6 6


1 10 1 6 4 7 2 8 5


7



1 76 11 2 11 14 4 7


22 2 10 5 4 7 4 8


1 47 35 8 4 17 1 4 9


10


1 2 1 3 1 18 4 5 8 3 3


1 10 11 25 8 5 1 1 1


1 2 3 3 22 9 1 18


21 20 9


1 43 7 19 16 2 14 3 23 11


12 12 12


1 6 1 1 3 14 9 4 7 3 1


5 3


1 21 1 1 2 10 12 11


266 126 167 79 20 201 91 26 31 1 31


289 79 120 20


(Chapter 2: Q14)


25


l Fun

ds

Gove

rnm

enta

l Fun

ds

Gen

eral

Spe

cial R

even

ue

Cap

ital P

rojec

ts

Deb

t Ser

vice

Per

man

ent

Prop

rieta

ry F

unds

Ent

erpr

ise

Inte

rnal

Serv

ice

Fidu

ciary

Fun

ds

Age

ncy

Pen

sion

Trus

t

Priv

ate P

urpo

se T

rust

Inve

stm

ent T

rust

Com

pone

nt U

nits

Majo

r

Non

-majo

r

See F

ootn

otes



8



15 16 18


6 17 12


13

Notes 1. Alaska: General Fund information only: 1 main general fund and 65 general fund sub-funds.

2. Colorado: Permanent Trust 27 and General Full Accrual Accounting Group 1.

3. Florida: Expendable Trust 19, Nonexpendable Trust 5 and Investment 4

4. Idaho: Combining Statements: Governmental 7, Capital Projects 1, Permanent 1, Enterprise 2, Internal Service 4,

Fiduciary 9 and Non-major Internal Service 4.

5. Louisiana: One of the 13 Enterprise funds is an aggregation of “Boards and Commissions,” of which there are 46.

6. Montana: Non-major General Fund 10 and Non-major Enterprise 15.

7. New Jersey: Component Unit Funds: Authorities 16 and Colleges & Universities 12.

8. New Mexico: External Trust 2.

9. New York: Federal Special Revenue 1.

10. North Carolina: 80 GASB funds, thousands of cash basis funds.

11. Pennsylvania: Other Employee Benefit Trust 2.

12. Wisconsin: Major Governmental 3, Non-major Governmental 44, Major Proprietary 4 and Non-major Enterprise 16.

13. Wyoming: 401 funds classified into 6 major Governmental Funds, Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds and Fiduciary Funds.


26


Table 5 COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF POPULAR OR CITIZEN-CENTRIC REPORTS

(Chapter 2: Q15-18)


27

State and Office

Issued How Long After

FYE? Applied for

GFOA Award?

In Which Forms Is the Popular Report

Distributed? Link to Report

Cost Per Printed Copy and

Number Printed Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

N/A No


N/A No




N/A No


10 or more months

No On the website http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/sco/STAR/star.htm

Approximately $12.00 in year one



NA No



N/A No N/A


No


6 months Yes Printed copy, CD and on the website

http://www.sco.idaho.gov/web/DSADoc.nsf/1A94EDB7C744216C872579750061593F/$FILE/SCO-2011_CCR.pdf

$0.75, 500 printed


Varies, same time as CAFR

Yes Printed copy and on the website

www.ioc.state.il.us $1.91, 190 printed



N/A



N/A No N/A N/A


6 months No Printed copy and on the website

http://www.doa.la.gov/OSRAP/library/Publications/PAFR2011.pdf

$1.03, 1,000 printed


N/A No


N/A No


No


N/A No



No


N/A No

Table 5 COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF POPULAR OR CITIZEN-CENTRIC REPORTS

(Chapter 2: Q15-18)


28

State and Office

Issued How Long After

FYE? Applied for

GFOA Award?

In Which Forms Is the Popular Report

Distributed? Link to Report

Cost Per Printed Copy and

Number Printed Montana State Accounting Division


N/A No


6 months Yes Printed copy and on the website

http://www.controller.nv.gov/FinancialReports/Other_Reports/ReporttoourcitizensFY11.

$0.17, 15,000 printed



$0.50



N/A No N/A N/A



$3.00, 2,000 printed



$2.18, 100 printed


5 months Yes On the website http://www.nd.gov/fiscal/cafr


N/A No N/A N/A N/A



www.ok.gov/OSF/Comptroller/index $1.37, 500 printed


N/A No

Pennsylvania Office of the Budget/Comptroller Operations

6 months No On the website 0 printed


No


Approximately 6 months

No Printed copy and on the website

www.cg.sc.gov/publications


No



6 months Yes Printed copy and on the website

http://www.window.state.tx.us/finances/pubs/citizens/

Unknown, 50 printed


N/A



6 months Yes On the website http://www.doa.virginia.gov/financial_reporting/pafr/pafr_main.cfm

N/A



4 to 5 months No Printed copy and on the website

Minimal, done in-house


N/A No


8 months No On the website http://sao.state.wy.us/CAFR/2011_Report/PopularReportfy2011.pdf

Minimal


29

Chapter 3. Recent Developments in Internal Control Table 6. Internal Control: Use of Frameworks Table 6 has information about the centralization and decentralization of internal control, along with the office responsible for overseeing internal control assessments. Twenty-two of the 42 reporting states responded that the statewide assessment of internal control is decentralized. Seventeen states responded that the comptroller’s office is responsible for overseeing internal control assessments. Only four of the responding states (New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and South Carolina) are using compliance software. Twenty-six states reported using COSO for their internal control frameworks. Thirty-five states reported that documentation or sign-off is required by the comptroller’s office of state agencies for the financial information at fiscal year-end. Table 7. Internal Control: Risk Assessment Table 7 presents information about recent actions related to internal control and assessing risk. Twenty-seven of the 42 reporting states have recently conducted risk assessments of their internal control, and 17 of these have scheduled specific reviews of internal control as a result of the assessments. Of the 15 states that have not recently conducted risk assessments of their internal control, seven plan to do so in the near future. Table 8. Internal Control: Reforms and Statutes Twenty-two states report having mechanisms in place to identify weaknesses in internal control. Nineteen states report initiating reforms of their internal control systems during the past two years.


30


Table 6 INTERNAL CONTROL: USE OF FRAMEWORKS

(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


31

State and Office Is Statewide Assessment of IC Centralized or Decentralized?

Comptroller’s Office Responsible

For Overseeing IC Assessments?

Is Compliance Software Used?

Nationally-Recognized IC Frameworks

or Standards Used? If No, Plans

to Adopt Any? Documentation or

Sign-Off by State Agencies Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Assessment of internal control is done centrally by another office. To the extent internal control is assessed, State Department of Examiners of Public Accounts (state legislative audit agency) on a centralized basis for the central accounting system CAFR and decentralized for individual agency federal single audit purposes.

No


Assessment of internal control is decentralized.

No. Assessments of internal control are decentralized at each department. Annually, we have a memorandum signed by each department regarding management's Internal Control Representation to DOA/DOF.

No We utilize CobiT for IT system development and maintenance.

Yes. We intend to review and consider using the results of NASC's Multi-State Consortium on Internal Control.

To comply with SAS 112, we send a memorandum to each department which is a "Management Acknowledgment of Internal Control Responsibility" signed by key positions.




Assessment of internal control is done centrally by another office. The Department of Finance, Office of State Audits and Evaluations, is responsible for coordinating and ensuring that California state agencies/departments assess internal control on a biennial basis.

No No COSO and the Institute of Internal Auditors for internal audit related work

The Department of Finance requires agencies/departments to submit a management representation letter as part of the annual single audit process.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


32








Sign-Off by State Agencies Colorado Department of Personnel and Administration

Assessment of internal control is done centrally by another office. Office of the State Auditor assessment of internal control is decentralized. Each individual agency or institution is responsible.

Yes. Assessment is decentralized, but statute requires agencies to report to the state controller.

No Colorado Internal Control Toolkit developed in the 1990's was based on COSO.

No Two separate processes. The first requires agencies to certify their accounting system balances are reviewed and correct and their postclosing information is complete and accurate. A second process requires them to certify their financial responsibility and accountability. The second requirement is based on statute.



Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the comptroller's office.

Yes. The Division of Accounting is responsible for monitoring IC policies and practices across the state. The Division also issues authoritative guidance on agency control practices.

No COSO Representation letters from each agency and certain accrual balances require sign off by financial managers at the agencies.



No No No Each agency's senior financial officer submits certified forms (schedules); each agency head submits a SAS 99 compliance form with a management representation letter.



No, not at this time. No COSO No Require representation letter signed by agency head and fiscal officer.



Yes No COSO No For component units and business activities, audited financial statements. For primary government units, receivables, prepaid expenses, inventories, liabilities, accrued expenses, bonds payable and related footnote disclosures.


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Each agency is responsible for assessing its internal controls. The legislative auditors evaluate agency controls during the year.

Yes. Idaho code gives the state controller the responsibility to establish a statewide management control system with pertinent internal controls.

No COSO and a little CobiT The agency director, chief fiscal officer and information technology head sign a letter attesting they have adopted adequate controls that allow the state controller to sign the management representation letter.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


33








Sign-Off by State Agencies Illinois Office of the State Comptroller

Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Each state agency is required by statute to conduct an internal control assessment and the chief executive officer must submit a certification to the auditor general by May 1 each year.

No. The comptroller's office, in consultation with the Central Management Services, establishes guidelines for the evaluation by state agencies of their internal fiscal and administrative controls to determine whether the agency's systems comply with the statutory requirements.

As noted, the assessment of internal controls is decentralized in this state. Therefore, each agency is responsible for ensuring internal control compliance.

Our internal control guidelines have many similarities with COSO and parts of CobiT.

No Each state agency is required to submit a management representation letter stating the information they have provided is materially correct to the best of their knowledge.



Assessment of internal control is done centrally by another office. The state auditor's office evaluates internal control in its audits of individual state departments. Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Some state departments have their own internal control staff.

No No N/A Yes Agency Reporting Package Certification for information reported outside of the accounting system.



Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the Office of Internal Audit.

No No COSO We intend to use COSO as our standard.

Closing package of financial information signed off on by the agency head.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


34








Sign-Off by State Agencies Louisiana Division of Administration

Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Management for each state department or entity is responsible for assessing internal control for their entity.

No No None No A notarized affidavit is signed by the agency official. The agency official swears that the financial statements present fairly financial information and the results of operations for the year then ended in accordance with policies and practices of the Division of Administration or in accordance with GAAP. The basis is assigned by the Division of Administration.


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the comptroller's office. Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Departments are expected to conduct self-assessments of risk and report information to the controller's office.

Yes. Here is the statutory reference: http://www.mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/5/title5sec1541.html.

No COSO and CobiT Agency management representation letter to the controller's office.



No No No nationally-recognized standards. Various references from AICPA, GAO, state and local governments, GFOA and OMB are used.

No GAAP closing package and the statutory closing package.


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Management of each state agency is responsible for assessment of its own internal controls.

Yes. Each state agency must have an internal control plan developed in accordance with comptroller guidelines.

No COSO/Enterprise Risk Management

Department head, chief fiscal officer and internal control officer must read and approve the statements contained in an internal control questionnaire, the submission of which is required by all state agencies.


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Assessment is done by individual departments with oversight and monitoring by the Office of Internal Audit Services.

No No COSO and CobiT No Each agency's director and chief financial officer sign a letter of representation.



(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


35








Sign-Off by State Agencies Mississippi Department of Finance and Administration

Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Agencies are responsible for their internal controls. DFA has a small internal control section that was assembled in FY 2009. The section provides guidance to agencies and assists with any questions the agencies may have. Agencies are required to submit the assessments and a certification to DFA.

No. Agencies are responsible for conducting their own assessments, but DFA will assist if requested. Agencies are required to submit completed assessments to DFA.

No. Compliance software is not currently being used in the management and monitoring of internal controls in our state.

COSO Yes. We have reviewed internal control software but have not yet made a purchase.

Agencies submit a certification letter to DFA stating the agency has evaluated their internal controls and noted any material weakness and the plan of correction for each weakness.



Yes. Significant review of security to the statewide accounting system is centralized. Additionally, review of the statewide procurement card is centralized. Internal control plans prepared decentrally are sent for our review as well.

No COSO standards are in mind while reviewing decentrally prepared internal control plans.

No Agencies sign a Cooperative Agreement on Accounting, Auditing and Internal Control.


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. This is the related agency's responsibility.

No No COSO and Sarbanes Oxley No We have the agencies complete a CAFR questionnaire for each CAFR.



Yes No COSO No We are working on the process to require agencies to certify that they have proper internal controls in place.


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the Department of Administration, Division of Internal Audits.

No No COSO Financial information comes from centralized accounting system.



No, not presently being performed.

No No Larger agencies sign individual representation letters to auditors.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


36








Sign-Off by State Agencies New Jersey Office of Management and Budget

Assessment of internal control is decentralized. A standardized questionnaire is used unless another method is approved by the OMB director.

Yes. NJ Treasury Circular 03-08-OMB requires annual assessment of internal controls by all executive branch agencies. The final product of this process, and internal control self-assessment report signed by the agency head and CFO, is submitted to the OMB director on or before July 1, annually.

Yes 1 COSO, including Enterprise Risk Management Integrated Framework

Receivables and payables; capital assets, capital asset impairments; pollution remediation


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the comptroller's office. Assessment of internal control is decentralized. In addition, each state agency is required to assess its own internal control for its own financial statement audit that would be supplemental to the state's assessment done by the controller's office.

Yes. The Financial Control Division doesn't require the assessments to be provided for our review; however, when there are issues with a specific agency, then we review the assessment. Agencies are required to submit a representation letter each year when their annual audit is ready to commence.

No COSO No A management representation letter is signed by the CFO.



Yes No COSO Representation letters


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


37








Sign-Off by State Agencies North Carolina Office of the State Controller

Assessment of internal control is decentralized. North Carolina General Statute § 143D-7 states, "The management of each State agency bears full responsibility for establishing and maintaining a proper system of internal control within that agency. Each principal executive officer and each principal fiscal officer shall annually certify, in a manner prescribed by the State Controller, that the agency has in place a proper system of internal control."

Yes Yes. We provide state agencies with a Microsoft SharePoint website to upload documentation from their internal control assessments.

Both COSO and CobiT North Carolina General Statute § 143D-7 states, "The management of each State agency also bears the responsibility periodically to submit accurate and complete financial information to the State Controller for compilation into North Carolina State government's various financial reports and other related financial information disseminated to the public. With the submission of such periodic reports to the State Controller, each agency's principal executive officer and each agency's principal fiscal officer shall certify, in a manner prescribed by the State Controller, to the accuracy and completeness of the financial information submitted."



No No COSO No


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the comptroller's office; it applies to 22 cabinet agencies.

No No IIA Practical Advisories (incorporates elements of COSO) and NIST #800-53 (for information technology standards)

No GAAP packages, ARRA reporting



No No COSO and NASACT internal control guidelines

Yes, COSO and NASACT internal control guidelines

All GAAP reports are signed by each agency's finance officer.



No 2 No COSO and CobiT Agencies are required to certify that information submitted to the State Controller's Division in year-end disclosure packets accurately and completely reflects the agency's financial activities for the fiscal year, and that this information agrees with the ending account balances in the agency's financial accounting system.3


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


38








Sign-Off by State Agencies Pennsylvania Office of the Budget/ Comptroller Operations


Yes Yes. Comptroller Operations primarily uses SAP Business Enterprise and ACL Software for monitoring activities. Presently, implementing Government Risk & Compliance (GRC) Software to monitor segregation of duties and role conflicts.

Comptroller Operations COSO as our framework. Considering integrating OMB A-123 into our control assessment process. SAP GRC tools are being implemented to enhance existing controls.

No A letter from management addressed to the auditor confirming representations given by management during the audit (management representation letter) and Letter of Audit Inquiry (LAI), a letter inquiring of management and legal representatives on any pending or threatening litigation or claims.


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the Bureau of Audits.

No No No Any state agency submitting financial information that is used in preparing the CAFR must submit a certification regarding the completeness and accuracy of the information.


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Agency directors are responsible for the design, implementation and monitoring of internal controls. The Comptroller General's Office provides best practice guidance.

No. Each agency's management team is responsible for overseeing internal control assessments.

Yes. Some agencies have implemented information gathering technology that provides monitoring of compliance with certain internal controls.

Selected by individual agency directors.

No An agency reviewer must provide sign-off of each reporting package indicating review, accuracy of information and completeness of information.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


39








Sign-Off by State Agencies South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the comptroller's office. Assessment of internal control is decentralized. Each state agency is responsible for agency specific internal control structure.

Yes. BFM is responsible for state-wide internal control policies and procedures.

No N/A No Question is too vague to answer. The state has hundreds of controls for year-end information.



No. Internal control assessments are prepared annually by state departments and agencies. The departments and agencies send our office a letter containing the results of the assessments.

No COSO Internal control assessments are prepared annually by state departments and agencies. The departments and agencies send our office a letter containing the results of the assessments.



No No Not handled by this office. No Agencies must certify that (1) the information in the Uniform Statewide Accounting System (USAS) was reconciled to their annual financial reports, (2) they have coordinated and posted correctly all interagency activity, (3) they have reconciled their general revenue cash balances, (4) and that they have reconciled capital asset activity and balances in USAS with the activity and balances in the Statewide Property Accounting System (#4 applies to state agencies only, not required for universities).


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. To date, our risk assessment is limited to the completion of NASC Internal Control Questionnaires (tailored to Utah). This effort is coordinated by the State Division of Finance. More extensive risk assessment is planned during the coming years.

Yes. We have recently implemented a statewide internal control self-assessment program. State agencies fill out questionnaires and indicate how they will correct any internal control weaknesses.

No COSO - NASC Internal Control Questionnaires are being used.

Yes Agencies are required to submit various information, but no formal sign-offs are required. We have relied on the external audit to verify accuracy and to obtain representations from agency management. However, in the future when our statewide assessment of internal control is in place, agencies will be required to annually attest to the accuracy of their information and that they have proper internal controls in place and functioning.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


40








Sign-Off by State Agencies Vermont Department of Finance and Management


Assessment of internal control is decentralized. A statewide internal control program is managed by the comptroller's office and implemented by state agencies.

Yes. The state comptroller's office establishes the statewide guidelines and receives an annual certification from each agency.

No COSO 1992 Internal Control -- Integrated Framework, and limited components of the 2004 framework

Agency management must provide an annual Statement of Internal Control that says whether internal controls adequately safeguard assets and whether the data presented is accurate in all material respects. Corrective action plans are required for any deficiencies noted.



Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the Legislative Audit Division, which reports directly to legislature and reviews internal control strengths & weaknesses of all programs. Assessment of internal control is decentralized. The State Auditor's Office has a division that reviews P-card purchases. The purchasing division has an inspector and contract management department that reviews purchases.

No No No Closing book forms and representation letters signed by appropriate management staff.


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the Legislative Audit Bureau.

Yes No COSO An annual report of internal controls is signed by the department secretary.


Assessment of internal control is done centrally by the Department of Audit.

No No Not sure what framework the Department of Audit uses.

No. This isn't part of our office's responsibility.

A letter is signed by the agency director.


(Chapter 3: Q1-6)


41

Notes 1. New Jersey: Microsoft Access database application (COCO12.mdb) that participating executive branch agencies use to complete their annual self-

assessment of internal controls. A reporting package is produced from the application upon completion that identifies current and prior year major control weaknesses, as well as management's plan to address them.

2. Oregon: Each agency is responsible for performing its own annual risk assessment and for performing specific reviews based on the risk assessment. In large

agencies, the annual risk assessment is performed by the internal audit function using the COSO and COBIT models. The State Controller’s Division is responsible for developing financial internal control policies, developing assessment tools that agencies may use to evaluate their internal controls, and for providing training opportunities. Upon request by agency management, the State Controller’s Division also conducts special reviews of agency accounting processes.

3. Oregon: In addition, agencies are required to certify that the agency's financial activity is accurately and completely reflected in the agency's financial

accounting system in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and legal requirements. Any differences between the balances reported in the transmitted disclosures and the agency's financial accounting system are required to be communicated in writing to the State Controller's Division. Disclosure packets include general disclosures, debt disclosures, and disclosures applicable to the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. The certifications must be signed by the responsible financial reporting accountant as well as the agency's chief fiscal officer or the director.


42


Table 7 INTERNAL CONTROL: RISK ASSESSMENT

(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


43

State and Office Recently Conducted Risk Assessment?

If Yes, Scheduled Specific Reviews?

Have Entity-Wide Control Objectives Been Established?

Have Activity-Level Objectives Been

Established?

What Methodology Was Used in

the Risk Identification

Process?

What Process was Used to Assess

Risk?

What Process is Being Used to Manage Risk

During Change?

If No Recent Assessment, Any Plans?


No Nothing planned at this time.


No No Yes. We intend to review and consider using the results of NASC's Multi-State Consortium on Internal Control as a tool for the departments to use in assessing internal control risk.




Yes 1 Yes 2


No No Yes. The Colorado OSC filled a single internal audit position that was intended to carry out this function; however, the internal audit position has been consumed with managing data quality issues around the ARRA implementation.


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


44





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?




Yes Yes Yes, within the next 2 years


No No


No No No


Yes, 13 of 17 departments are reviewed annually. The 4 not reviewed annually are done on a three-year rotation basis.

No No


Yes Yes 3 4 Initially, an interview with the auditor using checklists from the AICPA

Discussion of existing controls, known changes and past problems

Communication and education


No. As stated earlier, there is no statewide assessment of risk or internal controls. Each agency conducts its own risk assessment and internal control evaluation.

No



No No No


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


45





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?




Yes. Our Office of Internal Audit conducted a risk assessment.

Yes. Any weaknesses identified in the self-assessment will be addressed.


No No Yes. Louisiana is implementing an ERP system. When the system is functional, risk assessments and verification of computer edits (internal controls) will be performed. Full functionality is anticipated for 2015.


Yes. Risk assessments are on-going on a sample basis.

Yes. The risk assessments have pointed out several areas of concern.

Yes No We started the process using the enterprise risk assessment. From that assessment we have identified areas of risk.

An evaluation of documented procedures aligned with those audit areas that can present the greatest risk to the organization.


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


46





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?



Yes. A risk assessment, in preparation for a full evaluation of the internal controls of the Comptroller of Maryland in effect as of March 31, 2008, was performed in accordance with the Internal Control Manual for Use by state departments and independent agencies, issued by the Comptroller of Maryland in April 2007.

Yes. Risk assessment was performed in preparation for a full evaluation of the internal controls of the Comptroller of Maryland.

Yes Yes Questionnaire Self-assessment Oversight by management and evaluation by internal audit divisions


Yes. Comptroller has implemented use of all data analytics to run some standard scripts to identify improper payments, vendor-employee file anomalies. Each agency must update its internal control plan at least annually.

Yes. Reviews are scheduled as part of the internal control, questionnaire process each spring and various comptroller desk reviews throughout the year. Also, the state auditor uses agency internal control plans for reference when conducting audits.

Yes, in statute Yes, some are statute and some via internal control questionnaire where statute and policy requirements are reflected in the questions.


Yes Yes N/A



(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


47





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?



Yes. Agencies annually submitted their risk assessments conducted on the internal controls they have in place. The assessments are due each December.

No Yes. The timing has not been set as we are in the midst of an ERP implementation.


Yes No No


No. We have not performed a formal risk assessment but we are constantly reviewing and updating our procedures.

No No 5


Yes Yes. Began with smaller agencies and working up to larger agencies.

Yes No COSO1 In-house developed risk assessment form

Developing a communication process with agencies as issues arise.

No


Yes No


No Yes, when capable of doing so.


Yes, annual risk assessment

Not by OMB. Reviews would be conducted by Office of State Comptroller or Office of State Auditing and these reviews would consider the results of these risk assessments.

No. See comments in the second column (scheduled specific reviews). Schedule of reviews is unknown at this time.


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


48





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?



Yes, on-going and continuous

No No


Yes Yes


Yes. Internal control risk assessments are performed annually.

No


Yes Yes, state policy to review each biennium


Yes, high-level assessments

Yes. Office of Internal Audit - Annual Plan Auditor of State - Audit of Ohio Administrative Knowledge System (OAKS)

SOC1 OAKS control objectives

N/A


Yes, working with agencies to conduct risk assessments.

No Yes, within the next year.


Yes. The Internal Audit Section performs annual risk assessments of the agency. This process assesses risk related to the department’s ability to meet its mission and objectives. Control weaknesses are further identified as individual audit work is performed.

Yes. The Internal Audit Section creates an annual audit plan that is approved by the Audit Committee based on the results of the annual risk assessment. Management requests for audit work are also performed throughout the year if the risk is deemed to be significant.

The entity has statutes, rules and procedures that identify control objectives. The Internal Audit Section also follows professionally recognized standards.

6 Risks were assessed based on staff knowledge of agency programs. All risks identified were reviewed with agency management.

No formalized process

N//A


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


49





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?



Yes Yes A management directive has been established with respect to the Comptroller's Office facilitating control self-assessments in all agencies under the governor's jurisdiction.

7 As part of the control self-assessment process when assessing their risks, participants determine what controls they have in place to mitigate those risks and also what portion of the risks remain afterwards.

There are a number of agencies which are undergoing change, new initiatives, etc., and are desirous of going through the control self-assessment process to ensure that controls are built into their programs to avoid problems going through transition/start-up.

N/A


Yes No


No No No


No No. We are continuously reviewing and modifying internal controls.

Yes, in the near future


Yes, each December No


Yes. It is conducted with various sections within the comptroller's office.

Yes No


No. We have begun to use NASC ICQs only.

Yes, during fiscal year 2013 (also see previous responses)


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


50





Established?



Process?


Risk?


During Change?




Yes. The risk assessments are conducted by each individual agency.

Yes. Individual agency assessments are reviewed during periodic quality assurance reviews conducted by the State Comptroller's office.

This is part of the statewide internal control program.

This is part of the statewide internal control program.

The risk identification process is specific to each agency involved and varies by agency.

As stated, the process is specific to each agency and varies by agency.

As stated, the process is specific to each agency and varies by agency.



Yes Yes


No Yes, as time permits


No. The Department of Audit has not required this of the State Auditor's office.

No. This is handled by the Department of Audit and not our office.

No. Agencies do self-assessment as a requirement of the Department of Audit.

Notes 1. California: In accordance with the Financial Integrity and State Manager’s Accountability Act, all California state agencies/departments are required to

maintain effective systems of internal accounting and administrative control, to evaluate the effectiveness of these controls on an ongoing basis, and to biennially review and report on the adequacy of the agency's systems of internal accounting and administrative control utilizing a risk-based model.

2. California: The Department of Finance, Office of State Audits and Evaluations reviews all submitted biennial reports and requires agencies/departments to

submit corrective action plans to address actions that are being taken/planned to mitigate the identified risks. Agencies/departments are required to provide follow-up status reports on their respective corrective action plans


(Chapter 3: Q7-10)


51

3. Idaho: The following control objectives were established for financial reporting:

1. Established a mission statement to guide financial reporting activity. 2. Established process for implementing new accounting standards. 3. Established a process for communicating process, procedures and policies to employees. 4. Established strategic operating plan to address priorities. 5. Established a process to identify, assess, and mitigate risk from internal and external sources.

4. Idaho: The following activity-level objectives were established for financial reporting:

1. Bi-weekly monitoring of an annual plan that details tasks, expected and actual due dates, and person accountable. 2. Annual review of employee policy handbook. 3. Annual training to enhance employee skills. 4. Cross-training of employees to enhance skills. 5. Ongoing maintenance and review of instruction manuals for each task that incorporates changes. 6. Annual employee performance evaluations. 7. Participation in NASACT and AGA committees, workgroups, and audio conferences. 8. Participation in continuing professional education to maintain a highly-educated and skilled workforce. 9. Monitor emerging GAAP guidance by providing responses to preliminary views documents, exposure drafts, etc. 10. Preparation for annual risk analysis and interview with auditors. 11. Maintain a suggestion list for process re-engineering and system improvements. 12. Annual training meeting with outside audits to discuss changes, deadlines and new guidance. 13. Policies and procedures established for handling of unusual and infrequent transactions. 14. Preparation of position papers for new accounting standards that evaluate risks and document decisions made. 15. Disaster recovery testing of systems to ensure ongoing operations in case of a disaster. 16. Attempt to implement major technology or applications during the spring months when we are not actively producing the CAFR. 17. Reconciliation and review processes in place to ensure correct data in the reporting system. 18. Review and approval of unusual and infrequent entries. 19. Limited access and checklist for manual adjustments. 20. Preparation of proforma statements and disclosure using prior year data to reveal limitations, deficiencies and weaknesses.

5. Montana: We reviewed internal controls through a statewide task force several years ago and issued a detailed statewide internal control chapter within state

policy. We also have included the NASC developed internal control documents on our website for the agencies use in developing, assessing and monitoring their internal controls. Future reviews are the agency's responsibility.

6. Oregon: Risk was assessed against agency mission and high-level objectives to determine what could prevent the agency from meeting its goals. These risks

were identified by the Internal Audit Section and then discussed, vetted and ranked by executive leadership. 7. Pennsylvania: We have established a control self-assessment initiative whereby agencies identify their financial, operations, strategic, reporting and

compliance risks and discuss such in a workshop setting. Participants do this individually, initially, and then collectively in a workshop setting.


52


Table 8 INTERNAL CONTROL: REFORMS AND STATUTES

(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


53

State and Office Mechanisms to Identify

Weakness in IC? Reforms of Internal Control Initiated

Statewide in Past Two Years Statutes or Other Authority for IC?

Links or Statutory References Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

No


No We are currently working on drafting an internal control section to incorporate within our Alaska Administrative Manual. We also plan to post on a web page a PowerPoint presentation explaining internal controls and who is responsible for them.




Yes. As each California state agency/department is responsible for maintaining effective systems of internal accounting and administrative controls and to biennially assess the risks to their respective programs, the addition or deletion of programs would be considered part of their continuous risk assessment process.

The Department of Finance, Office of State Audits and Evaluations, is actively involved in educating and providing technical assistance to state agencies/departments by emphasizing the importance of risk-based assessments of internal controls and their responsibilities under the Financial Integrity and State Manager’s Accountability Act. The focus has been on using risk based assessments, identifying risks and how the risks will be mitigated as opposed to performing reviews of internal controls over accounting processes such as cash handling and accounts payable.

Hyperlink to the California Government Code: http://law.justia.com/california/codes/gov/13400-13407.html Hyperlink to the Financial Integrity and State Manager's Accountability Act (FISMA): http://www.dof.ca.gov/osae/fisma/


No. Most internal control weaknesses are identified by their consequences or by the external audit function.

None State Department Financial Responsibility and Accountability, Colorado Revised Statutes 24-17-101 Most internal control policies are contained within our State Fiscal Rules and Fiscal Procedures Manual. Respectively, they are at: http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/sco/FiscalRules/FR_Manual(2009-0701).htm http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/sco/FiscalProcedures/Cur/manual_cur.htm



Yes The new ERP system has allowed us to make significant changes to business processes and the internal control structure across the state.

Office Authority included in Delaware Code


(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


54




Links or Statutory References Florida Department of Financial Services

No Sections 215.86, 215.91(3)(b), and 20.055(5), Florida Statutes: http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/215.86 http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/215.91 http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/20.055


No None Official Code of Georgia Annotated (OCGA) 50-5B-3: http://www.lexis-nexis.com/hottopics/gacode/default.asp Internal Controls on SAO’s website: http://sao.georgia.gov/00/channel_createdate/0,2095,39779022_161308762,00.html


Yes. State departments are audited annually. Those not audited annually are reviewed periodically for internal control compliance. Departments complete a Self-Assessment of Internal Control Questionnaire.

Self-Assessment of Internal Control Questionnaire Hawaii Revised Statutes, Section 40-2


Yes, building controls in software and processes

None http://legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title67/T67CH10SECT67-1021.htm http://www.sco.idaho.gov/web/scoweb.nsf/pages/MCS_Policy.pdf/$File/Policy.pdf?OpenElement


No None The legal mandate which requires Illinois state agencies to maintain a system of internal controls can be found in the Illinois Compiled Statutes Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act (30 ILCS 10): http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs5.asp?ActID=467&ChapterID=7 The broad establishment for internal control policies for the state of Illinois can be found in Chapter #2 of the Illinois Statewide Accounting Manual: http://www.ioc.state.il.us/index.cfm/linkservid/60F208B2-1CC1-DE6E-2F4808A951E543C6/showMeta/0/



No N/A Code requirements for the audit of claims and the control of accounts., 8A.502 http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?category=billinfo&service=IowaCode&ga=82&input=8A.502



(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


55




Links or Statutory References Kentucky Office of the Controller

Yes. That is considered in the functional design of any new financial software or software upgrades.

Legislation has passed that requires agencies to strengthen internal controls.

KRS 45.237


Yes. A series of controlled test transactions or "scripts" are performed, with the processed results being compared to expected results. Also, reports are generated for comparison to other system reports and to ad hoc reports.

None because of the focus on the ERP project


Yes. Draft legislation is reviewed by the controller's office to identify any potential conflicts or concerns.

None Title 5, Section 1541


Yes. Under personnel guidelines, the supervisor/manager is responsible for maintaining proper internal controls over procedures within his or her responsibility. This responsibility includes exhibiting a strong commitment to complying with internal control guidelines and ensuring that supervised employees perform their duties in accordance with written procedures that encompass internal control requirements.

None http://compnet.comp.state.md.us/General_Accounting_Division/Static_Files/Internal_Control_Manual_2008_Volume_1.pdf


Yes. The Internal Control Guide based on COSO's ERM framework addresses the need to continually identify risk.

Updated the internal control/risk assessment training module

All data analytics for accounting and payroll systems New training on awareness and prevention of

fraud/waste/abuse "Stop Fraud Group" hosted by the Attorney General's

Office

Chapter 647 of the Acts of 1989, Chapter 647 of the Acts of 1989 and Office of the Comptroller's Internal Control Guide: http://www.mass.gov/sao/laws.htm


(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


56




Links or Statutory References Michigan Office of Financial Management

Yes. Agencies are responsible for ongoing assessments using the COSO model. The results of these assessments are summarized in biennial reports to the Office of Internal Audit Services.

We have revised control self-assessment tools to make it easier for departments and agencies to establish and evaluate controls and to reach conclusions regarding the sufficiency of those controls. Improvements to tools include programmatic and information technology related subject matter. We have standardized the approach and report that the internal auditors use to assess the department and agency actions to perform these self-assessments. We also created standard reports that management throughout departments and agencies use to document that the self-assessment occurred and to identify any weaknesses noted. They are then routed through senior management and onto department and agency heads. These reports form the basis for a report from the department or agency head that is issued to the governor.

Michigan Compiled Laws, Section 18.1485, State of Michigan Financial Management Guide Part VII - Internal Control



No Section 7-7-3(6)(d), Mississippi Code Ann. as amended, states that each agency through its governing board or executive head is required to maintain continuous internal audit covering the activities of such agency affecting its revenue and expenditure, and an adequate internal system of pre-auditing claims, demands and accounts... to ensure that only valid claims, demands and accounts will be paid: http://michie.com/mississippi/lpExt.dll?f=templates&eMail=Y&fn=main-h.htm&cp=mscode/a79/d37/d39/d44.1


No None


No No new reforms were issued within the last two years.


No We have established internal control training classes for all agencies.


Yes. All agencies must submit internal controls to the Department of Administration for review before a new program can be implemented.

None http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-353A.html#NRS353ASec020


(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


57




Links or Statutory References New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services

No Controls have changed to some degree with the implementation of ERP software, but not as a result of an assessment.

RSA 21 I-8 only required to audit business process primarily related to disbursements; not published


No None NJSA 52:15c-1: www.state.nj.us/infobank/circular/cir0308b.htm


No Annually updated Manual of Model Accounting Practices using the COSO framework and detailing State Statutes and Administrative Code as authority. A centralized cash and investments reconciliation.

Chapter 6 Article 5 - Financial Control: http://www.conwaygreene.com/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&2.0


Yes. OSC requires that major operational areas identify program objectives, potential risks and planned controls prior to implementing any new programs.

More comprehensive system of statewide internal control and risk assessment. State agencies are partnering with OSC on an Internal Control Task Force to identify weaknesses and outline improvements.


Yes. By statute, the Office of the State Controller prescribes and supervises accounting system changes necessary to secure and maintain internal control.

The Statewide Governmental Accountability and Internal Control Act (Chapter 143D of the North Carolina General Statutes) was passed on August 31, 2007 with an effective date of January 1, 2008. No additional changes to this Act have been made since that time.

The Statewide Governmental Accountability and Internal Control Act (Chapter 143D of the North Carolina General Statutes) Internal control policies: http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/index.html


No


Yes. Office of Internal Audit provides consulting services if requested by agency client.

Establishment of Office of Internal Audit Adoption of NIST #800-53 for information technology control frameworks, Development of OBM central reporting (ARRA)

ORC 126.45 DAS OIT Policy (NIST #800-53), http://66.161.141.164/orc/126.45 http://www.privacy.ohio.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=3aFM0Pz7OeU%3D&tabid=40


Yes. We have numerous legislatively required checks and balances when setting up new programs.

Still in the planning stage HB 2015, June 2009


Yes. Because the assessment of internal control is decentralized, the state does not have "statewide" mechanisms in place to identify weaknesses in internal control before new programs are developed or old programs are renewed.2

Not our area ORS 291.015: http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/SCD/SARS/oam_toc.shtml#Chapter_10___Internal_Control


(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


58




Links or Statutory References Pennsylvania Office of the Budget/ Comptroller Operations

Yes. When new systems are being developed or old systems reconstructed, most agencies in the commonwealth include comptroller operations audit and/or accounting staff as part of the team. Their role is to ensure that user requirements are met and that proper controls are being designed into the system to prevent, detect or correct errors and misstatements.

In 2010 Pennsylvania established a commonwealth-wide audit committee, which was the first step in the development of an enterprise-wide risk management concept. As a next step, control self-assessments were established in 2011, by directive, to assist commonwealth agencies in developing a process to identify, control and monitor risks (events) intrinsic to the programs/projects under their control. Our next steps will be to utilize the audit committee to direct audits and/or establish necessary policy to address control weaknesses or areas of significant risk.


No


Yes. The purpose and operations of new programs are evaluated by agency personnel to transactional needs. Need requests are evaluated by the Comptroller General's Office for prudence of business purpose and conflicts with other programs within the state. The Comptroller General's Office must approve statewide master data elements for recording activity in the centralized accounting system. The Comptroller General's Office approves all disbursements for state agencies.

Workflow approvals Enterprise IT access authorizations Matching of goods receipts to purchase order and

invoice through the ERP Systematic identification of partner activity for internal

transactions


Yes. We have second-level system checks and reviews to make sure first-level internal controls are effective and operating as planned.

Increased documentation N/A


No None Tennessee Code Annotated Title 9 Public Finances Chapter 18 Financial Integrity Act: http://tennessee.gov/finance/act/riskManagement.html


No, no specific requirement for new/renewed programs3


(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


59




Links or Statutory References Utah Division of Finance

No Recently adopted a state policy on internal control self-assessment program.

None



Yes. Agency Risk Management and Internal Control Standards (ARMICS).

Revision to the annual internal control certification and process

Code of Virginia section 2.2-803 Financial accounting and control: http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+2.2-803 http://www.doa.virginia.gov/Financial_Reporting/ARMICS/ARMICS_Main.cfm



Yes. The Legislative Audit Division, which reports directly to legislature, reviews internal control strengths and weaknesses of all programs. The State Auditor's Office has a division that reviews P-card purchases.

A new cash management policy was issued recently.


No


Yes, as overseen by the Department of Audit and program reviews by the Legislative Service Office

More awareness of the necessity of internal control Statutes do not require; Department of Audit policies require.

Notes 1. Mississippi: The Mississippi Agency Accounting Policies and Procedures (MAAPP) manual contains information regarding the Statewide Automated

Accounting System (SAAS), Statewide Payroll and Human Resource System (SPAHRS), and other state accounting issues. Documented in this manual are fiscal policies, accounting principles, controls, operating procedures and reporting requirements. It contains a section for Internal Control: http://www.dfa.state.ms.us/Offices/OFM/BFR%20Files/MAAPP%20Files/30%20Internal%20Control%201.pdf.

2. Oregon: However, most agencies involve their internal auditor(s) in project committees as new programs are developed. Also, the chief audit executives are

non-voting members of agencies' executive staffs. They regularly attend the executive staff meetings and, therefore, have ample opportunity to weigh in on program changes. For DAS – not a formalized process, however Internal Audit is often consulted as new programs and systems are developed and implemented.


(Chapter 3: Q11-13)


60

3. Texas: Typically internal auditors participate with management during program development or redesign to ensure that effective internal controls are included.

Texas is a very decentralized state. Most programs are developed and administered by individual state agencies and controls over the programs are the responsibility of those agencies. The State Auditor’s Office conducts periodic reviews of agencies and programs and addresses control issues during those reviews. The state comptroller conducts expenditure, purchase and payroll audits - controls are reviewed during these audits.


61

Chapter 4. Reimbursement for Business Travel Expenses Table 9. Reimbursement for In-State Meals Expense Thirty-nine of the 42 reporting states establish maximum allowances of some sort for meals while traveling in-state for business. Among those states that define maximum amounts for meals, the ranges vary considerably. Allowances for breakfast range from $5 in three states to $12 in three states; for lunch the range is from $5.50 (Illinois) to $30 (New Mexico); and for dinner the range is from $12 in three states to $36 (Colorado). Table 10. Reimbursement for In-State Lodging and Out-of-State Travel Expense Ten states reimburse actual in-state lodging expenses, and 12 reimburse actual cost with an established upper limit. Nine states provided information regarding the maximum amount that is reimbursed for lodging. The range of allowable lodging rates among those listed is $46.50 in South Dakota to $215 in New Mexico.

Reimbursement of In‐State

Lodging Expense

Actuallodging

Actual up tomaximum

Lodgingmaximum

Per diem

Other

Reimbursement of actual business expenses is more common when the expenses are incurred during out-of-state travel. Two states reimburse actual meal expenses, five listed actual and meal maximums and three states reimburse actual amounts up to the federal per diem schedule. Fourteen states report reimbursing at

established maximums for meals and 17 use a per diem schedule. Fifteen states reimburse actual out-of-state lodging expenses, although seven of these mention specific limitations. Four states use a lodging maximum and 14 states use a per diem schedule for out-of-state lodging.

Reimbursement of Out‐of‐State

Lodging Expense

Actuallodging

Actual up tomaximum

Lodgingmaximum

Per diem

Other

Table 11. Mileage Reimbursement Policies and New Programs Related to Travel Eighteen of the 42 reporting states use the federal rate for mileage reimbursement. The state reimbursement rates range from $0.33 per mile (North Carolina, which uses both federal and state rates) to $0.555 per mile (California, Maryland and for the legislative agencies in New Mexico). Some states reimburse based on the availability of a state car.


62


Table 9 REIMBURSEMENT FOR IN-STATE MEALS EXPENSE

(Chapter 4: Q1-2)


63

State and Office How Reimbursed Receipts Required Maximum

for Breakfast Maximum for Lunch

Maximum for Dinner Daily Rate Effective Date


Meal allowance: over 6-12 hours away from base—$11.25; over 12 hours away from base, not overnight—$30.00

No


Actual and meal maximums. We have developed an in-state per diem rate of $60.00 for M&IE* reimbursement for travel within the state of Alaska by employees.

Yes. If reimbursement is based upon actuals, receipts are required. However, reimbursements on actuals would be an exception, and typically the $60 M&IE for in-state travel is followed.

$12.00 $16.00 $32.00 $60.00 November 8, 2006




Actual and meal maximums; follow IRS accountable plan rules

$6.00 $10.00 $18.00 November 4, 2008


Meal maximums and the federal per diem schedule

No $7.00 base - $8.00 to $12.00 high cost

$11.00 base - $12.00 to $18.00 high cost

$23.00 base - $26.00 to $36.00 high cost

$5.00 incidental expenses

October 1, 2011



Approved on a case-by-case basis by each agency.

Yes


Meal maximums No $6.00 $11.00 $19.00 $36.00 July 1, 2006


Meal maximums Yes; over $25 if actual, none for per diem meals

$6.00 to $7.00, which is our high cost

$7.00 to $9.00 which is our high cost

$15.00 to $20.00 which is our high cost

August 1, 2007


State per diem policy Yes for all


Actual and meal maximums Everything except meals $7.50 $10.50 $16.50 $30.00 January 1, 2008


Meal maximums $5.50 $5.50 $17.00 $28.00


(Chapter 4: Q1-2)


64






Meal maximums Yes, all meal expenses require receipts.

$5.00 $8.00 $15.00 $28.00 July 1, 2007



Actual: meal expenses are reimbursed on a per diem basis.

Normal rate of $7.00 and a high rate of $8.00

Normal rate of $8.00 and a high rate of $9.00

Normal rate of $15.00 and high rate of $19.00

July 1, 1999


Meal maximums. Certain state officials are exempt from this regulation and are reimbursed for actual, reasonable expenses.

No. State officials that are allowed "actual" expenses must provide a receipt with an indication of the business purpose and of the individuals in attendance.

$8.00 $12.00 $21.00 $41.00 January 1, 2012


Federal per diem schedule Yes for non-meal expenditures over $8.00


Actual and meal maximums $8.00 $10.00 $24.00 July 1, 2011


Actual and meal maximums of $25.00 per day - all meals

Yes for all Varies Varies Varies August 1996


Actual and meal maximums For any part of travel that a receipt can be obtained

$7.25 $7.25 $16.50 October 1, 2011



Actual up to daily limits established by DFA using the federal per diem schedule by location.


Actual and meal maximums. A statewide meal maximum is set which is based off the federal per diem schedule. Agencies are able to set lower rates as long those rates are consistently applied to all staff. Actual rates can be reimbursed as long as below statewide maximums.

Yes and no. Some agencies require receipts to support actual claims while others do not.

$9.00 $14.00 $27.00 Depends on city October 2009


Actual and meal maximums Meal receipts are required if it was paid for with a state credit card.

$5.00 $6.00 $12.00 1997


(Chapter 4: Q1-2)


65





Actual Yes for any meal over $5.00 (lodging, commercial and transportation)


Federal per diem schedule No Follows federal GSA amounts

January 1, 2008


Actual


Federal per diem schedule No


Actual and meal maximums Yes 1 Minimum $12.00 a day

Maximum $30.00 a day

Depends on how far travel is

$45.00 July 1, 2003


Actual and federal per diem schedule


Meal maximums $8.00 $10.45 $17.90 July 1, 2011


Meal maximums No $6.00 $9.00 $15.00 $30.00 August 9, 2009


Federal per diem schedule No $9.00 $13.00 $29.00 $56.00 October 1, 2009


Actual and federal per diem schedule All expenses over $25.00




Actual All receipts are required, except where stated otherwise in collective bargaining agreements.

22% of applicable GSA amount



January 1, 2012


Meal maximums; generally no in-state meals reimbursed

$30.00


Actual and meal maximums. Amounts are based on time of departure and return with a maximum for each meal (breakfast, lunch and supper).

Receipts are required for all expenditures except taxi and meals.

$6.00 $7.00 $12.00 $25.00 July 2010


(Chapter 4: Q1-2)


66





Actual and meal maximums $5.00 in-state/ $8.00 out-of-state

$9.00 in-state/ $11.00 out-of-state

$12.00 in-state/ $17.00 out-of-state

October 23, 2006/ July 1, 2007




Meal maximums and federal per diem schedule. For non-overnight travel, meals are limited to $36.00. For over-night travel, meals are reimbursed according to the federal per diem schedule.

No $36.00 More than 10 years


State per diem schedule $9.00 $11.00 $16.00 $36.00 July 1, 2009



Actual and federal per diem schedule. Generally, per diem for overnight, official business travel. Individuals may qualify for business meal reimbursement, and state policies identify these circumstances.



Actual and federal per diem schedule No 20% of federal per diem

20% of federal per diem

60% of federal per diem


Actual and meal maximums No. Receipts are only required for unusual situations where reimbursement in excess of the maximum is allowed.

$8.00 $9.00 $17.00 July 1, 2001


Actual and federal per diem schedule All actual expenses for reimbursements require receipts.

Notes * M&IE: Meals & incidental expenses 1. New Mexico: The public officer or employee must submit receipts for the actual meal and lodging expenses incurred. Under circumstances where the loss of

receipts would create a hardship, an affidavit from the officer or employee attesting to the expenses may be substituted for actual receipts. The affidavit must accompany the travel voucher and include the signature of the agency head or governing board.

Table 10 REIMBURSEMENT FOR IN-STATE LODGING AND OUT-OF-STATE TRAVEL EXPENSES

(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


67

State and Office

Reimbursement for In-State Lodging Expenses Reimbursement for Out-of-State Travel Expenses

How Reimbursed Maximum for

Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

$75 daily per diem for each day away from base.

Breakfast—$10, lunch—$15, dinner—$25, with exceptions allowed if justified and approved in advance by governor's office for documented high-cost travel locations.

Yes. Out-of-state: breakfast—$10, lunch—$15, dinner—$25, with exceptions allowed if justified in advance for documented high-cost travel locations. If in-state, see Table 9.

Capped at $175 per day, subject to exceptions documented and approved in advance by the Governor's Office.


Actual and lodging maximum. We also have a taxable noncommercial lodging rate of $30 for in-state travel if employee chooses to stay with a friend or relative rather than a hotel room.

If over $300, a waiver from DOA is required.

Federal per diem schedule Yes. If in travel status for 12 or more hours, M&IE* may be paid to the employee for the particular meal in which the employee traveling within the identified meal period for three consecutive hours or more. This is considered taxable to the employee.

Actual




Actual and lodging maximum. Maximum of $84, plus tax, with exceptions for higher cost counties.

$84 November 4, 2008

Actual and meal maximums (based on in-state rates and policies)

Yes. Employees may claim breakfast if the trip begins at/before 6:00 a.m. Employees may claim dinner if the trip ends at/after 7:00 p.m. Lunch is not an allowable reimbursement for trips lasting less than 24 hours. Employees may claim $8 overtime meal reimbursement if: a) Employees work at least two hours more

than their regular scheduled workday; b) Employees work a minimum of ten hours of

overtime on holidays or regularly scheduled days off.

Actual and lodging maximum (actual cost based on in-state rates and policies)


(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


68

State and Office



Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging Colorado Department of Personnel and Administration

Actual Meal maximums (based on an allocation of federal CONUS rates)

Yes. Generally employees must be on overnight travel to be reimbursed for meals, but they may qualify for reimbursement even if not on overnight travel under the following definition. Traveling Away from Home – A traveler is traveling away from home if: a) the traveler’s duties require him or her to be

away from the traveler’s regular work location substantially longer than an ordinary day’s work, and

b) the traveler needs to sleep or rest to meet the demands of his or her work while away from home.

Actual, receipts required (may be required to use designated facilities in some areas)



Established by the state agency

Federal per diem schedule No GSA rate


At the option of traveler, $80 per diem, or meal allowances plus actual expenses for lodging at single-occupancy rate, substantiated by paid bills.

July 1, 2006 Meal maximums No At the option of traveler, $80 per diem, or meal allowances plus actual expenses for lodging at single-occupancy rate, substantiated by paid bills.


Actual and GSA rate, typically reimbursed based on actual

Federal per diem schedule Yes. Employees who travel on single day trips which are over 50 miles and away more than 12 hours can receive reimbursements for non-overnight trips. The amount they can receive is limited to 75% of the daily per diem rate.

Actual. Employees are asked to follow guidelines to obtain reasonable lodging rates.


Actual State per diem policy Yes - $20 Actual


Actual Actual, meal maximums and federal per diem schedule

Yes. Agencies may have a more restrictive policy that does not reimburse taxable meals.

Actual


Lodging maximum: Chicago Metro—$149 per night; downstate—$60 - $80 per night

Various Meal maximums Yes, for breakfast and dinner Lodging maximum


(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


69

State and Office



Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging Indiana Office of the Auditor of State


Lodging maximum $55 plus applicable taxes

August 15, 2011 Meal maximums Yes. Meals are reimbursed if provided as an integral part of a meeting, conference, retreat or special event; when allowed by code; when a meal waiver has been signed by the director of the Department of Administrative Services.

Actual



Actual July 1, 1999 For breakfast, lunch and dinner respectively; $7, $8 and $15 (non-high rate) or $8, $9 and $19 (high rate)

Yes Actual


Actual up to a lodging maximum, unless associated with a conference. The maximum is tiered according to location (i.e., high-cost area).

$85 with high-cost area at $115

January 1, 2012 Meal maximums; tiered reimbursement according to location

No, an exception exists when travel exceeds 12 hours.

Lodging maximum; based on tiered reimbursement according to location


GSA rate Federal per diem schedule Yes in certain circumstances GSA rate


Actual Meal maximums Yes 1 Actual


Actual Meal maximums of $30 per day

Yes Actual


GSA rate Meal maximums Yes for day meals Actual or per diem



Actual Actual up to daily limits established by DFA using the federal per diem schedule by location

That is an agency decision, and some do and some do not.

Actual


(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


70

State and Office



Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging Missouri Division of Accounting

Actual. We try to limit actual rates to a maximum based on GSA rates.

September 2009 Federal FY 2009 CONUS by city; some departments have further reductions.

Yes, some departments will reimburse; however, it is often taxable to the employee.

Actual. Similar to in-state lodging, we try to limit costs to GSA amounts.


Actual, lodging maximum and GSA rate

Follows the federal rate

October 1, 2009 Federal per diem schedule but the base rate does not increase for high-cost cities.

Yes. The reimbursement is based on travel shifts. If an employee falls in a particular travel shift, that employee is eligible for the related meal reimbursement. Part of the reason the in-state meal rates are so low for Montana employees is because they receive reimbursement for these "meals not overnight."

GSA rate


Actual Actual No Actual


GSA rate; agencies may choose a lower maximum.

Follows federal GSA amounts

January 1, 2008 Federal per diem schedule Yes, if they are traveling more than 50 miles from duty station

GSA rate


Actual Actual Actual


GSA rate Federal per diem schedule No GSA rate


Actual and lodging maximum, $85

$215, anything greater needs approval.

July 1, 2003 Actual and meal maximums

Yes. Partial day per diem rate: Public officers or employees who occasionally and irregularly travel shall be reimbursed for travel which does not require overnight lodging, but extends beyond a normal work day as follows:

a) for less than 2 hours of travel beyond normal work day, none;

b) for 2 hours, but less than 6 hours beyond the normal work day, $12;

c) for 6 six hours, but less than 12 hours beyond the normal work day, $20;

d) for 12 hours or more beyond the normal work day, $30.

Actual and lodging maximum


Actual and GSA rate Federal per diem schedule No GSA rate


(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


71

State and Office



Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging North Carolina Office of the State Controller

Lodging maximum $63.90 July 1, 2011 Meal maximums Yes. If an employee leaves before 6:00 a.m. on travel or gets back after 8:00 p.m. while on state business, they can receive breakfast and dinner. All three are granted if they are on overnight travel status.

Lodging maximum; $75.60 for out of state


GSA rate - 90% of GSA rate

Federal per diem schedule Yes Actual


GSA rate October 1, 2009 Federal per diem schedule No GSA rate


GSA rate. Actual expenses for overnight stays at "designated lodging" arranged by sponsoring entity. Otherwise, per diem rates apply.

Federal per diem schedule No Actual expenses are reimbursed for overnight stays at "designated lodging" as arranged by sponsoring entity. If the overnight stay is not associated with a "designated hotel" per diem rates apply.


GSA rate Federal per diem schedule Yes 2 GSA rate


GSA rate; GSA per diems, excluding taxes

January 1, 2012 Actual and meal maximums. All out-of-state travel requires Governor's Office approval.

Yes, in limited circumstances, as documented in Travel Manual 230.1 or as documented in collective bargaining agreements

GSA rate


Generally no in state lodging.

Meal maximums No Actual


GSA rate; GSA schedules $85 since October 2010

Meal maximums. Breakfast—$7, lunch— $9, dinner—$16, with a max per day of $32. Limitations are placed on the hour of the day in which each amount can be incurred.

Yes. Time of departure and expected return and time of incurrence of the meal dictates if a meal is reimbursable. For example, if departure is before 6:30 a.m. and return is after 8:30 p.m., three meals are reimbursed for the day. However, if departure is between 6:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. and return is after 1:30 p.m. but before 8:30 p.m., only lunch is reimbursed.

GSA rate


(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


72

State and Office



Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

Actual and lodging maximum; maximum amount not to exceed actual

$46.50 October 23, 2006 Meal maximums Yes Actual and lodging maximum; Maximum not to exceed actual


GSA rate Federal per diem schedule No GSA rate


GSA rate; maximum rate of $77 for non-GSA locations

September 2011 Federal per diem schedule with actual expenses not to exceed the federal per diem schedule rates

Yes, if the travel is outside the employee's headquarters and meal reimbursement is approved by the agency head

GSA rate; actual expenses not to exceed federal per diem schedule rates


Varies; $65 to $90 + tax, depending on location. If lodging is not available at that rate and our State Travel Office finds other acceptable accommodations, then the state will pay the higher amount regardless of the state rate for that location. If a conference hotel, the state reimburses actual cost plus tax.

July 1, 2009 Actual and meal maximums. We reimburse either a per diem amount of $45 per day, or for premium cities - actual cost with a maximum amount of $59 with original meal receipts.

Yes, only if approved by the agency's executive director and the reimbursement is taxable

Actual and GSA rate. We reimburse actual expenses not to exceed the federal lodging rate for the location, unless booked by the central travel office. We also allow lodging at conference hotels even if it exceeds the federal rate.



GSA rate. In certain instances, pre-approval may be obtained for higher reimbursement rates when a reasonable cost justification is provided.

Federal per diem schedule Yes. Generally, overnight travel is required. However, state policy does allow reimbursement in other instances such as qualifying business meals or overtime status.

GSA rate



Actual and GSA rate Actual and federal per diem schedule

No, not usually Actual and GSA rate


(Chapter 4: Q3-6)


73

State and Office



Lodging Effective Date Meals Meals With No Overnight Travel Lodging Wisconsin Department of Administration

Actual and lodging maximum, $70

July 1, 2008 Actual and meal maximums. Maximums are $10 for breakfast, $10 for lunch and $20 for dinner.

Yes. Employees away from their headquarters city during certain time periods can be reimbursed.

Actual and lodging maximum. The maximum is $70 except for those cities listed as high-cost cities which have different maximums. A high-cost city list is published each year.


Actual Actual and federal per diem schedule

No. Same day travel does not allow reimbursement for meals.

Actual

Notes * M&IE: Meals & incidental expenses 1. Maryland: The cost of breakfast is reimbursable when an employee in travel status has to leave home on official business 2 hours or more before the

beginning time of the employee's place of business. The cost of dinner is reimbursable when an employee in travel status cannot get home within 2 hours after the employee's normal quitting time. In both cases, the 2 hours are in addition to the normal commuting time. In cases when an employee meets the conditions above and is in travel status for the entire day, but not overnight, the employee's lunch also is reimbursable.

2. Oregon: A meal per diem is permitted under the following conditions during non-overnight travel:

a) Breakfast. Personnel must be on travel status for two hours or more before the beginning of their scheduled work shift to receive a breakfast

allowance. b) Lunch. No allowance is provided for lunch during non-overnight travel unless the employee is attending an official business meeting and the meal is an

agenda item, that was not included in the fee, and the cost and choice of having the meal were beyond the control of the employee. A receipt is required. Other circumstances may warrant an exception to the provision that no allowance is provided for lunch. The agency director or designee, board member or commission member may authorize such an exception when such payment provides a clear and distinct economic advantage to the agency and is critical and essential to the mission of the agency.

c) Dinner. Personnel must be on travel status for two hours or more beyond the end of their scheduled work shift to receive a dinner allowance.


74


Table 11 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT POLICIES AND NEW PROGRAMS RELATED TO TRAVEL

(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


75

State and Office

Mileage Reimbursement for Use of Personal

Auto? Limitations on the Use of Personal Automobile and

Link or Statutory Reference to the Policy Rate Used for Mileage

Reimbursement

Policies and Rates for Elected Officials Different from

Other State Employees?

New Programs Related to Travel Within the

Past Two Years Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Yes Personal vehicle approved if no motor pool vehicle available. http://comptroller.alabama.gov/Docs/FPPM%2010-2011.pdf (pages 6-17)

IRS rate Yes. Legislators are paid $0.10 per mile for travel to and from legislative session. Largest portion of legislative pay is paid as expenses that can be offset from IRS salary with allowable legislative business expenses.

Governor's office approval process controls majority of out-of-state travel. Governor's office implemented meal and room caps to control cost.


Yes Travel purchases must utilize the most direct route which meets the business need. Travelers may use a personal vehicle when it is in the best interest of the state. The amount of reimbursement is limited to the lowest commercial available alternative for the particular trip. Alaska Administrative Manual - Travel http://doa.alaska.gov/dof/manuals/aam/resource/60t.pdf

IRS rate for personal vehicle and GSA rate for aircraft and motorcycle, which will also utilize for snowmobile and boat reimbursement: http://doa.alaska.gov/dof/travel/resource/POV_Rate_Table.pdf

No a. Automated traveler profile maintenance.

b. Began participation in Western States Contracting Alliance for rental car and hotel rentals in 2010.

c. Created an enterprise travel authorization form.




Yes Must be approved by SCO. Must have valid driver’s license, insurance and good driving record. Shall use and ensure all passengers use all available safety equipment. Must complete defensive drivers class once every four years. Vehicle must be adequate for the work performed. State Administrative Manual 0750-0753

State rate, $0.555 (55.5 cents)


Yes Must be approved by supervisor and appointing authority with preference given to use of state fleet vehicles. http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/sco/FiscalRules/FR_5-1(2009-0701).pdf and http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/dfp/sco/FiscalRules/mileage.htm

1 No. However, our fiscal rules contain certain exceptions for travel by the governor.

2



(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


76

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years Delaware Department of Finance

Yes Requires prior approval of the appropriate organization authority

No


Yes Agency head designates most economical method of travel. Mileage reimbursement may be limited by cost of common carrier (includes rental cars). Section 112.061(7)(a), Florida Statutes, http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/112.061

Other rate, $0.445 per mile

No For FY 2010-11 and 2011-12, the General Appropriations Act placed limitations on travel expenses to mission critical activities. Training, conferences, or out-of-state travel required agency head approval.


Yes http://sao.georgia.gov/vgn/images/portal/cit_1210/25/49/184352580State%20of%20Georgia%20Travel%20and%20Expense%20Policy_051012.pdf

GSA rate No Began implementation of statewide travel and reservation expense suite.


Yes To and from business destination; transport reasonable amount of small tools, equipment and supplies

State rate No None


Yes https://www.sco.idaho.gov/web/sbe/sbeweb.nsf/pages/trvlpolicy.htm

State rate; reviewed annually by the Board of Examiners (currently $045.5 cents per mile)

No


Yes GSA rate Yes. Due to budget constraints for July 1, 2010, through June 30, 2012, legislator’s mileage reimbursement is $0.39 per mile. Per diem and lodging is $111.00.

N/A



(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


77

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years Iowa State Accounting Enterprise

Yes Reimbursed up to 14,000 miles annually on a fiscal year basis. Reasonable accommodation reimbursed up to 10,000 miles annually on a fiscal year basis. http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/2003SUPPLEMENT/8A/363.html

State rate, $0.39 Yes. The following state elected officials shall not be subject to dollar limitations for meals or lodging: governor, lt. governor, auditor of state, secretary of agriculture, state treasurer, secretary of state, attorney general and state legislators.

1) No taxable meals (meals w/o overnight stay) are reimbursed unless provided as an integral part of a meeting, conference, retreat or special event. (August 15, 2011)

2) Online Travel Authorization. All out-of-state and international travel (including travel for normal job duties) is approved by the employee's department head rather than the Executive Council. Previously was not online.



Yes Discretion of agency head State rate; flexible rate is adjusted quarterly based on average retail price of gas for Kentucky

Yes, elected officials are reimbursed for actual expenses

Privately owned vehicle reimbursement rates are adjusted quarterly to stay in line with changes in cost of fuel.


Yes Mileage may not exceed 99 miles round trip. http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/osp/travel/travelpolicy/2011-12travelguide.pdf

State rate, $0.51 Yes, may be reimbursed for actual, reasonable expenses with receipts

1) Refer to Memo in Travel Policy Manual at http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/osp/travel/travelpolicy/2011-12travelguide.pdf (see section "Revisions to PPM 49").

2) Employees use rental cars to travel when the round-trip will exceed 99 miles.


Yes Frequent travelers are identified and issued a state vehicle. $0.44 No N/A


(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


78

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years Maryland Office of the Comptroller

Yes An employee traveling on official business is expected to exercise the same care incurring expenses as would a prudent person traveling for personal reasons. Travel for business should be conducted at a minimum cost for achieving the success of the mission. http://dbm.maryland.gov/agencies/Documents/TravelManagementServices/Travel_Regulations.pdf

State rate, $0.555 No None


Yes To and from alternative work location with prior approval State rate Yes, other state employees under collective bargaining agreements

December 21, 2009 - Limits use of state vehicles: Administrative Bulletin #10


Yes If the employee is traveling over 100 miles round trip and you have not asked for state vehicle, standard rate for mileage will apply. If an employee has asked for a state vehicle and one was not available, then the premium rate would apply. http://michigan.gov/documents/DMB_StandardizedTravelRegulations_23541_7.pdf http://michigan.gov/documents/dmb/0420_182332_7.pdf

Federal rate for premium and state rate for standard

No Continued restrictions on in-state and out-of-state travel



Yes Mileage is reimbursed in accordance with established polices. The Office of Purchasing and Travel within DFA prescribes travel policies. The link to the travel manual is: http://www.dfa.state.ms.us/Purchasing/Travel/TravelManual.pdf

GSA rate No


Yes Mileage is reimbursed at $0.37 mile if a state car is unavailable and a rental car is more expensive. Mileage is reimbursed at $0.26 mile anytime. http://oa.mo.gov/co/policies/sp12vehicular.pdf

Often, $0.03 cents less than the IRS rate; however, significantly less recently http://oa.mo.gov/acct/mileage/index.htm

Yes. Frequently the policies are the same; however, some are required for executive agencies and only encouraged for legislative or judicial branches.

None


Yes If a state vehicle is available and meets the employee's needs, the employee may receive approval to use a personal vehicle and will be reimbursed at a lower rate. http://doa.mt.gov/doatravel/default.mcpx Section 1-0310.10 MCA 2-18-503

IRS rate. The employee is reimbursed at a lower rate, $0.4815 times the GSA rate, when a state vehicle that meets their needs is available and they receive approval to use their own vehicle instead.

No. Generally the same with some minor differences.


(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


79

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years Nebraska Department of Administrative Services

Yes http://www.das.state.ne.us/accounting/nis/am005.htm#auto IRS rate No


Yes An employee using his own personal vehicle for the employee's convenience will be reimbursed at one-half the standard mileage reimbursement rate. http://nevadabudget.org/wiki/index.php?title=0200_Travel#0212_Travel_Status_-_In-State

IRS rate, 55.5 cents per mile

No None


Yes Not to be used if a state vehicle is available. Department of administrative services manual of procedures, not on website.

No


Yes www/state.nj.us/infobank/circular/cir1105b.pdf

State rate No None


Yes Non-commuting authorized travel only 2.42.2 NM Administrative Code. http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/parts/title02/02.042.0002.htm

State rate: executive agencies - $0.41; judicial agencies - $0.32; legislative agencies - $0.555

Yes, rates for the legislative branch differ from those in the executive branch.

None


Yes GSA rate No OSC recently implemented an electronic travel voucher submittal process.


Yes 3

IRS rate is used for round trips of 100 miles or less. For trips over 100 miles, the IRS rate is used if a state vehicle is not available. If a state vehicle is available but the employee wishes to drive their personal vehicle, the employee will get the state motor fleet rate of $0.33 cents.

Yes. Not for elected officials that head state departments. However, the state legislature has a different reimbursement structure. They receive IRS rate for mileage and a daily rate of $104 for meals and lodging.

No new polices have been adopted.


Yes GSA rate No


(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


80

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years Ohio Office of Budget and Management

Yes No reimbursement for commute miles. http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/126-1-02

Other rate, $0.45 per mile

Yes, not required to follow travel policy and per diem rates

None


Yes Published IRS rate No None


Yes Personal vehicles will be reimbursed at the full GSA rate if state vehicles are unavailable or if special circumstances apply. Otherwise, personal vehicle mileage is reimbursed at the rate applicable to using a state vehicle. All of these scenarios require manager's prior approval. Mileage is reimbursable by use of the most direct route minus commute mileage. http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/SCD/SARS/oam_toc.shtml#Chapter_40___Travel See Private Vehicle Reimbursement Rates in Appendix A

GSA rate Yes4 The GSA multi-tiered private vehicle reimbursement rates


Yes Personal automobiles should not be used on trips of 100 miles or more per 24-hour period. Lease cost of ground transportation is required. http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?open=514&objID=224629&mode=2&contentid=http://pubcontent.state.pa.us/publishedcontent/publish/cop_general_government_operations/oa/oa_portal/omd/p_and_p/manuals/items/m230_1.html

GSA rate Yes. The governor and lt. governor (elected positions) are exempt from monetary limits for lodging and subsistence. Reasonable reimbursement for these expenses is permitted up to 2 1/2 times the normal amounts. Cabinet level and deputies (appointed positions) are also exempt from the monetary limits and are permitted up to 2 1/2 times the normal amounts.

Adopted new policies effective 1/1/12 requiring receipts for all expenses and the requirement to utilize the most cost effective method of ground transportation.


Yes GSA rate No Revision of in-state policy to require travelers to deduct normal commuting mileage from offsite visits.


Yes The lesser of $0.505 or the IRS rate per mile for use of personal vehicle if a state vehicle is not available. This rate is reduced by $0.04 if state motor fleet vehicle is available. General Proviso 89.23J of the State Appropriations Act.

The lessor of 50.5 cents or IRS rate or 4 cents under the IRS rate if state motor fleet vehicle is available

Yes, the statewide elected officials are reimbursed actual expenses for subsistence.

Beginning July 1, 2010, the state requires reimbursement from state employees utilizing state motor fleet vehicles in daily work commute. This requirement is for compliance with IRS regulations.


(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


81

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

Yes If a fleet car is available, employee receives the low mileage rate for personal auto usage. If fleet car is not available, employee receives high mileage rate for personal usage.

State rate Yes, elected officials can get reimbursement as cost with receipt.

N/A


Yes Department head authorization is required for the use of personally owned automobiles in the daily performance of duties. Only mileage on official state business may be claimed for reimbursement. Procedures for calculating mileage are based on the fact that the state is prohibited from reimbursing employees for normal commuting mileage. Employees should select the least expensive way to travel of either personal automobile mileage reimbursement or rental using the state’s WeCar/Enterprise Fleet contract. http://www.tennessee.gov/finance/act/documents/policy8.pdf

State rate, $0.47


Yes When employees from the same agency travel on the same dates with the same itinerary, they must coordinate travel. When four or fewer employees travel on the same itinerary, only one may be reimbursed for mileage. When more than four employees travel on the same itinerary, only one out of every four may be reimbursed for mileage. https://fmx.cpa.state.tx.us/fmx/travel/textravel/trans/personal.php

IRS rate, 55.5 cents per mile

Yes. For key officials the rates are twice that of a state employee. The current reimbursement for lodging is actual expense up to a maximum of $154. For meals, the reimbursement is actual expense up to $92.

N/A


Yes We reimburse at a lower rate unless a state fleet vehicle isn't reasonably available, then we reimburse at a higher rate, generally the federal mileage rate. If the trip averages 100 miles or more per day, using a fleet vehicle is strongly encouraged or the reimbursement will be at the lower rate. http://apps.finance.utah.gov/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&vid=nxtpub:app1 See the 10 Travel - Reimbursements - Transportation FIACCT 10-02.06 Policy

State rate. If fleet vehicle not available we reimburse at the GSA rate; if it is available we reimburse at the state rate of $0.36 cents/mile.

No None



(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


82

State and Office




Reimbursement




Past Two Years Virginia Department of Accounts

Yes Travel under 100 miles per day is reimbursed at the IRS rate. Travel exceeding 100 miles per day must cost justify personal vehicle rather than state car or Enterprise rental on state contract. Use of personal vehicle for convenience paid at lower fleet rate of $0.246 per mile. Commonwealth Accounting Policies and Procedures (CAPP) Manual section "20335 State Travel Regulations." http://www.doa.virginia.gov/Admin_Services/CAPP/CAPP_Summary.cfm Virginia 2011 Acts of Assembly

A state rate is used if cost justification does not warrant the IRS rate.

No



Yes Varies by state agency, usually based on federal rate Varies by state agency, usually based on federal rate

No, it depends on who and what agency

None


Yes Mileage from the employee's home to their headquarters is not reimbursed. s. 20.916(4) WI Stat.

State rate, $0.485 per mile

No None


Yes Use of a personal vehicle is allowed only if a state vehicle is not available, or for extenuating circumstances.

IRS rate Yes, different for legislators, not statewide elected officials

None


(Chapter 4: Q7-10)


83

Notes 1. Colorado: IRS rate, mileage reimbursement rates cents per mile.

Effective 7/1/2011 Effective 1/1/2012 IRS Rate $0.56 $0.56 State of Colorado: 2WD $0.50 $0.50 4WD $0.53 $0.53

2. Colorado:

1) Meal per diems that were previously removed were re-instated and receipt requirement removed. 2) Tied vehicle mileage reimbursement to fixed percentage of IRS rate. 3) Travel Management Program implemented an online automated In/Out of State lodging program. 4) Executive Order on Greening of Government requires state employee travelers to give preference to airports with mass transit options and airports

closest to the travel destination. 3. North Carolina: § 138-6. Travel allowances of state officers and employees.

1) Travel on official business by the officers and employees of state departments, institutions and agencies which operate from funds deposited with the

State Treasurer shall be reimbursed at the following rates: a) For transportation by privately owned automobile, the business standard mileage rate set by the Internal Revenue Service per mile of travel

and the actual cost of tolls paid. Any other law which sets a mileage rate by referring to the rate set herein, instead establishes a rate of twenty-five cents (25¢) per mile. No reimbursement shall be made for the use of a personal car in commuting from an employee's home to his duty station in connection with regularly scheduled work hours. In addition to the statute above, the NC Office of State Budget and Management have set policy on the use of personal vehicles. A state employee shall be reimbursed the business standard mileage rate set by the Internal Revenue Service when using their personal vehicles for state business when the round trip does not exceed 100 miles or when a state-owned vehicle is not available. However, if a state employee chooses to use a personal vehicle when a state-owned vehicle is available for trips over 100 miles round trip, all departments and agencies will reimburse the employee at the motor fleet rate for mileage of 33 cents per mile. NC G.S. 138-6 http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bysection/chapter_138/gs_138-6.html NC Office State Budget and Management Policy (page 130): http://www.osbm.state.nc.us/files/pdf_files/BudgetManual.pdf

4. Oregon: Elected officials are encouraged to use per diems for meals and lodging, but may opt to claim reimbursement for actual and necessary travel

expenses incurred in the performance of official state duties. Except as otherwise provided by law, members of state boards and commissions, including those individuals employed in full-time public service, are entitled to receive reimbursement for actual and necessary travel expenses incurred in the performance of official state duties. Gratuities are permissible if reasonable and not excessive and need to be documented on the receipt. If an official is reimbursed using the meal per diem allowance in lieu of actual expenses, gratuities are not separately reimbursed.


84



85

Chapter 5. Relations with the Federal Government Table 12. Federal Liaison: State Officers Charged with SWCAP and CMIA SWCAP is the acronym for the Statewide Indirect Cost Allocation Plan, the plan whereby a state calculates the portion of its central operating costs that it may recover from the federal government as part of the state’s cost of administering federal programs. Forty-two states provided contact information for the preparer(s) of the SWCAP. The intent of the federal Cash Management Improvement Act of 1990 (CMIA) was to rationalize cash flows between the federal government and the states so that neither party would have the “free” use of the other party’s funds. That is, the federal government would transfer funds for federal programs to state governments on the day the funds are to be disbursed by the states. On the other side, state governments are expected to request drawdown of federal funds in a pattern that reflects the expected pattern of state disbursements for federal programs. Every state files an annual report with the Financial Management Service of the U.S. Treasury with the calculations of interest liabilities for the previous fiscal year. At that time, a state might owe interest to the federal government to the extent that the state held federal funds before the intended disbursements were made; or the federal government might owe interest to a state to the extent that the state made disbursements for federal programs before being reimbursed by the federal government. Forty-one states provided contact information for the federal liaison(s) of the CMIA. Table 13. Federal Liaison: State Officers Charged with ARRA and FFATA The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as the Stimulus or the Recovery Act, was enacted in February 2009. The purpose of ARRA was to create jobs and promote spending. Thirty-five states provided contact information for the federal liaison(s) for ARRA. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA). The intent of the Act is to empower every American with

the ability to hold the government accountable for each spending decision. Nineteen states provided contact information.


86


Table 12 FEDERAL LIAISON: STATE OFFICERS CHARGED WITH SWCAP AND CMIA

(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


87

State and Office Statewide Indirect Cost Allocation Plan SWCAP Prepared By and Software Used Cash Management Improvement Act of 1990 Comments


Marilyn R. Dozier, Director, Finance Accounting, State Finance Department (334) 353-3224 [email protected]

Consultant This individual and the SWCAP function is not part of the State Comptroller's Office.

Thomas L. White, Jr., State Comptroller, State Finance Department (334) 242-7050 [email protected] Kathleen D. Baxter, Director Administrative Accounting, State Finance Department (334) 242-4857 [email protected]


Scot Arehart, Director of Finance, Department of Administration (907) 465-3435 [email protected] Lisa Pusich, Deputy Director, Department of Administration (907) 465-5616 [email protected]

Consultant Contractor has software they use to prepare our SWCAP. DOA/DOF compiles information and provides this to our contractor for the preparation of the SWCAP each year.

Michelle Prebula, Cash Manager, Department of Revenue, Treasury Division (907) 465-2360 [email protected]



California Office of the State Controller and/or Department of Finance

Todd Jerue, Chief Operating Officer, Department of Finance (916) 445-4923 [email protected] Kevin Fujitani, Chief, Fiscal Systems and Consulting Unit/CALSTARS, Department of Finance (916) 445-0211 [email protected]

Todd Jerue, Chief Operating Officer, Department of Finance (916) 445-4923 [email protected] Kevin Fujitani, Chief, Fiscal Systems and Consulting Unit/CALSTARS, Department of Finance (916) 445-0211 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


88



David J. McDermott, State Controller, Office of the State Controller (303) 866-2739 [email protected] Bhavna Punatar, Controller III, Office of the State Controller (303) 866-4344 [email protected]

In house Provider: MAXIMUS Software: MAXCars

Charles Scheibe, Controller, Department of Treasury (303) 866-5826 [email protected] Denise Knutsen, Accountant, Department of Treasury (303) 866-3565 [email protected]



John Nauman, OMB (302) 739-4206 [email protected]

With assistance from a consultant


Christina Smith, Director, Division of Accounting and Auditing, Department of Financial Services (850) 413-5510 [email protected] Steve Wilson, Professional Accountant Specialist, Department of Financial Services (850) 413-5643 [email protected]

Consultant Software: MAXCars

Bert Wilkerson, Director, Division of Treasury, Department of Financial Services (850) 413-2720 [email protected] Miriam Gray, Financial Administrator, Department of Financial Services (850) 413-2783 [email protected]


Alan Skelton, State Accounting Officer, [email protected]

Consultant Steve McCoy, Director, Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services (404) 656-2168 [email protected] Mitch Seabaugh, Assistant Director, Office of Treasury and Fiscal Services (404) 656-2168


Kalbert Young, Director of Finance, Department of Budget and Finance (808) 586-1518 [email protected]

Kalbert Young, Director of Finance, Department of Budget and Finance (808) 586-1518 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


89



David Fulkerson, State Financial Officer, Division of Financial Management (208) 854-3072 [email protected]

In house David Fulkerson, State Financial Officer, Division of Financial Management (208) 854-3072 [email protected]


Jerome Stermer, Director, Governor's Office of Management & Budget (217) 782-4520

Jerome Stermer, Director, Governor's Office of Management & Budget (217) 782-4520



Jay Cleveland, Division Administrator, Department of Admin Services-State Accounting Enterprise (515) 281-3725 [email protected] Jim Reasoner, Fiscal and Policy Analyst, Department of Admin Services-State Accounting Enterprise (515) 281-3802 [email protected]

In house Jay Cleveland, Division Administrator, Department of Admin Services-State Accounting Enterprise (515) 281-3725 [email protected]



Tommy Richie, Auditor, Office of the Controller (502) 564-8637 [email protected]

N/A John Bailey, Staff Assistant, Office of the Controller (502) 564-7752 [email protected]


Afranie Adomako, State Accounting System Director, Division of Administration (225) 342-0708 [email protected] Yuchi Fong, State Accounting System Manager, Division of Administration (225) 342-0708 [email protected]

Consultant Software: MAXCars Much of the detailed information needed for the SWCAP is gathered and/or prepared in house under the consultant's guidance. The consultant then creates the final report.

Afranie Adomako, State Accounting System Director, Division of Administration (OSRAP) (225) 342-0708 [email protected] Kurt Demmerly, State Accounting System Supervisor, Division of Administration (OSRAP) (225) 342-0708 [email protected]


Doug Cotnoir, Deputy State Controller, State Controller Office (207) 626-8428 [email protected]

Consultant Barbara Raths, Deputy State Treasurer, Office of the State Treasurer (207) 624-7477 [email protected]


John J. Pirro, Director of Finance and Administration, Department of Budget & Management (410) 260-7059 [email protected]

Consultant (MAXIMUS) uses their own software.

Henry Mo, Grants & EFTs, Maryland State Treasurer's Office (410) 260-7269 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


90



Howard Merkowitz, Deputy Comptroller, Office of the Comptroller (617) 973-2602 [email protected]



Michael J. Moody, Director, Office of Financial Management, State Budget Office (517) 373-1010 [email protected]

Joseph Fielek, Executive Director, Bureau of State and Authority, Department of Treasury (517) 335-1001 [email protected]



Diane Langham, Director, Office of Fiscal Management, Department of Finance and Administration (601) 359-3405 [email protected] Lisa Dunn, Financial Analyst, Department of Finance and Administration (601) 359-9416 [email protected]

Mark Valentine, Director, Bond Advisory, Department of Finance and Administration (601) 359-3160 [email protected] Belinda Russell, Staff Officer, Department of Finance and Administration (601) 359-5745 [email protected]


Stacy Neal, Director, Division of Accounting, Office of Administration (573) 751-4013 [email protected]

In house Software: MAXCars by MAXIMUS

Stacy Neal, Director, Division of Accounting, Office of Administration (573) 751-4013 [email protected]


Paul Christofferson, Administrator, State Accounting Division, Department of Administration (406) 444-4609 [email protected] Charles Idehen, Accountant, Department of Administration (406) 444-5584 [email protected]

In house Paul Christofferson, Administrator, State Accounting Division, Department of Administration (406) 444-4609 [email protected] Cody Carter, Accountant, Department of Administration (406) 444-7830 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


91



Weslie Mohling, Acting State Accounting Administrator, Department of Administrative Services (402) 471-0601 [email protected] Bruce Snyder, Financial Reporting Manager, Department of Administrative Services (402) 471-0620

In house Don Stenberg, State Treasurer, State Treasurer's Office (402) 471-2455 Weslie Mohling, Acting State Accounting Administrator, Department of Administrative Services (402) 471-0601 [email protected]


Evan Dale, Admin. Services Manager, Department of Administration (775) 684-0281 [email protected]

Prepared in house with on-call consultant Proprietary; custom integration on Excel file.

Kim R. Wallin, State Controller, Office of the State Controller (775) 684-5632 [email protected]


Edgar R. Carter, Comptroller, Department of Administrative Services (603) 271-3181 [email protected] Karen Hammond, SWCAP Accountant, Department of Administrative Services (603) 271-3508 [email protected]

In house Catherine Provencher, Treasurer, Legislature (603) 271-2621 [email protected]


Charlene M. Holzbaur, Director, OMB, Department of the Treasury (609) 292-6746 [email protected] James F. Kelly, Manager, Treasury - OMB (609) 633-3910 [email protected]

In house Charlene M. Holzbaur, Director, OMB, Department of the Treasury (609) 292-6746 [email protected]


Yvonne Herrera, CAFR Unit Manager, Department of Finance and Administration (505) 476-8536 [email protected] Richard Torrence, CAFR Accountant, Department of Finance and Administration (505) 476-8533 [email protected]

In house James B. Lewis, State Treasurer, Office of the State Treasurer (505) 955-1120 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


92



Robert Brondi, Principal Budget Examiner, Division of the Budget (518) 473-0803 [email protected]

Carolyn Garrison, Chief Budget Examiner, Division of the Budget (518) 474-4855 [email protected] Melody Goetz, Director, Bureau of Accounting Operations, Office of the State Comptroller (518) 474-4017 [email protected]


Randy Thomas, State Management Analyst, Office of the State Controller (919) 981-5488 [email protected]

Consultant Amber Young, Manager, Office of the State Controller (919) 707-0619 [email protected] Angela Johnston, State of NC CMIA Coordinator, Office of the State Controller (919) 707-0668 [email protected]


Pam Sharp, Director of OMB (701) 328-4904 [email protected] Dustin Krueger, Account/Budget Spec III, OMB-Fiscal Management (701) 328-2530 [email protected]

Consultant Rachel Ridl, Accounting Manager, OMB-Fiscal Management (701) 328-1530 [email protected]


Thomas Holsinger, Deputy Director, Accounting Administration, Office of Budget and Management (614) 728-4734 [email protected] Gary Palmer, State Accounting Specialist, Office of Budget and Management (614) 466-6887 [email protected]

In house Excel

Jeff Newman, Chief for Budget Planning, Office of Budget and Management (614) 644-8791 [email protected] Penny Rader, Budget/Management Analyst, Office of Budget and Management (614) 644-8783 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


93



Rochelle Quillman, Federal Grants Coordinator, Office of State Finance (405) 521-4947 [email protected]

Consultant Prepared by consultant based on state submitted data

Preston Doerflinger, Director of State Finance, Office of State Finance (405) 521-2141 [email protected] Jennie Pratt, Accounting Supervisor, Office of State Finance (405) 521-6160 [email protected]


Joy Sebastian, Acting State Controller, Department of Administrative Services (503) 373-0170 [email protected] Kathy Dixon, Senior Accounting Analyst, Department of Administrative Services (503) 373-0730 [email protected]

In house None

Michael Jordan, Director, Department of Administrative Services (503) 373-0914 [email protected] Barbara Homewood, Accounting Analyst, Department of Administrative Services (503) 373-0724 [email protected]

Michael Jordan signs the document; Barbara Homewood prepares the document.


Michael Burns, Director, Bureau of Financial Management, Office of the Budget (717) 265-7287 [email protected]

Consultant: Maximus, Inc. Michael Burns, Director, Bureau of Financial Management, Office of the Budget (717) 265-7287 [email protected] Lauren Dungan, Assistant Director, Office of the Budget (717) 265-7278 [email protected]


Marc Leonetti, State Controller, Office of Accounts & Control (401) 222-2274 [email protected] Peter B. Keenan, Associate Controller, Office of Accounts & Control (401) 222-6408 [email protected]

In house Excel

Marc Leonetti, State Controller, Office of Accounts & Control (401) 222-2274 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


94



David Seigler, Office of State Budget (803) 734-0485 [email protected] Jean Ricard, Office of State Budget (803) 734-1314 [email protected]

In house Paul Jarvis, Senior Assistant Treasurer, State Treasurer's Office (803) 734-2654 [email protected]


Jim Neiles, Director, Executive Management Finance Office, Bureau of Finance and Management (605) 773-3411 [email protected] Ron Olsen, Accounting Manager, Bureau of Finance and Management (605) 773-3411 [email protected]

In house N/A

Jim Neiles, Director, Executive Management Finance Office, Bureau of Finance and Management (605) 773-3411 [email protected]


Annette White, Director of Cash Management, Division of Accounts, Department of Finance and Administration (615) 532-1088 [email protected]

In house Annette White, Director of Cash Management, Division of Accounts, Department of Finance and Administration (615) 532-1088 [email protected]


Denise Francis, Director, State Grants Team, Governor's Office (512) 305-9415 [email protected]

Phillip Ashley, Director, Fiscal Management, Comptroller of Public Accounts (512) 463-4275 [email protected] Peggy Wagman, Accounting Policy Advisor, Comptroller of Public Accounts (512) 305-8636 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q1-2)


95



Marcie Handy, Assistant State Comptroller, Division of Finance, Department of Administrative Services (801) 538-1678 [email protected] Mark Knowlden, Accountant, State Finance, Department of Administrative Services (801) 538-1715 [email protected]

In house John Reidhead, Director, Division of Finance, Department of Administrative Services (801) 538-3020 [email protected] Marcie Handy, Assistant, Comptroller, Department of Administrative Services (801) 538-1678 [email protected]



David A. Von Moll, State Comptroller, Department of Accounts (804) 225-2109 [email protected]

In house Cost Allocation Planning and Performance System (CAPPS). The current system no longer has software support and is being replaced by an internally developed system.




Ross Taylor, State Comptroller, Finance Division, Department of Administration (304) 558-6181 [email protected] Jane Shinn, Financial Accounting and Reporting (304) 558-4083 [email protected]

Combination John Perdue, State Treasurer, Office of the Treasurer (304) 558-5000 [email protected]


Jeff Anderson, Treasury Management Supervisor, State Controller's Office (608) 266-8347 [email protected]

As of fiscal 2012, we no longer prepare section 1 of the SWCAP.



Bret A. Jones, Administrator, Budget Division, Department of Administration and Information [email protected]

Bret A. Jones, Administrator, Budget Division, Department of Administration and Information [email protected]


96


Table 13 FEDERAL LIAISON: STATE OFFICERS CHARGED WITH ARRA AND FFATA

(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


97

State and Office American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 Centralized/Decentralized

and Comments Federal Funding Accountability

and Transparency Act Comments Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

This function is not in the State Comptroller's Office. Handled in another finance department office.

This function is not in the State Comptroller's Office. Handled in another finance department office.


Diane Burnham, Auditor, Governor's OMB (907) 465-4660 [email protected] Craig Kahklen, Policy Analyst, Governor's OMB (907) 465-4660 [email protected]

Decentralized reporting by the individual departments. Reporting information was shared with Alaska's OMB for monitoring purposes.

This is the responsibility of the departments. No centralized reporting responsibility resides in the comptroller's office. Not certain at this time if governor’s OMB will be monitoring this reporting effort.





Bob Jaros, Deputy State Controller, Office of the State Controller (303) 866-3765 [email protected] Jennifer Henry, Internal Audit Manager, Office of the State Controller (303) 866-3809 [email protected]

Centralized Jennifer Henry, Internal Audit Manager, Office of the State Controller (303) 866-3809 [email protected]

Colorado has completely decentralized the FFATA responsibility due to the lack of central service agency resources.




(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


98



and Transparency Act Comments Florida Department of Financial Services

Christina Smith, Director, Division of Accounting and Auditing, Department of Financial Services (850) 413-5510 [email protected] Steve Wilson, Professional Accountant Specialist, Department of Financial Services (850) 413-5643 [email protected]

Decentralized, reported by Florida Department of Transportation

Reporting made by grantee agencies


Janet Arsenault, Accounting Manager (404) 463-1450 [email protected]

Decentralized


Mark Anderson, State Lead ARRA Coordinator, Department of Budget and Finance (808) 587-5372 [email protected]

Mark Anderson, State ARRA Coordinator, Department of Budget and Finance (808) 587-5372 [email protected]


Decentralized


Governor's Office of Management and Budget is responsible for ARRA.



Kim Knight, Fiscal and Policy Analyst, Dept of Admin Services-State Accounting Enterprise (515) 281-6523 [email protected]

No one at this time



John Bailey, Staff Assistant, Office of the Controller (502) 564-7752 [email protected]

N/A


(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


99



and Transparency Act Comments Louisiana Division of Administration

Barry Dusse, Director, Division of Administration (Planning & Budget) (225) 342-7005 [email protected] Dianne Shelmire, ARRA State Coordinator, Division of Administration (OSRAP) (225) 342-0708 [email protected]

Decentralized Steven Procopio, Assistant Commissioner - Management & Finance, Division of Administration (225) 342-7149 [email protected]


Shirley Browne, Director of Internal Audits, Administrative and Financial Services (207) 626-8493 [email protected]

Centralized Shirley Browne, Director of Internal Audit, Administrative and Financial Services (207) 626-8457 [email protected]

Decentralized for FFATA


Mark Sindt, Systems Control Accountant II, General Accounting Division (410) 260-7358 [email protected]

Centralized Mark Sindt, Systems Control Accountant II, General Accounting Division (410) 260-7358 [email protected]





Lora Mikula, Director, Accounting and Financial Reporting Division, State Budget Office (517) 373-0447

Mike Moody, Office Director, State Budget Office (517) 241-0811 [email protected]



Cille Litchfield, DFA Deputy Director, Department of Finance and Administration (601) 359-1433 [email protected] Diane Langham, Director, Office of Fiscal Management, Department of Finance and Administration (601) 359-3405 [email protected]

Decentralized


Celeste Metcalf, Stimulus Compliance Officer, Office of Administration (573) 751-9868 [email protected]

FFATA reporting is not centrally coordinated at this time.


(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


100



and Transparency Act Comments Montana State Accounting Division

Decentralized. The contact is in the governor's office.

The contact is in the governor's office.


Gerry Oligmueller, State Budget Administrator, Department of Administrative Services (402) 471-2526 [email protected] Weslie Mohling, Acting State Accounting Administrator, Department of Administrative Services (402) 471-0600 [email protected]

Centralized


Susan Hart, Chief Deputy Controller, State Controller's Office (775) 684-5658 [email protected]

Susan Hart, Chief Deputy Controller, Office of the Controller (775) 684-5658 [email protected]


Edgar R. Carter, Comptroller, Department of Administrative Services (603) 271-3181 [email protected]


Charlene M. Holzbaur, Director, OMB, Department of the Treasury (609) 292-6746 [email protected]

William Maughan, Supervisor Treasury - OMB (609) 292-5004 [email protected]


Ricky A. Bejarano, State Controller, Department of Finance and Administration (505) 827-3689 [email protected] Kim Korte, Public Information Officer, Department of Finance and Administration (505) 827-3881 [email protected]

Centralized. Currently the office has been disbanded, the reporting is still being done centrally, but there is only a skeleton crew to help run the software purchased to do the reporting.

N/A


Joan Sullivan, Executive Deputy Comptroller, NYS Comptroller's Office (518) 402-4102 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


101



and Transparency Act Comments North Carolina Office of the State Controller

Anne Godwin, Deputy State Controller, NC Office of the State Controller (919) 707-0650 [email protected] John Barfield, Mgr. Accounting and Financial Reporting, NC Office of the State Controller (919) 981-5454 [email protected]

Centralized


Tammy Dolan, Asst Exec Budget Analyst, OMB-Fiscal Management (701) 328-4947 [email protected]

Sheila Peterson, Director of Fiscal Management, OMB-Fiscal Management (701) 328-4905 [email protected]


Lawrence Parson, Budget/Management Analyst, Office of Budget and Management (614) 644-8805 [email protected]

Centralized Lawrence Parson, Budget/Management Analyst, Office of Budget and Management (614) 644-8805 [email protected]


Steve Funck, Deputy Comptroller, Office of State Finance (405) 521-3231 [email protected]

Centralized Rochelle Quillman, Federal Grants Coordinator, Office of State Finance (405) 521-4947 [email protected]


N/A for the State Controller's Office

N/A for State Controller's Division


Richard Cardamone, Director, Bureau of Commonwealth Accounting, Office of the Budget (717) 265-7274 [email protected] Danny Novak, Assistant Director, Federal Accounting Division, Office of the Budget (717) 265-7269 [email protected]

Richard Cardamone, Director, Bureau of Commonwealth, Accounting Office of the Budget (717) 265-7274 [email protected] Danny Novak, Assistant Director, Federal Accounting Division, Office of the Budget (717) 265-7269 [email protected]


Marc Leonetti, State Controller, Office of Accounts & Control (401) 222-2274 [email protected]

Managed at the agency level


Jim Holly, Chief of Staff, Comptroller General's Office (803) 734-2120 [email protected]

Decentralized Jim Holly, Chief of Staff, Comptroller Generals Office (803) 734-2120 [email protected]


(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


102



and Transparency Act Comments South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

Colin Keeler, Director - Financial Systems and Operations, Bureau of Finance and Management (605) 773-3411 [email protected]

Centralized Colin Keeler, Director - Financial Systems and Operations, Bureau of Finance and Management (605) 773-3411 [email protected]


Michelle Earhart, Assistant Director-General Ledger, Department of Finance and Administration (615) 253-6057 [email protected]

Decentralized Michelle Earhart, Assistant Director-General Ledger, Department of Finance and Administration (615) 253-6057 [email protected]


Rob Coleman, Government Relations, Comptroller of Public Accounts (512) 463-7630 [email protected]


Marcie Handy, Assistant Comptroller, Department of Admin Services/Finance (801) 538-1678 [email protected] Lynn Bodrero, Accountant, State Finance, Department of Admin Services (801) 538-3119 [email protected]

Centralized through the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget

Marcie Handy, Assistant Comptroller, Department of Admin Services (801) 538-1678 [email protected] Lynn Bodrero, Accountant, State Finance, Department of Admin Services (801) 538-3119 [email protected]




Decentralized David A. Von Moll, State Comptroller, Department of Accounts (804) 225-2109 [email protected]



Christine Sforza, Manager, Financial Accounting & Reporting, Administration (304) 558-4083 [email protected] Cindy Smith, Administration Manager, Governor's Office (304) 558-3836 [email protected]

Decentralized


(Chapter 5: Q3-4)


103



and Transparency Act Comments Wisconsin Department of Administration


Done in the state budget office


Vicci M. Colgan, Deputy Auditor, State Auditor's Office (307) 777-7831 [email protected]

Joyce Hefenieder, Deputy Director, Administration and Information (307) 777-3335 [email protected]


104



105

Chapter 6. Funding and Staffing the Comptroller’s Office Table 14. Functions in “Comptroller Operations,” Fiscal Year 2012 Forty-one states provided the functions that are the responsibility of the comptroller’s office. Table 15. Funding for the Comptroller’s Office, Fiscal Year 2012 General fund appropriations and fees for services are the two major sources of funding for comptrollers’ operations. Among the 41 responding states, 10 state comptrollers’ offices are funded completely by general fund appropriations, and three offices (Nebraska, Tennessee and Wisconsin) are funded solely by fees for services. In 18 more offices, general fund appropriations provide 50 percent or more of their funding. Five offices (Georgia, Idaho, Montana, Pennsylvania and West Virginia) report that fees for services provide 50 percent or more of their funding. South Dakota is 100 percent SWCAP funded. The remaining four states typically have three or more sources of funding for the comptroller’s office.

0369

121518

100%Approp.

≥ 50%Approp.

100%Fees

≥ 50%Fees

Other

Funding Sources for Comptrollers' Offices

Budgets for comptrollers’ operations vary widely due to variances in the sizes of the states and the range of duties in the offices. In fiscal year 2012, budgets for comptrollers’ operations ranged from $1,566,000 (New Hampshire) to $304,284,000 (New York). Forty state comptrollers’ offices responded. In fiscal year 2012, 13 comptrollers’ offices received additional funding for special projects. The amounts of extra funding for particular projects ranged from $32,328 in Idaho to $47,380,000 in Alaska.

Table 16. Staffing the Comptroller’s Office, Fiscal Year 2012 The numbers of internal and external staff by function are listed in Table 16. Twenty-nine of the 34 responding states indicated that their state has a chief information officer. The number of certified public accountants in the 39 responding state comptrollers’ offices ranged from two in Rhode Island and South Dakota to 125 in New York. The approximate annual staff turnover in the 39 offices that responded ranged from zero percent (Iowa) to 32 percent in Colorado. New Jersey responded that their turnover rate was -1.1 percent and Wyoming provided a range of zero to eight percent. Table 17. Annual Salaries in State Comptrollers’ Offices Table 17 includes salaries and cost-of-living adjustment information as of January 31, 2012. The information is provided for state comptrollers, their deputies and division heads, and other professional staff. Thirty-nine states provided information for this table. Salaries for the responding comptrollers’ offices ranged from $63,408 (Mississippi) to $204,402 (Louisiana). Twenty-seven state comptrollers have annual salaries of $100,000 or more. The salary ranges of deputies, division heads and other professionals vary widely. In states with elected comptrollers, it is not unusual for deputies’ salaries to be higher than the salary of the comptroller. Thirty-eight states responded to the question “To what extent are cost-of-living adjustments built into salary adjustments each year?” The responses show that some states have the rate negotiated as part of the collective bargaining process. Colorado depends upon a survey to ascertain the market pay for each job class. Several states do not give cost-of-living adjustments


106


Table 14 FUNCTIONS IN “COMPTROLLER OPERATIONS,” FISCAL YEAR 2012

(Chapter 6: Q1)


107

State and Office Disb

urse

men

ts

Payr

oll

Pre-

Audi

t

Post

-Aud

it

Oper

atin

g th

e Fin

ancia

l Ma

nage

men

t Sys

tem

Fina

ncial

Rep

ortin

g

Debt

Man

agem

ent

Inve

stm

ent M

anag

emen

t

Inte

rnal

Cont

rol O

vers

ight

Tran

spar

ency

Quali

ty A

ssur

ance

ERP

Syst

em

Resp

onsib

ility

Other Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

X X X X X X


X X X X X Data warehouse, enterprise travel office, and one-card program





X X X X X X X X X Some of the functions are shared with the Office of Information Technology



X X X X X X X X X Payroll compliance (not processing)


X X X X X X X X State treasury – deposit security and funds management, risk management, and unclaimed property


X X X X Building shared service center for payroll, A/P and travel


X X X X X X


X X X X X


X X X X X X X X



X X X X X X X Income offsets, CMIA & SWCAP and 1099 reporting



X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X Planning and budgeting, and facility planning and control (capital outlay)


X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X Tax collection, tax compliance, and revenue estimates


X X X X X X X


X X X X


(Chapter 6: Q1)


108


urse

men

ts

Payr

oll

Pre-

Audi

t

Post

-Aud

it

Oper

atin

g th

e Fin

ancia

l Ma

nage

men

t Sys

tem

Fina

ncial

Rep

ortin

g

Debt

Man

agem

ent

Inve

stm

ent M

anag

emen

t

Inte

rnal

Cont

rol O

vers

ight

Tran

spar

ency

Quali

ty A

ssur

ance

ERP

Syst

em

Resp

onsib

ility

Other Minnesota Management and Budget


X X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X State Social Security administrator


X X X X X Treasury – deposits and recons, local government audit and reporting, and Social Security administrator


X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X


X X X X X X X


X X X X X Accounting and grants management, cash management and cash accounting


X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X


X X X X X X X Accounting and shared services


X X X X X X X X


X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X X Employee travel


X X X X X X X


X X X X X X


(Chapter 6: Q1)


109


urse

men

ts

Payr

oll

Pre-

Audi

t

Post

-Aud

it

Oper

atin

g th

e Fin

ancia

l Ma

nage

men

t Sys

tem

Fina

ncial

Rep

ortin

g

Debt

Man

agem

ent

Inve

stm

ent M

anag

emen

t

Inte

rnal

Cont

rol O

vers

ight

Tran

spar

ency

Quali

ty A

ssur

ance

ERP

Syst

em

Resp

onsib

ility

Other South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X Policy development, technical accounting training, CMIA and certain banking relationships




X X X X X X X X X X Date warehouse, loan servicing, central budget and accounting



X X X X X X X X X



X X X X X Financial audits, securities administration and land commissioner


X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X


110


Table 15 FUNDING FOR THE COMPTROLLER’S OFFICE, FISCAL YEAR 2012

(Chapter 6: Q2-5)


111

State and Office Sources of Funding

Budget for Comptroller Operations

Special Projects, FY 2012

Amount Source Purpose Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

95% general fund 5% fees

$4,250,000


56% general fund 29% fees 10% SWCAP 5% credit card rebate

$12,216,800 operating budget

$47,380,000 capital budget

General fund In FY12 we received an additional $47,380,000 capital appropriation for the statewide administration replacement.





81.1% general fund 5.9% - partly federal – partly state cash funds 13.0%- with applicable credit given in SWCAP procurement card rebates and supplier database

$2,925,965 $93,300 Supplier Database Cash Fund and P-card

To implement 3% withholding. This was operating costs only; no personal services were appropriated. The operating costs did not materialize due to repeal of the 3% withholding requirement.



100% general fund $7,000,000


85% general fund 11% fees SWCAP fees are included in general revenue 4% escheatments

$98,119,918 $525,000 76% general fund 24% trust fund

Three percent withholding on vendor payments project (federal mandate) Three positions to develop and recommend a uniform chart of accounts for reporting among state agencies, local governments, educational entities and entities of higher education Staff augmentation to assist in development of Treasury Cash Management System



$20,000,000


100% general fund $16,000,000


42.3% general fund 57.4% fees 0.3% SWCAP

$13,903,200 $32,328 General fund 218 Referendum


100% general fund $25,566,200




$3,197,680


(Chapter 6: Q2-5)


112




Amount Source Purpose Kansas Office of Management, Analysis and Standards



$16,773,500


3% general fund 17% fees 80% federal (direct)

$112,452,817 N/A


100% general fund $2,256,552


70.9% general fund 11.0% fees, included in general fund 18.1% special fund taxes & licenses

$106,572,147 $430,000 General funds To handle an increased volume of tax collection calls due to a new collection project that requires the payment (or payment plan) of delinquent taxes prior to the renewal of a driver's license or vehicle registration


71.36% general fund 28.64% fees

$11,290,351


77% general fund 23% state restricted

$6,518,700



16% general fund 25% fees 4% SWCAP 6% budget contingency, internal cost allocation & federal 49% bonds

$45,937,418 $22,696,024 Bonds ERP implementation services


100% general fund $2,169,754


37.56% general fund 54.04% fees 0.02% federal - CMIA 8.38% proprietary SWCAP - deposited in GF not tied to expense

$8,599,152 $1,600,000 General fund Funds all investment banking costs. These investments are not managed by the division.


100% fees $4,840,000


100% general fund $4,398,521 1. $50,000 2. $213,272

General fund 1. Creating XBRL reporting capability for Single Audit purposes. 2. Creating XBRL reporting capability for state-wide debt collection.


100% general fund $1,566,000


97% general fund 3% federal

$11,200,000


90% general fund 10% HR assessment fees

$5,415,600


(Chapter 6: Q2-5)


113




Amount Source Purpose New York Office of the State Comptroller

51% general fund 6% special revenue funds 43% internal service funds and fiduciary funds

$304,284,000 for 2012-13


95% general fund 5% intragovernmental transfers (statewide reserve)

$33,001,460 $2,000,000 General fund 1


95% general funds 5% federal funds

$5,889,000 $500,000 General funds Additional PeopleSoft modules


17% general fund 18% fees 60% SWCAP, 4% payment card rebate 1% federal

$26,985,329 $1,358,000 General revenue fund Shared services lines of business implementation


100% general fund $3,836,718


39% fees 61% agency assessment

$8,402,053



$50,951,000 budgeted


100% general fund $3,751,998


64% general fund 36% processing fees

$2,340,000


100% SWCAP


100% fees $11,744,300


99% general fund 1% receipts and contracts

$222,019,483


55.38% general fund 13.33% fees 13.10% SWCAP 13.66% beginning balances 4.53% transportation fund

$9,924,109 $1,355,009 Beginning balance Actuarial study of post-employment benefits; personnel, maintenance, operation, and development of statewide accounting systems, including the state's transparency website and annual GASB assessment




$11,900,000 The commonwealth is embarking upon an ERP system, and the total funding statistics are not yet available.



(Chapter 6: Q2-5)


114




Amount Source Purpose West Virginia Office of the State Auditor

21% general fund 50% fees 5% SWCAP 24% P-card rebate

$14,129,383


100% fees $6,675,100 $100,000 Fees Actuarial study for OPEB for reporting in the CAFR


100% general fund $17,700,000 biennium budget

Notes 1. North Carolina:

Enterprise Electronic Forms and Digital Signatures

Session Law 2011-0145, House Bill 200, directed the state controller to take the necessary measures to enable a coordinated enterprise electronic forms and digital signatures capability. The Office of the State Controller (OSC) has been working with agencies across the state to determine the best approach. While there are intersections between e-forms and digital signatures:

• Automating business processes (e-forms) does not always involve digital signatures. • Digital signatures can be plugged into an automated business process. • Solutions in the marketplace are often separate.

A survey of high-level agency requirements and some of the available mature solutions has led OSC to organize this effort in two projects:

• The Authentication Project focuses on digital signatures, eliminating resource-intensive processes that require agencies, citizens and staff to manually sign documents.

• The Inspections, Licensing and Permitting Automation Capability Project focuses on helping agencies be more efficient while eliminating paper processes by automating complex processes that encompass multiple forms and checkpoints.

North Carolina’s Enterprise Fraud, Waste and Improper Payment Detection Program Session Law 2011, HB 200-145, directed OSC to develop an enterprise process to detect fraud, waste and improper payments across state agencies. The OSC has contracted with SAS to design, develop and host the North Carolina Financial Accountability and Compliance Technology System (NC FACTS) leveraging the SAS Fraud Framework technology. The NC FACTS program will evolve under the guidance of the legislatively created Data Integration Steering Committee in partnership with state agencies having an interest in leveraging integrated data to detect incidents of fraudulent, wasteful or erroneous overpayments in their business areas.

Table 16 STAFFING THE COMPTROLLER’S OFFICE, FISCAL YEAR 2012

(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


115

State and Office

Number of Comptroller Staff Working on Each Function

See N

otes

Internal External

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Po

st-a

udit/

D

isbu

rsem

ents

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Post

-aud

it/

Dis

burs

emen

ts

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning


2 2 9 4 5 7 1


1 3 2 10 5 1 4 8 1 2





2 1 27 6 9 1 5 3 1 3



2 3 5 60


35 32 24 61 14 28 100 33 17 7 9 4


2 6 1 1 1 1 6 12 14 76 3 5


10 15 5 12 18 5 133 4 4 2


(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


116

State and Office


See N

otes

Internal External

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Po

st-a

udit/

D

isbu

rsem

ents

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Post

-aud

it/

Dis

burs

emen

ts

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning


3 3 1 1 2 1 20 2 2 2 2 2 6 5 10 6 29 4 4 3 6


67 28 1 6 7 2 9 44 30 10 1 7



2 1 7 4 3.5 4 3 8



9 85 1 14 5 4 1 6 1 6 9


12 55 2 17 24 4 2 13 169 19 4 13 149 10


3 6 7 5 4 1 1


34.5 10.9 14 15 3 13 74.55 7 32.1 13 3 11


1 5 2 1 2 4 14 9 20 5 6 22 5 9 1 11


4 2 13 16 6 12


(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


117

State and Office


See N

otes

Internal External

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Po

st-a

udit/

D

isbu

rsem

ents

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Post

-aud

it/

Dis

burs

emen

ts

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning



4 12 1 3 13 13 20 14 2 4 7 51 16 2 13


3 3 11 13 11 6 14


4 1 16 6 3 5 15


0.5 0.5 0.4 1 1.5 4.2 2.75 0.5 2.3 10 0.1 0.4 0.75 0.75 16


3 1 0.25 7.75 2 1 1 9 11 17


7 3 7 6 2 6 1 4 18


4 4 27 44 9 19


9 1 8 2 23 8 2 9 9 6 20


115 94 128 30 109 11 256 90 59 15 21


4 3.75 30 2 2 1 13 30 63 4 8 22


(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


118

State and Office


See N

otes

Internal External

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Po

st-a

udit/

D

isbu

rsem

ents

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Post

-aud

it/

Dis

burs

emen

ts

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning



23


1 3 2 2 1 4 6 4 20 2 2 24


1 2.5 6 9 9 5 1.2 7 25


27 25 60 8 145 110 16 104 20 29 2 23 6 12 26


3 1 6 6 3 13 57 5 27


1 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 6 1 7


2 1 8 8 1


1 3 18 70 8 1 9


2 17 36 10 6 24 7 18 18 24 18 7 2


2 3.5 6 1 0.5 23.5 8 24.5 8.75 2.5 1 2 28


(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


119

State and Office


See N

otes

Internal External

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Po

st-a

udit/

D

isbu

rsem

ents

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning

Adm

inis

tratio

n/

Man

agem

ent

Adm

inis

trativ

e Su

ppor

t

Payr

oll

Pers

onne

l

Acco

untin

g

Audi

ting

Fina

ncia

l R

epor

ting

Info

rmat

ion

Tech

nolo

gy

Pre-

audi

t/ D

isbu

rsem

ents

Post

-aud

it/

Dis

burs

emen

ts

Inve

stm

ent

Inte

rnal

Con

trol

Ove

rsig

ht

Trai

ning



10 10 2 12 2 15 13 3 3 7 11 29



10 3 1 1 1 44 15 4 4 20 2 30


1 1 5 9 6 2 3 1


3 2 5 1 4 4 5 1 3 2 2 4 4 5 5

Notes 1. Alabama: Internal – Agency distribution / data operations 5, Fiscal management 3 and Receipts 5.

2. Alaska: Internal – Project management and subject matter experts for system implementation 15. External – E-travel office 1 and Systems administration and

security for statewide systems 9.

3. Colorado: External – Contract policy, management and approval

4. Florida: Internal – State Treasury - deposit security and fund management 20.5, includes maintain security for Florida public entity deposits, employee deferred compensation program, management of state funds through centralized depository and paying financial institutions. Unclaimed property 54, the CFO holds unclaimed moneys, securities and tangible property for citizens of the state. There is no statute of limitations and owners have the right to claim their property any time at no cost. Risk management 69, self-insurance claims administration for state’s agencies and universities.


(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


120

5. Georgia: External – Vendor management 3, Travel 3 and Accounting policy 1.

6. Idaho: Internal – Idaho business intelligence solution 1. External – Idaho business intelligence solution 1.

7. Illinois: Internal – Mailroom 11, Cemetery care and burial 23 and Processing all agency payrolls 17.

8. Iowa: External – Income offsets 3 and Operating financial management systems 6.

9. Kentucky: Internal – Central purchase for all agencies 18, Management of short and long-term debt 8, Fiscal agency services for local governments 12 and Fire and tornado risk pool 12.

10. Louisiana: Internal – Planning and budget 11 and Facility planning and control (capital outlay except for Department of Transportation and Development) 2. External – Planning and budget 26 and Facility planning and control (capital outlay except for Department of Transportation and Development) 62.

11. Maryland: Internal – Tax collection 380.2, Tax compliance 432.25 and Revenue estimates 6.

12. Massachusetts: Internal – Help desk 9 and Website support 2.

13. Mississippi: External – Purchasing and fleet management 8, Appropriation control 6 and Records management, SWCAP and ARRA 5.

14. Missouri: Internal – Social Security administration 2.

15. Montana: Internal – Social Security administrator 1, works directly under the administrator (controller) with local governments and the federal government on section 218 issues. External – Warrant writer maintain state vendor files, provide assistance relating to payment process, reconcile the payments to the bank, research warrant issues (attempted frauds, bad check numbers, etc.). Other 4, treasury receive deposits from state agencies, make wire transfers, reconcile state bank accounts, work with the bank, work with and provide information to the Board of Investments and work with agencies on deposit issues.

16. Nebraska: External – Payments / disbursements 1.1, ARRA review 2 and Grants 1.55.

17. Nevada: Internal – Vendor services 3. External – Accounts receivable / debt collection management 4.

18. New Hampshire: Internal – SWCAP 1.

19. New Jersey: Internal – Cash management 6.

20. New Mexico: Internal – Disbursement of legislative appropriations 2.

21. New York: Internal – Contracts bureau / unclaimed funds 282, Employee retirement system 753 and Special duty for NYC, oil spill fund, states services and legal 116.


(Chapter 6: Q6-21)


121

22. North Carolina: External – HR/payroll shared services center 31, HR/Payroll planning functions and management, and the North Carolina Accounting System call center. E-commerce initiatives 1, since the passage of NC Senate Bill 222 in 1999, the NC Office of the State Controller (OSC) has taken the lead in expanding the state’s electronic commerce program, specifically as it pertains to payments. The program has two primary components: Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) Services and Merchant Card Program (credit and debit cards). The utilization of e-commerce has allowed the state to continue toward its goal of shifting away from a paper-based environment, for both outbound and inbound payments. This site provides the framework for the state’s Enterprise Electronic Commerce Program. Criminal Justice Law Enforcement Automated Data Service (CJLEADS) project 11, CJLEADS is a software application that integrates data currently stored in state criminal justice databases in an effort to provide comprehensive information on an offender through a single portal secured network for use by state and local government criminal justice professionals. CJLEADS has two primary objectives: (1) to provide comprehensive information of an offender in an easy to use format for law enforcement officers, magistrates, prosecutors, judges and other criminal justice professionals who rely on the information in making decisions that impact public safety and; (2) to provide an “offender watch” capability to alert criminal justice professionals when an offender has a change in status within the criminal justice system so that they may take appropriate action. The North Carolina Office of State Controller was tasked by the NC General Assembly to pilot this application in one county and then roll the application statewide. Once complete, the project will be turned over to another state agency, most likely the NC Department of Justice.

23. Ohio: External – Shared services 66, Office of Health transformation 5, Budget development and management 27, Debt management 4 and Financial supervision 1.

24. Oklahoma: External – Shared services: budgeting, accounts payable, reconciliations and reporting 12.

25. Oregon: Internal – Statewide financial management services 16.

26. Pennsylvania: Internal – Budget, policy, and communications 3 and Call center and contract review with payable services 50.

27. Rhode Island: internal – Fixed assets 3 and Supplier 1.

28. Utah: Internal – Coordination of posting financial data to the state’s transparency website by local entities 1. External – Purchasing card administration 1 and State debt collection 5.

29. Virginia: Internal – Electronic commerce 7 and Financial system replacement initiative 2. External – Payroll service bureau 24.

30. West Virginia: Internal – Securities / land / local government 22 and E-commerce / communication 12. External – Purchase card 20.

31. Wisconsin: External – Treasury management 4, Capital accounting / debt payment 5 and Federal cash draw 2.

32. Wyoming: Internal – maintain agency vendor file 2. External – maintain agency vendor file 2.


122


Table 16a STAFFING THE COMPTROLLER’S OFFICE: TRAINING AND STAFF TURNOVER

(Chapter 6: Q13, 22-24)


123

State and Office Description of Training State CIO?

Total # of Staff

Number of CPAs Annual Turnover


Yes 42 4 20%


Accounting system and data warehouse training. Yes 60 2 17%



385 15 12%



Training is provided by the controller's office to other state agencies by each of the functions in this portion of the questionnaire. Training includes contracts, GAAP, budget implementation, payroll, 1099, ARRA and other topics.

Yes 26 6 32% last year - 25% the year before


Yes 89 5 - 6.74%



Div. of Accounting and Auditing: Training is conducted for the state's financial and cash management system and contract management for agency staff and service providers. Div. of Risk Management: Safety awareness and loss prevention.

Yes 474.5 16 13%


Yes 122 8 Varies between 5%-10%


Yes 12 3 2%


Payroll and accounting applications, FYE procedures and the CAFR 82 3 8.5%


257 13 3%



32 9 0%



Centralized financial, budgeting and purchasing training provided to all state agencies.

6 9 10%


The state relies heavily on computer-based training. Yes 688 13 10.39%


Yes 26 8 15%


1,110 9 4.25%


117 4 Less than 5%


Variety of computer applications and other subject matters Yes 51 8 5%



(Chapter 6: Q13, 22-24)


124


Total # of Staff



Yes 181 9 5%


Yes 49 3 8%


Training is not provided by a specific individual but is provided by staff within the Accounting, Financial Reporting and IT staff.

42 (5 are vacant)

10 19%


Pre-audit and internal control, mixed in with general accounting concepts and principles

Yes 30.3 4 10%


Training for accounting system No 40 7 15%


Appropriation, accounts payable, accounts receivable and grants 22 6 5


Yes 94 7 -1.1%


No official training assigned, entire division will perform training as needed.

Yes 57 5 10%


Yes 2,643 125 11%


We have 4 FTE's supporting training for BEACON University, the State of North Carolina's new Human Resource/Payroll system. Training will be for agency personnel professionals and other individuals involved with using the new HR/Payroll system. The staff now includes permanent employees and temporary employees.1

203.75 14 10.215


Yes 23 7 9%


Financial and budget systems training. Fiscal officer training. New hire and skills training

Yes 218 15 19%


38 14 3%


Payroll, Datamart, financial systems Yes 46.5 8 5%


Budget and accounting processes, career development program, audit and accounting topics, leadership and soft skills, Microsoft Office products

527, filled positions as of January 31, 2012

26 15%. hiring freeze in 2009-10


Yes 36 2 10


Training is conducted in collaboration with other agencies that pool internal and external resources.

25 6 12%


No 13 2 10%


Yes 82 20 6.4 %


Yes Authorized - 3,001.6


(Chapter 6: Q13, 22-24)


125


Total # of Staff



Financial, payroll and data warehouse systems training. 88 14 9%


We have a Customer Support Center in place that assist external state departments on using our Statewide Accounting and Budgeting systems

Yes 32 4 0-5%


110 24 12%


Accounting systems, financial reporting systems, contract system and policies, budget systems, budget processes, statewide accounting policies and procedures (compliance, internal control), GAAP, payroll policies and federal grants

Yes 327 10 8.1%


165 12 4-5%


Accounting system 41 9 5%


25 3

Notes 1. North Carolina: We have 4 FTE that help provide training for Criminal Justice Law Enforcement Automated Data

Services (CJLEADS). In 2008, the North Carolina General Assembly initiated the Criminal Justice Data Integration Program with the mandate to create a statewide crime analysis system designed to save time, save money, and save lives. Since the project’s inception, the Office of State Controller (OSC) has managed CJLEADS and has worked with SAS as a vendor partner and in collaboration with criminal justice organizations in the State of North Carolina and Wake County, to develop and implement the Criminal Justice Law Enforcement Automated Data Services (CJLEADS) system. Consistent with the Legislature’s intent to serve criminal justice professionals and improve the safety of North Carolina’s citizens, CJLEADS has two primary objectives:

1. To provide a comprehensive view of an offender through a single application, allowing for positive identification of an offender through a photographic image.

2. 2. To provide an “offender watch” capability to alert criminal justice professionals when an offender has a change in status.


126


Table 17 ANNUAL SALARIES IN STATE COMPTROLLERS’ OFFICES

(Chapter 6: Q25-26)


127

State and Office Comptroller’s

Position Chief Deputy Other Deputies Division Head Other Positions and Salaries Cost-of-Living Adjustments Built Into Annual Salary Adjustments?


$131,632 $86,390 – $131,632 $80,287 - $122,232 $69,098 - $105,403 Salary pay ranges are 18 steps. Normally a satisfactory annual evaluation allows a 2-step pay increase within the pay range. However, annual step raises have been frozen for 4 calendar years (2009-2012) due to lower than expected state revenues from the post 2008 economic downturn.


$115,200 $90,072 – $138,804 $84,156 - $129,156 Same as comptroller position

Various salary schedules are based upon the region, which is to reflect the cost of living in that area as compared to other areas in the state.





$126,540 $79,944 – $122,760 2 Controller III's: $86,004 - $122,760

6 Controller II's: $76,140 - $109,764; 1 Controller I: $67,536 - $97,416; 2 Accountant III: $58,332 - $84,144; 5 Accountant II: $46,740 - $67,404; 3 Accountant I: $42,408 - $61,164

The Department of Personnel and Administration does a survey of payroll surveys to establish market pay for each job class and makes a recommendation for salary range for each job class to the legislature. The legislature funds the salary survey recommendation at its discretion. In times of declining state revenue the salary survey has been permanently not implemented.




$128,972 $150,000 $82,000 - $120,000 $100,000 - $115,000 Cost-of-living adjustments are not automatically included in salary adjustments. The legislature last approved a general salary increase for fiscal year 2006-2007.


$148,000 $135,000 $99,000 - $125,000 Salary adjustments are performance based.


$109,000 $100,000 $72,000 - $118,000 None


(Chapter 6: Q25-26)


128




$93,756 $95,014 – $106,080 $66,290 - $95,014 $87,290 - $95,014 Fiscal officer: $55,556 - $92,580; Financial manager: $48,131 - $80,204; Financial specialists 1, 2 and seniors: $32,385 - $57,470; IT programmers, analysts, managers: $34,486 - $99,673; IT LAN positions: $44,886 - $74,817; Other IT: $28,724 - $69,888

Cost-of-living increases are normally not given.


$135,669 $135,960 $111,240 - $125,660 $70,000 - $117,330 N/A



$121,284 $74,027 – $105,373 This is part of the contract bargaining.



$106,150 $88,000 $72,000 - $112,000 $60,000 - $100,000 Accountants: $30,000 - $70,000; Auditors: $32,000 - $75,000; Financial analysts: $32,000 - $75,000

No salary increases are budgeted for the next two years, not-withstanding a 5 percent increase by statute.


$204,402 $190,550 $101,338 - $146,400 $103,792 - $159,016 Attorney - general counsel: $66,716 - $140,358; State planning/budget director: $76,336 - $160,680; Information technology director: $167,000

Cost-of-living adjustments are not recognized. Merit increases are provided for satisfactory performance when included in the budget. However, merit increases have not been budgeted for 2 years.


$90,355 $84,801 $74,297 $63,502 None at this point


$125,000 $154,235 $92,640 - $123,708 Program manager senior (all functions): $84,436 - $102,180; Revenue administrator (tax collections): $48,250 - $66,089; Revenue administrator (tax compliance): $43,337 - $66,627; Field enforcement agent (tax compliance): $54,426 - $60,580; Data processing programmer analyst (information technology): $52,950 - $68,508

As appropriated by the legislature


(Chapter 6: Q25-26)


129




$159,308 $109,660 - $125,244 Bureau director: $85,490 - $105,750 Only if pre-approved by the Executive Office of Administration and Finance or Bargaining Unit Agreement


$128,000 $108,000 - $117,000 Cost-of-living adjustments are set annually. For FY12, the adjustment was 3 percent.



$63,408 - $110,965

$53,601 - $110,788 There are no annual cost-of-living adjustments for state employees.


$95,288 $83,504 No automatic COLAs. COLAs must be appropriated by the legislature.


$87,213 Bureau chiefs/managers: $67,500 - $84,500; IT staff: $58,750 - $70,500; Financial reporting staff: $42,000 - $50,100; Auditors: $52,000 - $54,500

None for FY 2012 or into the foreseeable future.


Vacant $58,111 - $87,166 $54,057 - $81,087 Financial systems coordinator: $46,775 - $70,165; Operations supervisor: $43,512 - $65,268; Accountant III: $40,471 - $57,668; Auditor: $36,040 - $51,347; Accountant II: $35,019 - $49,901; Accounting clerk II: $25,309 - $36,123

Technically they are not. There usually is one annual increase which takes COLA's into consideration.


$97,000 Up to $107,465 Up to $87,773 IT manager: $61,950 - $93,187; Chief accountant: $59,194 - $88,948; CAFR accountant II: $64,707 - $97,593 These are the published salaries; however, all salaries have been temporarily reduced by five percent because of furlough days.

COLA's are determined every biennium by the legislature when setting the budget. Depending on the state's economic outlook, there may be no COLA at all given. No COLA's were granted for FY10 and FY11. In fact employees have seen pay cuts of 5 percent through furlough days in FY10 and FY11. For FY12 and FY13, pay cuts of 5 percent remained in effect through a combination of salary reductions and furlough days.


$105,000 $98,000 $76,000 All positions


(Chapter 6: Q25-26)


130




$133,500 $129,200 $121,000 $115,000 None


$100,000 $99,588 - $85,167 $84,676 average See comptroller Cost-of-living adjustments are determined and approved by the legislature each year. The funding is then disbursed to each agency based on the approved formula and the number of employees. Any other salary adjustments are determined by the agency. Currently, it has been three years since the last COLA was given.


$151,500 $151,700 $148,625 $131,681 Raises are negotiated between the Governor's Office of Employee Relations and various state unions for most employees (usually around 3 percent per year). Elected officials' salaries are established by statute.


$153,319 $141,912 $113,063 - $119,135 Managers and staff: $35,337 - $117,330 The state of North Carolina has not issued cost-of-living increases since July 1, 2008.



$150,000 $134,000 $117,000 $98,000 - $115,000 Internal audit chief: $115,000; Shared services lead: $110,000; Deputy director of operations: $103,000; Deputy director, accounting administration: $98,000

COLAs are not built into salary adjustments.


$99,996 $76,500 $68,250 - $80,000 None. Adjustments can be made based on market study or legislative authorization.


$106,974 $69,072 - $101,880 Section managers: $62,736 - $92,388 The annual salary ranges have not been adjusted for the seven unpaid furlough days that are taken annually.

COLA adjustments are not automatically built in to salary adjustments. They are determined by the collective bargaining process and budgeting process every two years.


$128,564 $90,661 - $125,000 Controlled by Governor's Office

$79,433 - $120,744 $62,807 - $108,988 All management will receive a 1 percent cost of living raise in 2012.


$119,343


(Chapter 6: Q25-26)


131




$92,007 $100,000 - $145,000 $85,000 - $107,000 COLAs are determined each year by the state legislature. In some budget cycles, state employee COLA's are provided. No cost of living increases were provided in the last three budget periods.


Approximately $75,000

Accounting analysts: $35,000 - $55,000 Cost-of-living adjustments are at the discretion of the legislature.


$117,156 $80,412 - $144,912 Fiscal directors (various): $44,124 - $108,120;

Accounting professionals: $33,000 - $65,364;

Accounting paraprofessionals: $23,676 - $42,876

There are no cost-of-living adjustments.


$150,000 $158,878 - $262,148 $98,000 - $155,000 $108,516 - $140,000 It varies each legislative cycle. There are no cost-of-living increases budgeted during fiscal years 2010-2011.


$126,214 $75,400 - $113,235 $71,406 - $107,266 No cost-of-living adjustments are built in. Any cost-of-living increase must be considered and approved by the legislature each year.



$140,671 $91,324 - $187,430 $69,907 - $143,470 No COLAs since November 25, 2007



$95,000 $80,000 - $100,000 $70,000 - $80,000 $50,000 - $70,000 None


$109,000 $95,000 $115,000 No automatic increase


$92,000 $119,814 $70,500 CAFR - $97,492 Technical division head: $112,061; Financial system/training division head: $97,589; Payroll system/internal support group div. head: $80,184

None


132



133

Chapter 7. Consultants, Foregone Initiatives, Legislation and Demographics Table 18. Use of Consultants and Foregone Initiatives Thirty-four of the 40 offices that provided information report that consultants have been used in the past two years. Louisiana reported the highest total expenditure for consultants, with $120,466,899 for infrastructure and a medical center. Fourteen of the 22 states that responded provided information about initiatives their state is foregoing based on budget constraints. Table 19. Recent Legislation and Demographic Data Twenty state comptrollers reported that legislation was passed within the past two years or is anticipated to be enacted in 2012 that will affect their roles or functions. Demographic data about the states are presented in the last four columns of Table 18 to provide a better understanding of the environment in which each state comptroller works. The table includes the state population along with the number of people employed by the state’s government and the number employed by the state’s college and university system. Finally, each state’s total revenue for all governmental fund types for fiscal year 2011 is reported. Of the 39 responding states, North Dakota (8,149) and South Dakota (8,174) have the smallest number of state government employees (excluding personnel at the state’s colleges and universities). At the high end of the range, two states have state government workforces that number over 100,000 employees: Florida (110,728) and New York (153,922).

State Employees 2011

< 10,000

10,000 ‐29,999

30,000 ‐49,999

50,000 ‐69,999

≥ 70,000

Twenty-three states reported the numbers of employees in their college and university systems. The numbers range from 4,670 in South Dakota to 82,462 in North Carolina. Thirty-nine states provided their total revenues in all governmental funds for fiscal year 2011. The revenues ranged from $3,523,224,000 in South Dakota to $133,323,000,000 in New York. Two states (Hawaii and New Hampshire) in addition to South Dakota reported total revenue under $5 billion. Eight additional states had revenue for fiscal year 2011 under $10 billion. At the other end of the range, three states in addition to New York reported revenue in all governmental funds in excess of $50 billion: Florida ($67 billion), Illinois ($51 billion) and Pennsylvania ($60 billion).


134


Table 18 USE OF CONSULTANTS AND FOREGONE INITIATIVES

(Chapter 7: Q1-5)


135

State and Office Comptroller’s Use of Consultants, Past Two Years

Initiatives the State is Foregoing Based on Budget Constraints Total Cost Purpose or Project, Cost, Time and Status Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

(1) Time and Attendance System, $10-$12 million estimated over 5 years, 2 years + project, ongoing. (2) Replace central and agency accounting systems, no start date specified, funding not secured. (3) Replace state payroll/personnel system, no start date specified, funding not secured.

Yes, Alabama is delaying all new financial initiatives other than the Time and Attendance System project, due to major budgetary constraints.


$4,500,000 (1) ERP - We have contracted with a vendor to replace our legacy financial and payroll systems for the state, $70 million (includes 10-year maintenance and system support), July 2011 - January 2016, ongoing. (2) Timekeeping - we have contracted with a vendor to implement a timekeeping system for the state, $4.5 million, July 2009 - June 2013, ongoing.

Current initiatives consume capacity of staff, and additional automation initiatives are not being pursued.





(1) COFRS (accounting system) modernization, $42.5 million over five years, vendor dependent - two years targeted, ongoing. (2) Improve contracts central approval process, 2-FTE $160,000, one year and ongoing.

Yes, most capital projects including controlled (deferred) maintenance



$123,183 (does not include system implementation)


$1,952,600 (1) Three percent withholding on vendor payments - with federal requirement removed, we are using the developments made to improve W-9 and 1099 reporting processes, ongoing. (2) Develop an integrated Treasury Cash Management System to provide staff the tools needed to securely manage more than $83 billion in annual deposits, $475,000, 5 years, ongoing. (3) Agency contract reporting and accountability system, 2 years, ongoing.

Replacement of state-wide accounting and financial reporting system


(1) Foundational accounting - improvements in accounting and reporting, $1,350,000, 15 months, completed. (2) Hyperion financial management - improvements in financial reporting, $600,000, 4 months, completed. (3) Shared services, TBD, ongoing.


(Chapter 7: Q1-5)


136


Initiatives the State is Foregoing Based on Budget Constraints Total Cost Purpose or Project, Cost, Time and Status Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services

$0


$96,933 (1) Redesign and deploy replacement of network infrastructure to facilitate virtualization, business continuity, and simplification, $400,000, 2+ years, ongoing. (2) Implement electronic storage solution to replace mainframe tape storage, $350,000, 2+ years, completed.

Transparency, fraud hot-line, modernization of legacy accounting and payroll systems


$792,975 (1) Rewrite of the state's Comprehensive Annual Financial Reporting System, $330,100, 2 years, ongoing. (2) Redesign of the state's Cemetery Care and Burial Trust Database, $141,480, 2 years, ongoing. (3) GAAP and Financial Reporting (FY10 and FY11), $75,410, 2 years, ongoing.

State is foregoing the implementation of a new statewide GAAP compliant financial reporting system due to budget constraints.



$0



$4,000,000 (1) Software upgrade, $4,000,000, 24 months, ongoing.


$120,466,899 (1) TIMED (Transportation Infrastructure Model for Economic Development). Program includes widening 536 miles of state highways to 4 lands on 11 project corridors, widening and/or new construction on 3 major bridges and improvements to both the Port of New Orleans and Louis Armstrong International Airport. $5 billion, 1989 - 2013, ongoing. (2) University Medical Center in New Orleans - the original structure was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, $991,696,000, 2008 - 2014, ongoing. (3) The I-49 North project is a 36-mile project that will construct a four-lane interstate from I-220 in Shreveport, LA to the Arkansas state line, $622 million, 2010 - 2013, ongoing.

All of the administration's initiatives are being funded.


$70,000 (1) Annual SWCAP plan, $35,000, annual, ongoing.


$2,145,400 (1) Statewide audit, $6,450,560, 5 years, ongoing. (2) Tax database consulting, $255,000, 5 years, ongoing.

None specifically identifiable


$8,000,000 (1) Cash management project - bringing cash management functions from the State Treasurer's Office onto CGI Advantage product, $1.8M, 24 - 36 months, completed. (2) MassDOT - consolidation of functions under one Massachusetts Department of Transportation, $500,000, completed. (3) PartnerNet - creating a secure web application for large scale financial file transfers to and from agencies, $90,144, 9 months, ongoing.

Software upgrades - rolling out new functionality with existing ERP


(Chapter 7: Q1-5)


137


Initiatives the State is Foregoing Based on Budget Constraints Total Cost Purpose or Project, Cost, Time and Status Michigan Office of Financial Management

$100,000 (1) SWCAP preparation, $50,000/year, ongoing.



$7,224,913 (1) MAGIC - Mississippi's Accountability System for Government Information and Collaboration is Mississippi's project for the purchase and implementation of an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) solution. Started February 2008, ongoing. (2) BRICKS - Building and Real Estate Information Collaborative Knowledge Solution - is a collaborative effort of several DFA offices to implement a web-based, comprehensive software solution to manage the construction and maintenance of state owned buildings. Will also include Facilities Maintenance for the Capitol Complex. Started in February 2009, completed. (3) KPMG has assisted the state in monitoring state agency internal controls for compliance with the rules and regulations of ARRA for agencies receiving ARRA grants, about 2 1/2 years, ongoing.


$0 (1) Refinance existing state bonds for economic savings, $400,000 of bond proceeds, 6 months, ongoing. (2) Centralize debt management/tax-exempt compliance for the state, absorbed, year, ongoing. (3) Revise capitalization threshold (currently third lowest in nation) to gain administrative efficiencies, absorbed, year, ongoing.

There are several initiatives, mostly related to technology upgrades, that would become higher priorities if funding was available.


$177,070 (1) Ongoing budget system support. (2) Local government database project, $150,000, 2 years, ongoing. (3) Budget system upgrade, $1,000,000, 2.5 years, ongoing.

Transparency - this has not been approved based on potential costs.


$656,500 (1) Integrate EnterpriseOne (financial & payroll) with Workday (HR & Benefits), ongoing. (2) Enhancement projects to EnterpriseOne requested by various agencies, ongoing.

None


$8,000 (1) XBRL system for debt collection and reporting, $275,000, 3 years, ongoing. (2) XBRL reporting capability for Single Audit requirements, $50,000, 1.5 years, ongoing. (3) Training facility for statewide financial system users, $167,000, one-time and annually, ongoing.

Lower class size and pre-K education for at risk populations


$30,000 (1) Establish post audit stat sampling methodology, internally funded, 1 year, ongoing. (2) Automation of CAFR statement preparation, $100,000, 1 year, ongoing.


$1,897,712 (1) FY11 Single Audit, $831,480, 10 months, completed. (2) FY10 Single Audit, $1,066,232, 10 months, completed.

No


(Chapter 7: Q1-5)


138


Initiatives the State is Foregoing Based on Budget Constraints Total Cost Purpose or Project, Cost, Time and Status New Mexico Financial Control Division

$438,108 (1) Operational activities - review of the CAFR, state General Fund audit; completion of the SWCAP, $130,000, occurs each year, completed. (2) Assessment of state-wide Cash Reconciliation Assessment of CAFR audit, $100,000, 2 months, ongoing.

None


(1) SFS project to redesign accounting system, ongoing.


$171,420 1 Before the present economic downturn in 2008, the office was proceeding with plans to build a new integrated accounting, budget, purchasing and grant system to go along with our new Human Resource and Payroll system. The North Carolina General Assembly authorized general fund dollars for a study which stated the new system would cost around $345 million dollars.


$111,560 No


$1,071,802 (1) Assist in the configuration and operation of financials system, $608,829, 12 months, ongoing. (2) Special counsel - debt management, $48,994, 3 months, completed. (3) Reporting writing for PeopleSoft Budget and Planning module, $44,665, 6 months, ongoing.


$348,745 (1) Business Intelligence reporting tool used for ARRA reporting and other reports, comptroller costs = $100,000; IT department costs = $150,000, $250,000, 18 months, ongoing.


$6,652.63 (1) Accounting system changes due to GASB 54, $45,000, completed. (2) Payroll system changes due to employees now paying part of their health insurance premiums, $185,000, ongoing. (3) Planning and executing mandatory budget reductions, $45,000, ongoing.

Due to FTE and expenditure cuts, there are numerous initiatives that are subject to review for elimination.


$3,672,809 (1) HayGroup OPEB actuarial services, $61,050, 2 years, ongoing. (2) MAXIMUS, SWCAP services, $45,000, 1 year, ongoing. (3) Equaterra, payroll services study, $50,000, 6 months, completed.

Yes. New initiatives have been deferred if consultants are needed.


$4,000


$239,375 (1) Implementation of a statewide enterprise information system, $82,400,000, 7 years projected end 2013, ongoing. (2) Retiring of statewide accounting system currently running parallel to enterprise information system, $0, 2 years projected end 2013, ongoing. (3) Information technology equipment upgrade, $60,000, completion date of 9/1/12, ongoing.


(Chapter 7: Q1-5)


139


Initiatives the State is Foregoing Based on Budget Constraints Total Cost Purpose or Project, Cost, Time and Status South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

$0 N/A


$800,000 Approximately

(1) Efficiently closing the fiscal year under new ERP system, $608,000 within existing resources, 1 year, ongoing. (2) Actuarial services for planning, budgeting, accounting and financial reporting purposes. The comptroller's office is reimbursed by the specific fund or department requiring the actuarial services, $1,700,000, 6 years, ongoing.

No



$202,629 (1) Upgrade the time sheet entry and approval screens on the statewide payroll system for employee self-service, $58,800, 6 months, completed. (2) Study statewide accounts payable practices to pave the way for a statewide automated payables system, $55,000, 6 months, completed. (3) Automate workflow for travel forms and reimbursement, $60,000, 9 months, ongoing.



$0



$0


$0 Replacement business systems


$0 (1) Creating efficiencies in office procedures and policies where possible, ongoing. (2) Looking at ways to more efficiently use accounting software and possibly eliminate customizations, ongoing.

Yes, having to look at projects existing staff can accomplish without looking to outside consultants for assistance. Also, tabling some projects completely due to budget constraints.


(Chapter 7: Q1-5)


140

Notes 1. North Carolina

1) North Carolina’s Enterprise Fraud, Waste and Improper Payment Detection Program

Session Law 2011, HB 200-145, directed OSC to develop an enterprise process to detect fraud, waste, and improper payments across state agencies. The OSC has contracted with SAS to design, develop and host the North Carolina Financial Accountability and Compliance Technology System (NC FACTS) leveraging the SAS Fraud Framework technology. The NC FACTS program will evolve under the guidance of the legislatively created Data Integration Steering Committee in partnership with state agencies having an interest in leveraging integrated data to detect incidents of fraudulent, wasteful or erroneous overpayments in their business areas, $9,000,000, 3 years, ongoing.

2) Enterprise Electronic Forms and Digital Signatures

Session Law 2011-0145, House Bill 200, directed the state controller to take the necessary measures to enable a coordinated enterprise electronic forms and digital signatures capability. The Office of the State Controller (OSC) has been working with agencies across the state to determine the best approach. While there are intersections between e-forms and digital signatures:

Automating business processes (e-forms) does not always involve digital signatures. Digital signatures can be plugged into an automated business process. Solutions in the marketplace are often separate.


The Authentication Project focuses on digital signatures, eliminating resource-intensive processes that require agencies, citizens, and staff to manually sign documents.

The Inspections, Licensing and Permitting Automation Capability Project focuses on helping agencies be more efficient while eliminating paper processes by automating complex processes that encompass multiple forms and checkpoints, $4,000,000, 3 years, ongoing.

3) Criminal Justice Law Enforcement Automated Data Services

Session Law 2008-107, H.B. 2436 recognized the need for state-of-the-art integrated criminal justice information and directed the NC Office of the State Controller and the State Chief Information Officer, among others, to develop and implement a statewide criminal justice data integration pilot program for Wake County. The NC Office of State Controller partnered with SAS to develop the Criminal Justice Law Enforcement Automated Data Services, CJLEADS. CJLEADS is a software application that integrates data currently stored in state criminal justice databases in an effort to provide comprehensive information on an offender through a single portal secured network for use by state and local government criminal justice professionals. CJLEADS has two primary objectives: 1) to provide comprehensive information of an offender in an easy to use format for law enforcement officers, magistrates, prosecutors, judges and other criminal justice professionals who rely on the information in making decisions that impact public safety and; 2) to provide an “offender watch” capability to alert criminal justice professionals when an offender has a change in status within the criminal justice system so that they may take appropriate action. Once complete, this new tool will be handed over to another state agency (the mostly likely candidate is the NC Department of Justice), $27,000,000, 3 years, ongoing.

Table 19 RECENT LEGISLATION AND DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

(Chapter 7: Q6-11)


141

State and Office Recent Legislation Affecting the Comptroller’s Office

Demographic Data at January 31, 2012 Total Revenues,

All Governmental Funds, FY 11 (000) State’s Population

# Employed by State Government, Excluding Colleges/Universities

# Employed by State Colleges & Universities


Reduced state appropriations due to revenue shortfalls resulted in staff losses. Act signed May 15, 2012 granting comptroller broad fee authority and requiring posting all state agency and educational institutions (trade schools, 2 and 4 year colleges) contract requests for proposals (RFPs) in a public accessible online database.

4,802,740 36,568 0 $19,652,008


2010-2012 implementation performed regarding HB 65, which clarifies the responsibility of those who handle confidential information (such as SSNs) and requires notification to all individuals potentially affected by security breaches. Implementation of the Affordable Care Act of 2010, which requires the reporting of the cost of coverage under an employer-sponsored group health plan on an employee’s W-2 for CY 2012.

722,190 18,042 8,444 $19,207,631





Enacted a recovery audit requirement that is currently in process. Legislature is currently considering authorizing revenue bond financing of unemployment insurance deficit with the Federal Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund. The legislature recently passed an expansion of the state version of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. It also passed a bill unwinding our pay date shift (deferral into the following year) for a small portion of employees (bi-weekly paid).

5,117,000 30,401 (paycheck count - includes 2,949 part-time)

71,173 (paycheck count- includes 44,538 part-time)

$17,308,663



885,122


(Chapter 7: Q6-11)


142







CFO may issue rules requiring payments to vendors be made by electronic means, with certain exceptions. Agencies to report to CFO all contracts and agreements for commodities or contractual services and CFO is responsible for the development and maintenance of a publicly accessible contract management system. The system will enable users to perform queries based on multiple conditions. The system is to contain contract information and images of contracts and validate information from the state's accounting system. Development of statewide chart of accounts for reporting by state agencies, local governments, educational entities and entities of higher education. New requirement for employees to contribute a portion of their salary for state retirement.

18,905,048 110,728 N/A $67,391,440


Remaining controller functions from Office of Insurance to SAO. SAO will be responsible for approving issuance of allotment warrants from Office of State Treasurer.

9,800,000 65,187 at June 30, 2011 79,174 at June 30, 2011 $33,500,000


1,300,000 56,000 12,000 $4,800,000


House bill 661 removes $452,300 in fiscal year 2010. 1,587,000 15,760 9,496 $6,602,443


Public Act 97-0632: Any person entitled payment from the state of Illinois, who also owes money to a participating local government entity, may have their payment offset. Public Act 97-0348: State employees, and vendors that receive a number of payments over a specified threshold, must receive their state payments via direct deposit.

12,869,257 67,749 56,156 $50,602,566 in FY 10 (FY11 CAFR not done yet)



IT consolidation and SERIP (State Employee Retirement Incentive Program), offset program and W-2 reporting changes

3,062,309 23,107 38,263 $15,529,967



None passed. Government "transparency" legislation anticipated. 4,346,266 37,920 Not state employees $20,309,070


(Chapter 7: Q6-11)


143







None 4,574,836 49,948 30,105 $25,626,189


1,321,000 13,330 $7,383,247


The imposition of a sales tax on alcohol will increase enforcement efforts by the Field Enforcement Division. The requirement that all debts to the comptroller be satisfied before a driver's license or registration may be issued or renewed will increase compliance efforts by the Compliance Division.

5,785,982 54,390 authorized positions; 2,933 contractual positions

24,731 authorized positions; 6,246 contractual positions

$28,795,534


IT consolidation/transparency 6,498,000 60,740 23,330 $10,889,703


Legislation for mandatory due date for Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and web portal to address transparency (detail on spending)

10,000,000 51,400 Not considered state employees

$43,300,000



2,970,000 32,322 $16,070,814


There are several pieces of legislation that would impact us, but I don't believe any will pass this year.

5,996,000 58,959 22,000 $23,447,610


None in 2012 - our legislature does not meet again until January 2013. 998,199 14,150 8,131 $5,184,607


None 1,830,000 16,016 N/A $7,704,882


There is nothing significant. 2,700,551 16,589 Unknown $7,723,924


None 1,328,000 10,800 $4,872,000


8,733,000 (FY11 CAFR)

72,228 (FY11 CAFR)

$46,088,464 (FY11 CAFR)


None 2,065,932 18,000 N/A $13,330,373


Legislation that required OSC to review contracts for major public benefit corporations

19,490,000 153,922 41,778 $133,323,000


1 9,838,560 83,546 82,462 $40,780,000


(Chapter 7: Q6-11)


144







646,844 8,149 10,300 $5,346,088


None 11,544,951 55,442 N/A $19,029,759


Four agencies were consolidated into the Office of State Finance effective 9/1/2011.

3,791,508 36,081 32,409 $16,823,593


HB2021 which mandates a supervisor to staff ratio of 1:11. 3,871,859 36,342 16,667 as of January 2010

$17,727,078


12,746,000 82,183 $60,490,636


None 1,053,209 10,289 FTEs budgeted 4,653 FTEs budgeted $5,777,000


A proposal has been initiated that would consolidate several agencies included in the Comptroller General's Office into a Division of Administration.

4,679,000 38,043 28,547 $19,502,119


N/A 812,383 8,174 4,670 $3,523,224


6,403,000 (estimate)

46,700 approximately $28,072,953



Legislation was passed in January 2011 to require our department to study the feasibility of consolidating administrative and accounting functions into our department.

2,817,000 19,862 $10,386,235



Federal 3 percent withholding required by the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 required much planning prior to repeal.

8,029,000 61.327 53,467 $31,272,540



(Chapter 7: Q6-11)


145







No 1,852,994 25,000 approximately 11,400 approximately $10,761,433


5,691,000 31,286 32,882 $27,140,200


No state legislation, session is over for 2012. 564,460 10,178 $5,540,242

Notes 1. North Carolina

Enterprise Electronic Forms and Digital Signatures: Session Law 2011-0145, House Bill 200, directed the state controller to take the necessary measures to enable a coordinated enterprise electronic forms and digital signatures capability. The Office of the State Controller (OSC) has been working with agencies across the state to determine the best approach. While there are intersections between e-forms and digital signatures:

Automating business processes (e-forms) does not always involve digital signatures. Digital signatures can be plugged into an automated business process. Solutions in the marketplace are often separate.


The Authentication Project focuses on digital signatures, eliminating resource-intensive processes that require agencies, citizens, and staff to manually sign documents.

The Inspections, Licensing and Permitting Automation Capability Project focuses on helping agencies be more efficient while eliminating paper processes by automating complex processes that encompass multiple forms and checkpoints.

North Carolina’s Enterprise Fraud, Waste and Improper Payment Detection Program: Session Law 2011, HB 200-145, directed OSC to develop an enterprise process to detect fraud, waste, and improper payments across state agencies. The OSC has contracted with SAS to design, develop and host the North Carolina Financial Accountability and Compliance Technology System (NC FACTS) leveraging the SAS Fraud Framework technology. The NC FACTS program will evolve under the guidance of the legislatively created Data Integration Steering Committee in partnership with state agencies having an interest in leveraging integrated data to detect incidents of fraudulent, wasteful or erroneous overpayments in their business areas. No state legislation is anticipated at this time.


146



147

Chapter 8. The Position of the State Comptroller in State Government Table 20. Legal Basis for Office, Method of Selection and Reporting Chapter 8 presents the first chapter of long-term data about state comptrollers’ offices, data that does not change a great deal over time. Table 20 describes the legal bases for state comptrollers’ offices and how comptrollers are selected. The breakdown of the 41 responses is as follows:

Statutory: 30 Constitutional: 5 Both statutory and constitutional: 6

The breakdown of the 41 responses to the method of selection is:

Appointed by the governor: 12 Elected: 10 Appointed by department heads: 16 Other: 3

State comptrollers generally report to the person who appointed them or to the citizens who elected them. Table 21. Term of Office and Succession; Civil Service/Merit System The terms of offices of state comptrollers and states’ adoption of term-limits for elected and appointed officials are described in Table 21. In general, an appointed comptroller serves at the pleasure of the governor or the appointing departmental director. Among the elected state comptrollers, three are limited to two four-year terms (FL, NV and WY), and six may seek re-election for an unlimited number of terms (IL, MD, NY, SC, TX and WV’s state auditor). Of the 41 responses to the question about whether the state comptroller is a civil service or merit system employee, nine responded in the affirmative. None of the elected comptrollers are civil service or merit system employees.

Table 22. Qualifications for Office Table 22 describes the various qualifications established by states. Eight of the responding states stipulate a minimum age for those seeking the position of state comptroller. Nine of the 12 responding states impose an education requirement on their comptrollers, with most requiring a bachelor’s degree. Mississippi and Rhode Island require a master’s degree. Table 23. Service on Boards and Commissions; Prohibitions against Working Outside State Government Many state comptrollers serve on state boards and commissions by virtue of their offices. Table 23 shows that such is the case for 26 of the 33 reporting state comptrollers. There are no prohibitions against a state comptroller working outside of state government in 31 of the 38 responding states. Seven offices do have such prohibitions imposed upon them, three by law (MD, MS and SC), three by departmental policy (CO, NJ and RI), and one (WV’s state auditor) by law and custom.


148


Table 20 LEGAL BASIS FOR OFFICE, METHOD OF SELECTION AND REPORTING

(Chapter 8: Q1-3)


149

State and Office Legal Basis for Office Method of Selection

Approval, if Necessary Reports to Whom


Statutory State merit system appointment; selected and recommended by state finance director

Approved by the governor for initial appointment

Assistant state finance director


Statutory Appointed by the commissioner of the Department of Administration

Approval by the governor

Directly reports to the deputy commissioner, who then reports to the commissioner of the Department of Administration (cabinet member)





Statutory Appointed by the executive director of the Department of Personnel and Administration and vetted by the governor's office

Approval by the governor's office

A department head



Statutory Appointed by the governor Approval by the legislature

The governor


Both statutory and constitutional

Elected The public


Statutory Appointed by the governor The governor


Statutory Appointed by the governor Approval by the senate

The governor


Constitutional Elected The public





Statutory Appointed by the director of the Department of Administrative Services

A department head



Statutory Appointed by the secretary of the Finance and Administration Cabinet


A department head, secretary of Finance and Administration Cabinet


Statutory Appointed by the governor. Some consider the cash/investment function to be part of the state comptroller's duties. Louisiana has an elected state treasurer that maintains the central depository and investments. He does not report to the commissioner of administration (Louisiana's comptroller).

The governor


Statutory Appointed by the commissioner of administrative and financial services


A department head






(Chapter 8: Q1-3)


150




Statutory Appointed by the deputy state budget director

Approval by the state budget director

The deputy state budget director




Appointed by the governor The governor


Statutory Appointed by the commissioner of administration

A department head


Statutory Hired through a selection process

A department head


Statutory Appointed by the director of administrative services

A department head



Elected The public



Statutory Appointed by the governor Approval by the senate

The governor





Elected The public


Statutory Appointed by the governor Confirmed by the general assembly

The public, the controller is appointed to a seven-year term and can only be removed if there is just cause brought by the governor; however, the controller does not report to the governor.






Statutory Appointed by the director of state finance A department head


Statutory Appointed by the director of the Department of Administrative Services


A department head, the director of the Department of Administrative Services


Statutory Appointed by the secretary of the budget Approval by the governor

The chief financial officer


Statutory Appointed by the director of the Department of Administration

A department head



Elected The elected comptroller general reports to the elected governor of the state and the voting constituents of the state in addition to the general public.


(Chapter 8: Q1-3)


151




Statutory Hired by the CFO A department head, to the CFO


Statutory Appointed by the commissioner of finance and administration.

A department head



Elected The public


Statutory Appointed by the executive director of the Department of Administrative Services


A department head



Statutory Appointed by the governor Secretary of finance





Statutory Appointed by the secretary of administration Approval by the governor's office

A department head, the secretary of administration


Statutory Hired civil service position

A department head, the state budget director




152


Table 21 TERM OF OFFICE AND SUCCESSION; CIVIL SERVICE/MERIT SYSTEM

(Chapter 8: Q4-7)


153

State and Office Length of Term

For Elected Comptrollers For Appointed Comptrollers Civil Service or Merit System

Employee? May Be

Re-Elected?

Maximum Consecutive

Terms May Be Re-Appointed?

Maximum Consecutive

Terms Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Serves indefinitely until he/she resigns, retires or otherwise leaves state service

Yes


Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the governor

Yes





One year contract similar to other division director. The state comptroller serves at the pleasure of the executive director of the Department of Personnel and Administration.

Yes No limit Yes




No


4 years Yes 2 terms No



No


4 years Yes No limit No


4 years Yes No





Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the director of the Department of Administrative Services

No



Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the Secretary of Finance and Administration Cabinet

No



Yes No limit on the number of terms since the comptroller is appointed by the governor

No


Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the Commissioner of Administrative and Financial Services

No


(Chapter 8: Q4-7)


154



Employee? May Be

Re-Elected?

Maximum Consecutive


Maximum Consecutive

Terms Maryland Office of the Comptroller





The state comptroller is appointed for a 2-year term.

Yes No limit Yes




Yes No limit No


Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the commissioner of administration

No


Serves indefinitely because as an employee in the state of Montana, the controller can only be discharged for cause.

Yes


Serves indefinitely. The director of administrative services appoints but the words “at the pleasure of” are not stated in the statute.

No






Yes



Yes No limit Yes







No



Yes No


Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the director of state finance

No


Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the director of the Department of Administrative Services

No


Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the governor, retained with each administration

Yes No limit No


Serves indefinitely Yes


(Chapter 8: Q4-7)


155



Employee? May Be

Re-Elected?

Maximum Consecutive


Maximum Consecutive

Terms South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General



Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the CFO and governor

No No limit No


Serves indefinitely No




Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the executive director of the Department of Administrative Services

No








Serves indefinitely at the pleasure of the secretary of administration and/or the governor's office

No


Serves indefinitely since this is a civil service position

Yes




156


Table 22 QUALIFICATIONS FOR OFFICE

(Chapter 8: Q8)


157

State and Office

Qualifications Required for the Comptroller’s Office

Minimum Age

U.S. Citizen, Years

State Resident,

Years

Education, Years or Degrees

Experience, Years

Professional Certification Other Qualifications


1 10 years accounting experience

One of the following CPA, CIA, CPM, CGFM or CGFO






Not set Not set




30 7



30 days


25 Not stated

2


25 3





None 2





(Chapter 8: Q8)


158

State and Office


Minimum Age

U.S. Citizen, Years

State Resident,

Years


Experience, Years



Advanced degree in accounting, auditing, financial management, business administration or public administration (M.G.L.C. 7A, S.1)


Bachelor’s degree 2 years



3



Bachelor’s degree in accounting

10 years CPA


Must have a 4-year degree with a concentration in accounting

3 years CPA


25 2





30 5 preceding elections


Person qualified by education and experience for the office

Person qualified by education and experience for the office







(Chapter 8: Q8)


159

State and Office


Minimum Age

U.S. Citizen, Years

State Resident,

Years


Experience, Years



Master's degree in accounting or business administration

No minimum CPA


18 No time limit

No time limit





Accounting or related college degree

6 years CPA





25


College education with a major in business or public administration

4 years


Bachelor's degree CPA required


25

Notes 1. Alabama: Bachelor's degree with a major in accounting and a master's degree in accounting, business administration

or public administration, both of which must be from an accredited college or university that is a member of one of the six regional accreditation associations in the United States.

2. Kentucky: In part the statute reads "the state controller shall be a person qualified by education and experience and

held in high professional esteem in the accounting community." 3. Mississippi: The executive director (a) shall be a certified public accountant; or (b) shall possess a master's degree in

business, public administration or a related field; or (c) shall have at least ten (10) years' experience in fiscal management in the private or public sector and a minimum of five (5) years' experience in a high-level management position with a documented record of management.

For an acronym key please see Table 1, page 9.


160


Table 23 SERVICE ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS; PROHIBITIONS AGAINST WORKING OUTSIDE STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 8: Q9-12)


161

State and Office Boards and Commissions on Which the Comptroller Presently Serves

Prohibitions Against Working Outside State

Government and Source Department or Office Division, if Applicable Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

None No Department of Finance Division of Control and Accounts


None No Department of Administration Division of Finance





Executive Governance Committee for Information Technology, Governor's Revenue Estimating Advisory Committee

Yes, by departmental policy Office of the State Controller in the Department of Personnel and Administration



Department of Finance


State Board of Administration, Division of Bond Finance Governing Board, Administration Commission, Executive Clemency Board, Financial Services Commission, Florida Land & Water Adjudicatory Commission, Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, Electrical Power Plant & Transmission Line Siting Board, Enterprise Florida, Inc., Medical & Public Assistance Fraud Strike Force

No Florida Department of Financial Services; Office of the Chief Financial Officer


State Depository Board, State Properties Commission No State Accounting Office


Wireless Enhanced 911, Procurement Policy, Hawaii Community Development Authority, Access Hawaii Committee, State Building Code Council, Enterprise Resource Planning Steering Committee, Hawaii Emergency Preparedness Executive Consortium, Hawaii Wireless Interoperability Network, Governor’s Special Action Team on the Hawaii State Hospital Census, New Day Work Projects Working Group, Transit Oriented Development Project Stakeholders Group, Information Privacy and Security Council

Department of Accounting and General Services

Office of the Comptroller


Board of Examiners, Board of Land Commissioners, State Board of Canvassers, Idaho State College Savings Board, Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Information Technology Resource Management Council, Advisor to the Commissioners of the Idaho Housing and Finance Association, Advisor to the Commissioners of the Idaho Food Quality Assurance Institute

No Office of the State Controller


State Employee Retirement Board Chair, Debt Collection Board, State Board of Investment

No Office of the Comptroller


(Chapter 8: Q9-12)


162



Government and Source Department or Office Division, if Applicable Indiana Office of the Auditor of State


No Department of Administrative Services

State Accounting Enterprise



Kentucky Deferred Compensation Authority, State Property and Building Authority, State Asset and Liability Commission, Kentucky Private Allocation Bond Allocation Committee

No Office of the Controller Office within the Finance and Administration Cabinet


State Bond Commission Coastal Protection & Restoration Financing Corporation, Interim Emergency Board, Juvenile Justice Reform Act Implementation Commission, Office of Facilities Corporation, Post Employment Benefits Trust Fund, Board of Trustees, Public Retirement Systems' Actuarial Committee, Tobacco Settlement Financing Corporation, Louisiana Children's Cabinet, Cash Management Review Board

No Executive Department Division of Administration


None No Office of the State Controller Bureau within the Department of Administrative and Financial Services


Board of Public Works, State Banking Board, Capital Debt Affordability Committee, Commission on State Debt, Board of State Canvassers, Hall of Records, Retirement Board, College Saving Plan

Yes, by law Office of the Comptroller


Lottery Commission, Health Care Security Trust, Inspector General Advisory Board, Comptroller Advisory Board

No Office of the Comptroller of the Commonwealth


No Office of the State Budget Office of Financial Management



Tort Claims Board, Public Procurement Review Board, Health Insurance Management Board, College Savings Plan, Local Government & Rural Water Board, Personal Service Contract Review Board, Homeowner Grant Program Appeals Board

Yes, by law Department of Finance and Administration


None No Office of Administration Division of Accounting


Montana Family Education Savings Plan Oversight Committee No Department of Administration State Accounting Division


None No State Accounting Division of the Department of Administrative Services


(Chapter 8: Q9-12)


163



Government and Source Department or Office Division, if Applicable Nevada Office of the State Controller

Board of Finance, Transportation Board, Executive Audit Committee No Office of the State Controller



Actuary Selection Committee, NJ State Employee Deferred Compensation Board, Supplemental Annuity Collective Trust Board, Salary Adjustment Committee, Tobacco Settlement Financing Corporation, Fund for Support of Free Public Schools, State Disability Benefits Fund Board of Trustees, Comm. on Bonding State Officials and Employees, Governing Board of the State Law Enforcement Planning Agency, NJ Building Authority, Defined Contribution Retirement Plan Board

Yes, by departmental policy Department of the Treasury Office of Management and Budget


N/A No Department of Finance and Administration

Financial Control Division


No State Comptroller's Office


Chair of the Council of Internal Auditing; Data Integration Steering Committee; Interagency Leadership Committee; NC Portal Project Review Committee; Evaluation of State Information Technology Operations Advisory Committee

No Office of the State Controller


No Office of Management and Budget


Ohio School Facilities Commission, Ohio Turnpike Commission, Ohio Public Facilities Commission, State Controlling Board, Financial Planning & Supervision Commission

No Office of Budget and Management


Chairs the Cash Management Investment Oversight Commission; Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement Pension Board

No Office of State Finance Division of Central Accounting and Reporting


None No Department of Administrative Services

State Controller's Division


No Office of the Budget Office of Comptroller Operations


Yes, by departmental policy Department of Administration Office of Accounts and Control


(Chapter 8: Q9-12)


164



Government and Source Department or Office Division, if Applicable South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General

South Carolina Budget and Control Board, SC Military Base Task Force, SC Education Assistance Authority, Educational Facilities Authority, SC Resources Authority, State Water Quality Revolving Fund Authority, SC Infrastructure Facilities Authority, Tobacco Settlement Revenue Management Authority Board, Santee Cooper Advisory Board

Yes, by law The state of South Carolina Office of Comptroller General contains the following divisions: Statewide Payroll/Accounts Payable, Statewide Financial Reporting, Accounting, and Information Technology, and Administration


No Bureau of Finance and Management

Division of Accounting Analysis and Financial Reporting


Portal Advisory Committee, Edison Steering Committee No Finance and Administration Division of Accounts


Alternative Fuels Council, Bond Review Board, Business Tax Advisory Committee, Cancer Research Institute of Texas Oversight Committee, Cash Management Committee, Committee to Adopt a Limit on the Rate of Growth of Appropriations, Contract Advisory Team, Electronic Recording Advisory Committee, Emergency Management Council, Enterprise Resource Planning Advisory Council, Legislative Redistricting Board of Texas, Medicaid and Public Assistance Fraud Oversight Task Force, Open Records Steering Committee, Prepaid Higher Education Tuition Board, State Council on Competitive Government, Telecommunications Planning and Oversight Council, Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation, Texas Racing Commission

No Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts


Department of Administrative Services Internal Service Fund Rate Board, Department of Human Services Management Internal Service Fund Rate Board, Chairman of the Department of Technology Services Internal Service Fund Rate Board, Indigent Defense Funds Board, OPEB Trust Board, Chairman of the Utah Transparency Advisory Board, Navajo Royalties Holding Fund Management Committee

No Department of Administrative Services

Division of Finance



Treasury Board, Virginia College Building Authority, Virginia Public Building Authority, Debt Capacity Advisory Committee, Virginia College Savings Plan, E911 Services Board

Department of Finance Department of Accounts



Board of Treasury Investments, Consolidated Public Retirement Board, Board of Public Works, Agricultural Farmland Protection Board, Investment Management Board, Board of Directors National White Collar Crime, Interstate Commerce Appeals Board, National Electronic Commerce Coordinating Council

Yes, by law and custom State Auditor's Office


(Chapter 8: Q9-12)


165



Government and Source Department or Office Division, if Applicable West Virginia Finance Division

The new ERP board No Department of Administration Finance Division


State Investment Board Audit Committee No State Controller's Office Division of Executive Budget and Finance


State Building Commission; Board of Land Commissioners; State Loan and Investment Board

No State Auditor's Office


166



167

Chapter 9. State Comptrollers and the Financial Management of State Government Table 24. Performance of Financial Management Functions in State Government The six sections of Table 24 (Tables 24a through 24f) present information about the centralization of over two dozen financial management functions in state government. The following table shows the number of states that responded if the functions are centralized or decentralized.

Function Centralized Decentralized Comments

Only Total

Respondents

Appropriation control 35 3 1 39

Preparation of the budget 33 5 1 39

Budgetary reporting 35 4 1 40

Accounting for capital leases 15 24 39

Cash flow forecasting 28 12 40

Management of CMIA 35 5 40

Preparation of the CAFR 37 2 1 40

Approval of contracts 21 18 39

Cost accounting 6 34 40

Responsibility for debt collection 8 31 1 40

Disbursement of funds 33 7 40

Management of federal grants 2 38 1 41

Accounting for fixed assets 21 19 1 41

Maintenance of the general ledger and chart of accounts 40 40 Preparation of the indirect cost allocation plan 26 13 2 41

Internal control assessment 12 29 41

Investment functions 34 6 40

Payroll preparation 20 19 1 40

Payroll processing 37 3 40

Performance measurement 10 30 40

Pre-auditing of payments 17 22 1 40

Post-auditing of payments 23 17 40

Procurement 19 21 40

Management of retirement systems 33 7 40

Collection of non-tax revenues 6 33 1 40

Collection of tax revenues 35 5 40

Operation of a risk management program 31 9 40

Preparation of the schedule of expenditures of federal awards 29 10 1 40

Management of travel policies 36 3 1 40

Preparation and processing of vouchers and claims 10 30 40

Preparation and Processing of Data Systems/IT 14 14 1 29

The last two columns in Table 24f lists additional financial management functions and other programs processed outside of central accounting.


168

Table 25. State Payroll Table 25a presents information about accoun-ting for payroll and maintenance of related records. Among the 40 responding states, 25 report that payroll processing is centralized, with state agencies handling various levels of responsibility. Thirty-one of the 41 responding offices now use online time and attendance for payroll. Responsibility for accounting and reporting leave accrual is most often located in individual state agencies. Of the 41 offices that responded to the survey, this responsibility is located within:

Agencies: 18 Comptroller’s office: 10 A state office of personnel, human

resources or administrative services: 8 Payroll system: 4 Other: 1

Table 25b contains data about direct deposit, the distribution of checks, areas of self-service offered to employees, and the processing of federal forms. Of the 40 reporting offices, 19 mandate the use of direct deposit. Following is a breakdown of the states’ workforce on direct deposit (only 38 of the 40 respondents provided a percentage):

90 percent or higher: 26 80 to 89 percent: 8 Below 80 percent: 4

Forty offices indicated methods by which payroll information is distributed to employees on direct deposit:

Email: 2 Mail: 17 Website: 24 Work site: 22

For the employees that are not on direct deposit, 34 states provided information about how checks are delivered to them.

Distributed to agencies: 2 Mailed to employee’s home: 5 Work site: 9 Combination: 18

The states offer self-service in the following areas (responses from 37 states):

Time and attendance: 24 Changing payroll information: 18 Benefits: 27 Pay stubs: 29 W-2: 18 Other areas: 7

Table 26. Interim Financial Reporting: Analysis and Availability Thirty-five of the 40 responding comptrollers report that their state accounting systems produce interim reports with sufficient information to meet the management needs of their offices. The accounting systems in 28 states produce interim financial reports with sufficient information to meet the needs of other agency heads. In 11 states the comptroller’s office provides financial analysis of interim information sent to state agencies. Thirty-nine offices responded to the question: “How are interim financial data made available?” Following are the responses:

Paper: 21 Online: 34 Other: 16 (includes ad-hoc reporting,

tape, cartridge and diskette) Thirty-four of the 39 reporting offices responded that the accounting system is used for ad-hoc inquiries. Thirty-four states print reports, and agency personnel can generate read-only inquiries in 25 states. Thirty-three offices responded that agency personnel can download files to PC applications. Thirty-one states responded that they have a data warehouse for compiling reports. Table 27. Pre-Audit State comptrollers have the responsibility for developing policies and procedures for the pre-audit function in 19 of the 39 responding states. State agencies have the responsibility in 19 states. It is performed centrally by accounts payable in Rhode Island. Of the 37 offices responding to the question about whether there are any claims that are not pre-audited, 19 report claims that are not pre-audited.


169

Thirty states responded to the question about materiality levels for not looking at a claim. Of these, eight states report a materiality level for not looking at a claim. Among the six states citing a dollar value for their materiality levels, the range is $150 (South Carolina) to $10,000 (Florida and Rhode Island). Among the 37 states responding to the question about materiality levels for not correcting an error, only two (Michigan and South Carolina) replied yes. Table 28. State Disbursement Activities The three parts of Table 28 explore disbursements–one of the core functions of state comptrollers. Table 28a describes the handling of inter-agency payments, which methods of payment are used and who issues or authorizes various types of disbursements. Of the 40 offices that provided the method of payment for inter-agency payments the responses were:

Warrants: 11 Checks: 13 Payment cards: 6 Internal accounting transactions: 36 Other: 2 (electronic transfers)

The methods of payment for goods and services in the states are (40 offices responded):

Warrants: 30 EFT/EDI/ACH: 39 Checks: 30 Procurement card: 36 Other: 4 (federal wire, inter-

departmental transfers, electronic credit card payments)

Fifteen of the 36 respondents said that warrants are used for internal processing when checks are used. Table 28b contains information about the authorization and distribution of disbursement activities and the lapse period for encumbrances. State agencies are responsible for authorizing payment of vouchers in 20 of the 38 responding states. Comptrollers have this responsibility in 17 states and share this responsibility in three states. It depends on the dollar amount in Delaware. Forty offices provided information about the use of lapse periods. Thirty-four offices have a lapse

period. The ranges are from one week in Idaho to two years in Texas (for non-construction items). Thirty-nine offices provided information about allowing prior year invoices to be paid in the current year. Fifteen of the respondents allow this practice. Table 28c contains information regarding carry-forward of old-year allotments along with central vendor file information. Responses from 33 of the 40 offices indicate that they allow carry-forward of old-year allotments to be added to new-year allotments. Of these, 10 states allow carry-forward for all types of allotments. The last column in the table contains responses from 40 offices, with 39 responding that their state has a central vendor file (Montana does not). Table 29. Management of Debt-Collection The two parts of Table 29 describe states’ practices in the area of debt collection. Table 29a shows what office has the responsibility for the management of debt collection (39 responding states):

State agencies: 28 Centralized debt collection office: 11

Information about the promulgation of policies and procedures for debt collection was provided by 39 offices.

No policies and procedures: 5 Comptroller’s office: 14 Centralized debt collection office: 7 Individual agencies: 8 Other office: 5

A response regarding the office that promulgates policies and procedures for writing off delinquent accounts was provided by 40 offices.

No policies and procedures: 6 Comptroller’s office: 17 Centralized debt collection office: 4 Individual agencies: 4 Other office: 9

Thirty-nine offices provided information about the methods used to pursue past-due receivables:

Use collection agencies: 32


170

Report to credit reporting agencies: 14 Add collection costs to a bad debt: 19 Revoke drivers’ licenses: 9 Place liens: 22 Offsets: 16 Other: 6

Table 29b has information about central offset programs, whereby debts to one state agency are offset against payments to a debtor through the statewide accounting system by another state agency. Twenty-two of the 39 responding offices have central debt offset programs. Twenty-three offices use a common identification number for debtors on the centralized file (35 respondents).

Federal identification number: 21 Social Security number: 21 Other: 2

In 26 of the 34 responding states, debtors are notified before any offset of payments is made. The debt notification notice in 19 states indicates that future payments from the state may be used to satisfy the debt. Half of the 36 responding offices indicate that they have a priority system for determining which debt to the state is satisfied first.

By law (statute): 10 Administrative rule: 6 First in, first out: 7 Central authority: 3 Other: 1

Table 30. Post-Audit Twenty-three of the 40 responding comptrollers perform some post-audit. The methods used to determine post-audit areas are:

Type of expenditure: 18 Internal control: 12 Dollar amount/threshold: 14 Other: 6

Five of the 27 responses indicate that a materiality threshold is used for subjecting claims/expenditures to post-audit.

The types of testing performed as part of post-audit was provided by 27 offices.

Compliance tests: 25 Substantive tests: 16 Internal control tests: 15

The frequency with which post-audits are performed varies widely.

Daily: 3 Monthly: 11 Quarterly: 2 Annually: 5 As needed: 2 Other: 8

Twenty-five of the comptrollers’ offices doing post-audit conduct follow-up to ensure that corrective action is taken. The types of follow-up conducted are:

Formal report: 11 Verbal discussion: 14 Management letter: 11 Other: 9

Among the states in which comptrollers’ offices perform some post-audit, 23 report that claims and expenditures that are subject to post-audit are also subject to pre-audit.

Table 24a PERFORMANCE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


171

State and Office

Financial Management Functions: Is each function centralized?

Appropriation Control Preparation of the Budget Budgetary Reporting Accounting for Capital Leases Cash Flow Forecasting Management of CMIA


Yes, in the budget office. The budget office makes the decisions, but the state comptroller enforces them through the software. Both budget and comptroller are divisions of the finance department.

Yes, in the budget office. The software is only loosely integrated.

Yes, in the budget office No. Accounting is centralized after the fact in the comptroller's office for CAFR purposes.

No. The function is centralized in the budget office. There is no integrated software.

Yes, in the state comptroller’s office


Yes, in the budget office and the comptroller's office

Yes, in the budget office with input from state agencies

Yes, in the budget office No. Capital lease information is summarized for CAFR by comptroller's office, but records remain at the various state agencies.

Yes, in the state treasurer's office






No. Budget documents are entered by the agencies but all budget documents must be approved by the Office of the State Controller.

No. Budget preparation is not automated and is prepared via submissions to the legislature's Joint Budget Committee via the Governor's Office of State Planning and Budgeting.

Yes, assuming this question means budget to actual reporting, that function is performed solely by the Office of the State Controller.

No No. The Office of the State Controller provides input data from the accounting system to the state treasurer's office for cash flow forecasting.




Yes, in the Office of Management and Budget



No Yes, in the Department of Finance



Yes in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Division of Accounting and Auditing

Yes, in the offices of the governor and legislature, Legislative Appropriation System/Planning and Budgeting Subsystem

Yes, in the legislature, Legislative Appropriation System/Planning and Budgeting Subsystem

Yes, in the Office of the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing

No Yes, in the Office of the CFO, Division of Treasury


(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


172

State and Office




Yes, in the Office of Planning and Budget (OPB) for budget preparation and the State Accounting Office (SAO) for budget compliance

Yes, in the OPB Yes, in the SAO via Budgetary Compliance Report and OPB via governor's budget book

Yes, in the SAO; EZ-13 tracks leases.

No No


Yes, in the Department of Accounting and General Services

No Yes, in the Department of Budget and Finance executive branch only; Judiciary and legislative branches prepare separately.

No Yes, in the Department of Taxation, tax revenues

Yes, in the Department of Budget and Finance


Yes, in the state controller's office. The statewide accounting system maintained by the state controller controls appropriations. However, the Division of Financial Management (governor's budget office) reviews certain transactions.

No. The Division of Financial Management prepares the governor's budget that is presented to the legislature. The Legislative Services Office prepares the legislative budget.

No; Legislative Services Office, Division of Financial Management, and state controller for the CAFR requirements

No. The state controller reviews all capital leases for the CAFR.

No. The Division of Financial Management performs cash flow forecasting for the state treasurer's office for Tax Anticipation Note (TAN) purposes.

Yes, in the Division of Financial Management


In the Office of the State Comptroller

Yes, in the Governor's Office of Management and Budget

Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller


No; the Office of the Comptroller and Governor's Office of Management and Budget

Yes, in the Governor's Office of Management and Budget



Yes, in the Department of Management


Yes, the Department of Management

Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services




Yes, in the Office of the Controller

Yes, in the Office of State Budget Director

Yes, Office of State Budget Director





(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


173

State and Office




No. Appropriations controls are in the statewide system at the budget category level. The budget in categories can be changed by user agencies with approval from a control agency (budget office). Within a category, agencies can make line item changes and can overspend a line item as long as the total category is not exceeded.

Yes, in the Division of Administration - Office of Planning and Budget (DOA - OPB)

No. Both the DOA-OPB and the Legislative Fiscal Office prepare projections of revenue available for appropriation for presentation to the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget.

No No. Both the DOA-OPB and the Legislative Fiscal Office project revenues/cash that will be available for appropriation for approval by the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget.

No. Individual state agencies are responsible for daily CMIA compliance. The monthly agency reports are reviewed by the DOA-Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policies. OSRAP also prepares the Treasury-State Agreement and the annual report to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. CMIA is not part of the statewide accounting system software.


Yes, in the Office of the State Controller

Yes, in the state budget office Yes, Office of the State Controller

No Yes, in the Office of the State Controller

Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer


Yes, in the Department of Budget and Management and comptroller's office

Yes, each agency does their own budget to submit for approval to Department of Budget and Management.

Yes, in the Department of Budget and Management

No Yes, in the treasurer's office



Yes, in the Executive Office of Administration and Finance and the Office of the Comptroller

Yes, in the Executive Office of Administration and Finance

Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller

Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller and Division of Capital Asset Management

Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer, Executive Office of Administration and Finance, and Office of the Comptroller

Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller and Office of the State Treasurer and Receiver General


Yes, in the state comptroller and budget office

Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the state budget office

Yes, in the Department of Management and Budget






No Yes, in the legislative budget office

No Yes, in the treasury (for the general fund only)

Yes, the general overall management is in the comptroller's office, but agencies manage the daily operations.


Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the budget office No No No No


(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


174

State and Office




Yes, in the controller's office. Appropriation control is within the state accounting system and Montana Budget Analysis and Reporting System (MBARS) which are run out of the controller’s office but the overall direction for MBARS is managed from the budget office (governor’s office) and Legislative Fiscal Division.

The budget is built in MBARS but approved by the governor’s office and legislature.

The initial budget report is prepared by the governor’s office and the final is built by the legislative branch. Both are built from MBARS.

No Yes. The annual and monthly general fund cash forecasts are prepared in the State Accounting Division. The governor’s office and legislative branches both prepare fund balance forecasts. Agencies prepare cash forecasts for funds other than the general fund.

Yes, in the controller’s office


Yes, in the budget and state accounting. Budget enters appropriation limits in the ERP and state accounting is responsible for maintaining the ERP.

Yes, in the budget division. Each agency prepares their budget request in a separate budget preparation system which has historical data fed in from the financial system and is maintained by the budget division.

Yes, in state accounting Yes, state accounting maintains a master lease program for capital equipment purchases over $50,000.

Yes, in state accounting. General fund only. Revenue figures are provided by the Nebraska Economic Forecasting Advisory Board and Appropriation data from the budget division.

Yes, the state treasurer is the signatory to the CMIA agreement while state accounting administers the agreement.


Yes, in the state controller's office

Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the state controller's office

No Yes, in the state treasurer's office











Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division

No. The Department of Finance and Administration, Budget Division reviews and approves all agency budgets based on the appropriate laws using BPS.

Yes, in the Legislative Finance Committee

No, capital leases are illegal based on statute.

Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration, Board of Finance



Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller and the Division of the Budget

Yes, in the Division of the Budget




Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller and the Division of Budget


No No No No No


(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


175

State and Office







No No Yes, in the state comptroller’s office


Yes, in the Office of Budget and Management (OBM)

Yes, in the OBM Yes, in the OBM Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services

Yes, in the OBM Yes, in the OBM


Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the budget office No Yes, in the budget office and tax commission



Yes, in the Budget and Management Division



No No1 Yes, in the State Controller's Division


Yes, in the Comptroller Operations and Governor's Budget Office

Yes, in the Office of the Budget Yes, in the Office of the Budget

No. State comptroller’s office reviews lease commitments at fiscal year-end for GAAP reporting.

Yes, the state comptroller’s office and Governor's Budget Office share this responsibility.



Yes, in the state controller’s office

Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the budget office No Yes, in the state treasurer’s office



Yes, in the Office of the State Budget



No. Small equipment capital leases may be executed by individual agencies. Master leases used as alternatives to not or bond issues is centralized in the state treasurer's office.

Yes, in the Business Economic Advisors within the Office of Budget



Yes, in the Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM), budget office

Yes, in the BFM, budget office Yes, in the BFM, budget office.

Yes, in the BFM, Accounting Analysis and Financial Reporting

Yes, in the BFM, budget office.

Yes, in the BFM, Executive Management Finance Office


Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration

Yes, in the Division of Budget in the Department of Finance and Administration

Yes, in the Division of Budget in the Department of Finance and Administration

Yes, in the real property management in the Department of General Services

Yes, in the State Funding Board

Yes, in the Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration



Yes, in the Legislative Budget Board

Yes, in the Legislative Budget Board

No Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller



(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


176

State and Office




Yes, in the Division of Finance

Yes, in the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget. State agencies use GOPB's software to compile their budget requests each year. After the legislative session, the approved budgets are interfaced into the Division of Finance's statewide accounting system.

Yes, in the Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Office



Yes, in the Division of Finance. Agencies prepare spreadsheets which are then forwarded to staff in the Division of Finance for review and compilation.





Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the state budget office

Yes, in the Purchasing Division and the Department of Administration

No No


Yes, in the budget department and state auditor’s office

Yes, in the budget office with input from state agencies

Yes, in the budget department

No Yes, in the revenue department




Yes, agencies may have their own budget systems but must feed information either manually or by interface with the central budget system.


No Yes, in the state controller's office



Yes, in the state auditor's office

Yes, in the budget division of Department of Administration and Information

Yes, in the Budget Office of Department of Administration and Information - for the budget process through governor and to the legislature. The state auditor's office provides budget reports from financial system.

Yes, in the General Services Division of Administration and Information

Yes, in the Economic Analysis Division of Administration and Information

Yes, in the budget division of Administration and Information


(Chapter 9: Q1-6)


177

Notes 1. Oregon: Individual agencies typically forecast cash flow for dedicated revenue sources, but the general fund cash flow is managed by a work group made up

of representatives from the State Controller's Division, the Office of Budget & Management, Treasurer’s Office, Office of Economic Analysis, Department of Revenue, and Legislative Fiscal Office.


178


Table 24b PERFORMANCE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


179

State and Office


Preparation of the CAFR Approval of Contracts Cost Accounting Responsibility for

Debt Collection Disbursement of Funds Management of Federal Grants



No No No Yes, in the state comptroller’s office. As always in government, there are exceptions to the centralized system.

No


Yes, in the comptroller's office

No No No Yes, in the comptroller's office with requests from state agencies

No





Yes, the Office of the State Controller compiles the CAFR from data extracted from a decentralized accounting system. The Departments of Transportation and Higher Education feed aggregated data rather than transactions to the accounting system.

No. All contracts require approval by the state controller; however, the controller has delegated all but certain high-risk contracts to state agencies and low-risk contracts where the agency has no contract expertise.

Yes, indirect cost accounting and allocation is performed centrally in the Office of the State Controller. General cost accounting occurs on an ad-hoc basis at the individual departments.

No. State statute requires debt collection by Central Collection Services; however, the statute also allows the state controller to provide extensions of the deadline by which agencies refer their accounts to CCS.

No. Warrant distribution and vendor master file management is centralized in the Office of the State Controller, but initiating the disbursement is decentralized at the agency.

No. This is solely a decentralized agency function except for SEFA and ARRA reporting.



Yes, in the Department of Finance, Division of Accounting


No No No No


Yes, in the Office of the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing

No No No. State agencies have initial responsibility for their debt collections, but after 120 days, they are required to use a CFO contracted debt collection service unless the agency has separate statutory authority to contract with a debt collector.

Yes, only the Office of the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing, is authorized to draw funds from the treasury.1

No


(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


180

State and Office





Yes, in the State Accounting Office

No No No No, the warrant process is centralized but payments to vendors are not.

No



No No No Yes, in the Department of Accounting and General Services

No



No. The Division of Purchasing within the Department of Administration provides contract function software. However not all agencies utilize the software.

No No Yes, in the Office of the State Controller, State Treasurer's Office. The Department of Labor issues checks for unemployment compensation, the State Insurance Fund issues checks for dividends and claims.

No



No, state agencies/Executive Ethics Commission

No, agencies No, agencies Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller

In the Governor's Office of Management and Budget, also agencies




No No Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services

No






Yes, in the Department of Revenue


No. The management of federal grants is decentralized with the recipient agency being responsible for grant administration.


Yes, in the Division of Administration (DOA), Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy

Yes, in the Division of Administration, Office of Contractual Review (agencies have some delegated authority)

No No No2 No. DOA maintains the statewide computer accounting system that allows agencies to track federal grant revenues and disbursements, although agencies also use other means to track grants. Some of those agencies have side systems that are integrated with the statewide system. Colleges and universities do not use the statewide system.


(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


181

State and Office






Yes, in the Division of Purchases

No No Yes, in the Office of the State Controller; one exception is unemployment compensation checks.

No



Yes, in the Board of Public Works, which is consisted of the governor, comptroller and treasurer

No Yes, in the Department of Budget and Management, and the central collection unit

Yes, in the comptroller's office and the state treasurer's office

No. It is delegated to state agencies except for CMIA, which is managed by the state treasurer's office.



Yes, in the Operational Services Division and Office of the Comptroller

No No. The Office of the Comptroller provides a billing and accounts receivable system, intercept functionality, and access to a debt collector contract; however, the day-to-day management of the debt is decentralized.


No



No No Yes, in the state treasurer's office


No




Yes, in the comptroller's, state personnel board, and information technology services offices

No No Yes, in the comptroller's office No


No No No No Yes, in the Office of Administration, Division of Accounting and state treasurer's office

No


Yes, in the controller’s office No No Bad debts are transferred to the Department of Revenue; prior to the determination that the debt is bad the collection is managed either by the Department of Revenue or other state agency.

Yes No


(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


182

State and Office





Yes, in the state accounting Yes, in the Material Division. Commodity contracts are maintained in the Materiel Division. Service contracts are the responsibility of each agency director.

No No Yes, in the state accounting No. Agencies are the program managers for their grants. Cash management for the CMIA agreement is administered in state accounting.



Yes, in the budget office No No Yes, in the state controller's office

No




Yes, in the Department of the Treasury, the Division of Purchasing

No Yes, in the Department of the Treasury. For non-tax debt we use the Division of Revenue and for tax debt we use the Division of Taxation.


Yes, in the Office of Management and Budget. Departments expend and drawdown federal funds, but are required to use the centralized accounting system with oversight by the Office of Management and Budget.


Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division's CAFR Unit

Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration, Administrative Services Division's Contract Bureau

No, agencies are responsible for their own cost accounting.

No, agencies are responsible for their debt collection.


No, agencies are responsible for their own grant accounting.


Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller and the Bureau of Financial Reporting


No No Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller



No No No No No No



No Yes, in the state comptroller’s office


No


Yes, in the Office of Management and Budget (OBM) and the Department of Administrative Services (DAS)

Yes, in the OBM and DAS

Yes, in the OBM Yes, in the OBM Yes in the OBM No


(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


183

State and Office





Yes, in the Office if the State Comptroller

Yes, contracts over $25,000 must be approved by the Department of Central Services.

No No Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller

No. The Single Audit responses to the federal government are coordinated by the state comptroller.


Yes, in the State Controller's Division

No3 No No. The creditor agency is responsible for collection. However, the Department of Revenue is available as a central resource, which agencies may choose to use.

No No


Yes, in the state comptroller's office

Yes, all contracts are approved by state comptroller’s office; i.e., grants and sole source purchases. Only procurements over $10,000 require state comptroller participation and approval to ensure compliance with procurement code.

No Yes, in the state attorney general's office with certain exceptions

Yes, in the state treasurer's office, with the exception of purchasing card and advancement account purchases which the treasurer reimburses. All reimbursement approvals are centralized in the state comptroller's office.

No. Agencies manage their federal grants and the state comptroller is the central point for all PA federal grant reporting.




No No Yes, in the state treasurer No


Yes, in the comptroller general's office

Yes, in the materials management office

No No. The Department of Revenue has been authorized to perform limited debt collection for state agencies only after receiving a request from the agency to which the debt is owed.

Yes, authorization is provided by the comptroller general's office while availability and timing is managed by the state treasurer's office.

No


Bureau of Finance and Management, Accounting Analysis and Financial Reporting


No No Yes, state auditor's office No



No No No Yes, in the Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration

No


(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


184

State and Office






No. The Contract Advisory Team (CAT) assists state agencies in improving contract management. The CAT reviews the solicitation of contracts over $1 million. The comptroller's office is the lead agency - other CAT members are the attorney general, Department of Information Resources and the Governor's Office.

No No. The attorney general's office is responsible for collections above a certain tolerance. The AG and individual agencies set the tolerances.


No



No. The Division of Purchasing approves statewide contracts and delegates its authority to other state agencies to approve their own agency contracts. All state contracts are entered into the state-wide accounting system.


Yes, in the Office of State Debt Collection, which is now part of the Division of Finance

No. The Division of Finance issues vendor payments from the statewide accounting system. Some agencies disburse payments from other systems, for example Medicaid payments.

No




No


Yes, in the Financial Accounting and Reporting Section Department of Administration

Yes, in the Purchasing Division Department of Administration

No No Yes, in the state auditor's office

No


(Chapter 9: Q7-12)


185

State and Office





Yes, in the Department of Administration and the state comptroller's office

Yes, in the purchasing division for contracts greater than $25,000

No No. If debt cannot be collected, state agencies are directed to turn info over to comptroller's office, who in turn works with outside debt collection agency.


No



No No Yes, in the Department of Revenue


No


Yes, in the CAFR division of the state auditor's office

Yes, in the procurement office of general services division for administration and information

Yes, modules exist in the financial system administered by the state auditor's office.

No, each state agency is responsible for collecting its own debt.

Yes, in the financial system administered by the auditor's office

No, modules available in financial system are administered by auditor's office; not all agencies use this system.

Notes: 1. Florida: Agencies initiate disbursement vouchers by recording accounting entries to the legacy general ledger based accounting system. This departmental

system generates the central accounting system voucher. Budget and cash controls are performed in central accounting system of the Office of the CFO. Some agency offices issue checks from revolving funds; these local bank account payments are reimbursed by the agency submitting vouchers to the CFO.

2. Louisiana: DOA maintains a statewide accounting system through which most disbursements are processed. However, various agencies have their own

computer systems that process payments (and most also interface with the statewide system to provide summary information regarding the agencies' disbursements). In addition, colleges and universities are not part of the statewide computer system.

3. Oregon: The function is delegated to state agencies. However, contracts over $150,000 require processing by and approval of the State Procurement Office.

Other approvals may be required from the Department of Justice and the Enterprise Information Systems Policy Division for contracts over $75,000. Still other contracts are delegated by type, rule or policy to specific functions within the Department of Administrative Services such as employee benefits.


186


Table 24c PERFORMANCE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


187

State and Office


Accounting for Fixed Assets

Maintenance of the General Ledger

and Chart of Accounts

Preparation of the Indirect

Cost Allocation Plan Internal

Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation Alabama Office of the State Comptroller


No No No No, one software system, but two offices: State Comptroller and State Personnel


No, it is summarized for CAFR by comptroller and records at various state agencies.


The comptroller prepares the Statewide Cost Allocation Plan with information from the various agencies. The individual agencies are responsible for preparation of their own indirect cost rate proposals and cost allocation plans.

No Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer.

The individual agencies enter their timesheet information, and Department of Administration, Division of Personnel authorizes transactions.





No, decentralized at the state agencies

Yes, the Office of the State Controller maintains the central chart of accounts. The general ledger is the result of transactions entered or interfaced by state agencies to the state's centralized accounting system.

Yes, the Statewide Cost Allocation Plan is prepared solely by the Office of the State Controller; however, most state departments prepare their own indirect cost rate proposals or indirect cost plans.

No Yes, the state treasurer invests the state's pooled cash and manages the state's investment funds. Certain higher education institutions have their own treasury functions and invest their own cash and manage their own investments.

No, most of the state's payroll is a turnaround process with adjustments and alterations entered by agencies at remote locations.








No, the function is centralized and the data entry is decentralized.


(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


188

State and Office







Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation Florida Department of Financial Services

Yes, in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Division of Accounting and Auditing

Yes, in the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing1

No No No, state funds held prior to disbursement are invested by CFO, Division of Treasury. The State Board of Administration invests the Florida Retirement System Trust Fund as well as other designated funds.

Yes, in the Department of Management Services using outsourced HR system. Legislative branch has a separate HR system. Department of Military Affairs sends separate payroll file for state employees called to active duty.


No Yes, in the State Accounting Office. Different general ledger used by Department of Labor and Board of Regents.

No No Yes, in the Office of the State Treasury

No


Yes, in the Department of Accounting and General Services for majority of executive departments







No, the state controller maintains a fixed assets system but it is not required that agencies utilize that system.


Yes, in the Division of Financial Management

No No, the state treasurer manages investments for the general fund. Each retirement fund manages its own portfolio. The Endowment Fund Investment Board manages investments for endowment land earnings.



No, in the Office of the Comptroller and Department of Central Management Services (plus other agencies)


Yes, in the Central Management Services Office

No, in the Office of the Comptroller, Auditor General, Central Management Services, and other agencies


No, agencies



(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


189

State and Office







Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation Iowa State Accounting Enterprise

No Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services


Yes, in the Office of the Auditor of State


Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services. The majority of payroll is centralized with a few other decentralized systems. These include the Regents Institutions, Department of Transportation, the Fair Board and Community Based Corrections.




Yes, in the Office of the Controller and Office of the State Budget Director. The chart of accounts is a shared responsibility with the office of state budget director.


Yes, in the Office of Internal Audit


Yes, in the Personnel Cabinet


Yes, most state entities (excluding colleges and universities) account for fixed assets in software modules maintained by the Division of Administration (DOA) in its State Land Office (land and buildings) and its Louisiana Property Assistance Agency (movable property).

Yes, in the DOA, Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy (OSRAP)

No, no system software exists to prepare the indirect cost allocation plans. The SWCAP is prepared by the DOA-OSRAP. Other state entities are responsible for preparation of their own plans.

No Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer. Colleges and universities maintain their own investments.

Yes, the state's centralized payroll system is Louisiana Employees Online (LEO) and maintained by DOA-Office of State Uniform Payroll. Timekeepers located at state entities check employee time/leave entry information in LEO for the pay period and make corrections as needed. Does not include colleges and universities


No Yes, in the Office of the State Controller and State Budget Office

Yes, in the Office of the State Controller for the statewide plan





Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller, General Accounting Division

Yes, in the General Accounting Division


No Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer

Yes, it is controlled by the comptroller's office (submitted by agencies).


(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


190

State and Office







Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation Massachusetts Office of the Comptroller



Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller, and a couple of large agencies have been delegated the preparation of their cost allocation plan.


Yes, one system, HR/CMS, overseen by the Office of the Comptroller with decentralized data entry by the departments


No Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller






Yes, in the comptroller's office and the state auditor


Yes, in the comptroller's office; the comptroller prepares the SWCAP and individual agencies prepare their own.

No, each agency is responsible but comptroller will assist.


No


No Yes, in the Division of Accounting

Yes, in the Division of Accounting

No Yes, in the State Treasurer's Office

No


We have one fixed asset system but the agencies are responsible for entering their assets on the system. Some agencies also have fixed asset sub-systems.

Yes, in the controller's office Yes, in the controller's office. The SWCAP is prepared centrally. Agencies prepare their own indirect costs plans in addition to the SWCAP.

No Yes, the Board of Investments (Department of Commerce)

Yes, in the State Human Resource Division (Department of Administration). Although the agencies ultimately record their payroll information in the centralized system, some have sub-systems for payroll entry and interface this information into the primary system.


Yes, the material division manages the fixed asset inventory. State accounting monitors the depreciation schedules.

Yes, in the state accounting office

Yes, state accounting prepares the statewide cost allocation plan, while agencies are responsible for their own indirect cost plans.

No, state accounting assists agencies with their internal control assessments.

Yes, in the Investment Council

No




Yes, in the Department of Administration



Yes, in the Department of Personnel



(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


191

State and Office







Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation New Jersey Office of Management and Budget

Yes, in the Office of Management and Budget, which requires input from departments




Yes, in the Department of the Treasury, Division of Investment

No, because some departments use the same system


No, agencies are responsible for their own fixed asset accounting.




Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer; with the exception of a handful of agencies that have been given authority by statute to handle their own investments

Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division, Central Payroll Bureau


Yes, in the Office of General Services and the Department of Transportation for most infrastructure



No Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller



No Yes, in the Office of the State Controller

No No Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer

No





No No No



Yes, in the Office of Management and Budget (OBM)

No Yes, in the OBM Yes, in the Treasurer of State No


No, the Department of Central Services maintains asset listing.




No


No Yes, in the State Controller's Division

Yes, in the State Controller's Division

No Yes2 No


No, fixed asset accounting is the responsibility of the agency but requires extensive assistance from the state comptroller's office.


Yes, in the state comptroller’s office - statewide indirect cost allocation plan only. Departments prepare their own department indirect cost plans.


Yes, in the state treasurer's office, which has primary investment authority. Only a few funds managers have legislative authority to invest their own funds; e.g., SWIF, Tobacco, and Statutory Liquidator.





Yes, in the State Controller – SWCAP

No Yes, in the state treasurer No


(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


192

State and Office







Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General

Yes, in the Comptroller General's Office for the state agencies. Other entities included in the state's CAFR reporting entity are decentralized.

Yes, in the Comptroller General's Office

Yes, in the Office of State Budget

No Yes, in the state treasurer's office

Yes in the Comptroller General's Office


Yes, in the Bureau of Administration, Property Management

Yes, in the Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM), Financial Systems and Operations

No, the statewide cost allocation plan is prepared by the BFM, Executive Management Finance Office. Agency specific plans prepared by individual agencies.

No Yes, in the South Dakota Investment Council

Yes, in the Bureau of Personnel




No No Yes, in the Treasury Department

No


Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller for state agencies but not for state universities


Yes, in the governor's office No No No




No, the Division of Finance does the statewide cost allocation plan. Many individual agencies also have their own indirect cost allocation plans.

Yes, in the Division of Finance. We have implemented an internal control self-assessment program. However, we don't use a software package other than Microsoft Excel for this assessment.


Yes, the Division of Finance runs the statewide payroll system that includes employee self-service for electronic time entry and approval used by most employees.3




No In the Office of Financial Management

No


(Chapter 9: Q13-18)


193

State and Office







Control Assessment Investment Functions Payroll Preparation West Virginia Office of the State Auditor

No Yes, in the State Auditor's Office and Department of Administration; two sets of mirrored G/L's interfacing

No No No No


No Yes, in the budget department and the state comptroller's office

No, the state comptroller's Office is responsible for SWCAP.

No Yes, in the state treasurer's office and the Investment Management Board

No


No Yes, in the state controller's office

No No Yes, in the State of Wisconsin Investment Board

Yes, in the state controller's office; some agencies interface transactions.


Yes, in the financial system administered by the state auditor's office

Yes, in the financial system administered by the state auditor's office

No Yes, in the Department of Audit


Yes, the payroll software is administered by the state auditor's office.

Notes 1. Florida: Maintenance of the chart of accounts is a hybrid. Some codes (elements of budget and cash control) are centrally managed by the CFO; codes used

for financial reporting have state standard prefix values with optional agency unique suffix values; other codes are specific to agency use and defined by each agency. These latter codes are not present in the central accounting system.

2. Oregon: The state treasurer is responsible for managing short-term and long-term investments held separately by the state's funds. In addition, the state treasurer manages the funds on deposit and the short-term local government investment pool. However, other investments are managed directly by state agencies.

3. Utah: The Department of Human Resources has a consolidated group of HR and payroll specialists that perform some of the payroll processing support functions. Our Departments of Transportation and Technology Services have separate time entry systems that interface with the statewide payroll system.


194


Table 24d PERFORMANCE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 9: Q19-23)


195

State and Office


Payroll Processing Performance Measurement Pre-Auditing of Payments

Post-Auditing of Payments Procurement


Yes, in the state comptroller’s office No Yes, in the state comptroller’s office

No Yes, in the Finance Department, Division of Purchasing


Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller Yes, they are reported by state agencies to the budget office as part of the budget preparation.

No No No


No




Yes, the state controller is the business owner of the payroll system and related data. Initiating payroll runs, tax and benefits liability payment, and other statewide functions are centralized in the Office of the State Controller.

No No, the state controller has delegated this responsibility to state agencies.

Yes, to the extent that this occurs it is done by the Office of the State Auditor on a sample basis.

No, purchasing policy and statewide price agreement awarding is centralized, but ongoing purchasing functions have mostly been delegate to agencies.



No No Yes, pre-auditing occurs for accounting transactions greater than $2,500.

No No


Yes, in the Office of the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing. System functions on payroll by exception for permanent position employees. Payroll preparation file will contain only changes for permanent employees and time and rate information for all temporary and seasonal employees.

No Yes, in the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing

Yes, in the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing

No, the Department of Management Services procurement system provides for only a limited number of services and commodities.


Yes, in the State Accounting Office; exception is Board of Regents

No No No No


(Chapter 9: Q19-23)


196

State and Office






Yes, in the Department of Budget and Finance, executive branch only

No, the Department of Accounting and General Services pre-audits majority of executive departments: payments under $1,000 pre-audited by departments; few executive departments and other branches of government pre-audit their own.

Yes, in the legislature, Office of the Auditor

Yes, in the State Procurement Office


Yes, in the state controller's office No No Yes, in the Legislative Services Office

Yes, agencies are granted a dollar threshold delegated authority. Until that threshold is reached, they are not required to contact the Division of Purchasing.


Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller No, the Office of the Comptroller, Governor's Office of Management and Budget, and agencies



Yes, in the Department of Central Management Services and Executive Ethics Commission



Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services. The majority of payroll is centralized with a few other decentralized systems. These include the Regents Institutions, Department of Transportation, the Fair Board and Community Based Corrections.


No No No



Yes, in the Personnel Cabinet Yes, in the Office of State Budget Director

No, the Office of the Controller has delegated this responsibility to agencies. Each agency has been delegated pre-audit responsibility with oversight being provided by the Office of the Controller.




(Chapter 9: Q19-23)


197

State and Office





Yes, in the Division of Administration, Office of State Uniform Payroll (except for colleges and universities)

No No, each request for payment is input by a state agency employee, then approved by another supervisor (a pre-audit). The statewide computer system software includes edits that may be considered part of a "pre-audit" function.

No, individual agencies use standard system reports as well as ad-hoc reports, exception reports and online screens to research transactions accepted and/or rejected during processing.

No1


Yes, in the Office of the State Controller No Yes, in the Office of the State Controller




Yes, in the comptroller's office, Central Payroll Bureau

No, it is delegated to state agencies

Yes, in the Comptroller's Office, General Accounting Division

Yes, all of agencies' transactions are audited by legislative auditor's office and comptroller's office.

No, it is delegated to state agencies


Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller (accounting policies and tax reporting); Human Resources Division (personnel policies for departments under the control of the Governor’s Information Technology Division, Technology support)

No No Yes, in the Office of the State Auditor and Office of the Comptroller

Yes, in the Operational Services Division, Purchasing Agent


Yes, in the state comptroller's office No No No No



Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller No Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller

Yes, in the state auditor's office No


Yes, in the Office of Administration, Division of Accounting

No, employee performance appraisals are, but operational measures are not

No No No


Yes, in the State Human Resource Division (Department of Administration). Although the agencies ultimately record their payroll information in the centralized system, some have sub-systems for payroll entry and the maintenance of additional payroll information.

No No No


(Chapter 9: Q19-23)


198

State and Office





Yes, in the state accounting office No No, state accounting has signed MOUs with the agencies to perform their own pre-audit.

Yes, in the state auditor’s office No


Yes, in the Department of Personnel No, the Department of Administration is working toward achieving centralized performance measurement.

No No Yes, in the Department of Administration




No No No Yes, in the Department of the Treasury, the Division of Purchase and Property


Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division, Central Payroll Bureau

Yes, the Legislative Finance Committee


No, the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division

No, agencies are responsible for their own procurement.


Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller No Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller


Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller, the Office of General Services


Yes, in the state controller’s office No No No No


Yes, in the state comptroller’s office No No No No


Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services (DAS)

No Yes, in the Office of Budget and Management (OBM)

Yes, in the OBM Yes, in the DAS


No No Yes, in the state comptroller's office using sampling techniques, except for exempt agencies

Yes, in the state comptroller's office using sampling techniques, except for exempt agencies

Yes, in the Department of Central Services, Central Purchasing if over $25,000


(Chapter 9: Q19-23)


199

State and Office





Yes, in the State Controller's Division No, performance measurement activities are managed by individual state agencies. Each of these agencies reports their performance outcomes and projected targets as part of the budget development process each biennium. These performance reports are sent to the Budget and Management Division each year.

No No No, depending upon the value of the procurement, the purchasing function may be conducted in the Department of Administrative Services, State Procurement Office or it could be conducted at the individual agencies. The threshold for requiring the procurement to be processed through the State Procurement Office is over $150,000.


Yes, in the state comptroller's office Yes, in the Office of Budget Yes, in the state comptroller's office

Yes, in the Office of the Auditor General and the state comptroller's office

Yes, the Department of General Services is business process owner. Certain agencies have authority to procure goods and services in accordance with the state procurement code.


Yes, in the state controller’s office Yes, in the budget office Yes, in the state controller’s office




Yes, in the Comptroller‘s General's Office No Yes, in the Comptroller‘s General's Office

Yes, in the Material Management Office

Yes, in the Material Management Office


Yes, in the Bureau of Personnel No Yes, in the state auditor's office

No Yes, in the Bureau of Administration, Property Management and Purchasing



No No Yes, in the Division of Accounts in Department of Finance and Administration. The Office of the Comptroller of the Treasury performs independent post-audits.

No


Yes, in the comptroller's office Yes, in the Office of the Legislative Budget Board

It is performed by the comptroller's office, but only in special circumstances.

Yes, in the comptroller's office No, the comptroller's office administers the Centralized Master Bidders List and awards/manages statewide contracts. Procurement systems are maintained at the agency level.


(Chapter 9: Q19-23)


200

State and Office





Yes, in the Division of Finance No No Yes, in the Division of Finance No, the Division of Purchasing delegates its procurement authority to some agencies for specific purposes.2





Yes, in the state auditor's office No Yes, in the state auditor's office

Yes, in the Legislative Post Audit Division; performed on very limited basis

No


No Yes, in the auditor’s office Yes in the auditor's office Yes, in the purchasing division if the purchase contracts are greater than $25,000, and legislative post-audit looks at everything, P-card division looks at P-card spending.



Yes, in the state controller's office No No Yes, in the Legislative Audit Bureau.

Yes, in the State Bureau of Procurement with some delegation to state agencies.


Yes, in the state auditor's office Yes, the strategic planning and performance audited by Department of Audit.

No, agencies are delegated pre-audit functions, using written internal control procedures.

No, agencies are audited by the Department of Audit, then statewide Single Audit as contracted by Department of Audit.

Yes, in the procurement office in General Services Division of Administration and Information

Notes: 1. Louisiana: Agencies are required to use the Division of Administration (DOA), Office of State Purchasing, to procure items that are on state contract and/or for

purchases that exceed an agency's delegated authority (the dollar amount varies by agency). The bid process, purchase order creation, etc. are in a module of the statewide system maintained by the DOA.

2. Utah: Agencies use the statewide accounting system to enter requisitions which are then used by the Division of Purchasing to solicit and award bids using a separate system. Once the vendor is selected, the contract is entered into the statewide accounting system for payments. Various state agencies use their own purchase orders even though the central accounting system has them.

Table 24e PERFORMANCE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 9: Q24-28)


201

State and Office

Financial Management Functions: Is each function centralized? Management of

Retirement Systems Collection of Non-Tax Revenues Collection of Tax Revenues Operation of a Risk

Management Program Preparation of the Schedule of

Expenditures of Federal Awards Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Yes, in the retirement systems of Alabama

No No Yes, in the Finance Department, Division of Risk Management

Yes, in the Examiners of Public Accounts


Yes, in the Department of Administration, Division of Retirement and Benefits

No Yes, in the Department of Revenue and the Division of Tax

Yes, in the Department of Administration and the Division of Risk Management

Individual agencies submit federal schedules to the comptroller's office for consolidation into our statewide federal schedule.





Yes, the state's main retirement plan is managed and reported in a separate legal entity, but the state also has a few small OPEB plans managed by institutions of higher education.

No Yes, individual and corporate income taxes, tobacco, gaming, alcohol and excise taxes are collected by the Department of Revenue. Insurance taxes are collected by the Division of Insurance in the Department of Regulatory Agencies.

Yes, most agencies participate in the State Risk Management Program managed by the Department of Personnel and Administration. However, some institutions of higher education have been allowed to opt out of the program.

Yes, the Office of the State Controller prepares the statewide SEFA.




No Yes, in the Department of Finance, Division of Revenue

No Yes, in the Department of Finance, Division of Accounting


Yes, in the Department of Management Services

No Yes, in the Department of Revenue

Yes, in the Office of the CFO, Division of Risk Management

Yes, in the CFO, Division of Accounting and Auditing


Yes, in the Teachers Retirement System and Employees Retirement System


Yes, in the Department of Administrative Services (Risk Management)

Yes, in the State Accounting Office


Yes, in the Hawaii State Employee Retirement System

No Yes, in the Department of Taxation for majority of taxes


No


(Chapter 9: Q24-28)


202

State and Office




Expenditures of Federal Awards Idaho Office of the State Controller

No Yes, in the State Treasurer's Office and the Office of the State Controller. All state revenues are required to be deposited in the state treasury and recorded in the statewide accounting system.

Yes, by the state tax commission No Yes, by the Legislative Services Office and the Office of the State Controller


Yes, in the State Employee Retirement System

No, it is done by the Department of Revenue and various agencies.


Yes, by the Department of Central Management Services

Yes, in the Office of the Auditor General




No Yes, in the Department of Management



Yes, our retirement systems are legally separate entities that are component units of the commonwealth for financial reporting purposes.

No, federal funds and agency generated funds (non-tax) are collected by agencies.


No, the risk management function is distributed through various cabinets with coordination provided by the Office of the Controller.



No No, state entities collect the funds for deposit into bank accounts under the control of the state treasurer. The deposits are then coded to the applicable revenue category in the statewide computer system that is maintained by the Division of Administration (DOA).

No, state agencies collect the taxes for deposit into bank accounts under the control of the state treasurer. The deposits are then coded to the applicable revenue category in the statewide computer system that is maintained by the Division of Administration.

Yes, in the Division of Administration, Office of Risk Management

Yes, the SEFA is compiled by DOA, Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy


Yes, in the Maine Public Employee Retirement System

No Yes, in the Maine Revenue Services

Yes, in the Division of Risk Management



Yes, in the State Retirement Agency

No, it is delegated to state agencies. Yes, in the comptroller's office, Revenue Administration Division


Yes, in the Comptroller's Office, General Accounting Division



Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller Yes, in the Department of Revenue

No Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller


Yes, in the Office of Retirement Services

No No Yes, in the Department of Management and Budget

No


(Chapter 9: Q24-28)


203

State and Office




Expenditures of Federal Awards Minnesota Management and Budget


Yes, in the Public Employees Retirement System

No Yes, by the State Tax Commission Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration



Yes, in the Missouri State Employees' Retirement System and Missouri Public Employees' Retirement System


Yes, in the Office of Administration and the Department of Transportation

No


Yes, the Teachers Retirement and Montana Public Employee Retirement Administration (all other public employee retirement plans managed by the state)

No No Yes, in the Risk Management and Tort Defense Division (Department of Administration)

Yes, in the Office of Budget and Program Planning (Governor's Office). We have discussed moving this to the controller's office but the schedule conflicts with the CAFR and additional FTE are not available for the preparation duties.


Yes, in the Public Employees Retirement Systems


Yes, in the Risk Management Division

Yes, in the state accounting office


Yes, in the Public Employees Retirement System

No Yes, in the Department of Taxation Yes, in the Department of Administration




Yes, in the Department of the Treasury, the Division of Pension and Benefits

No, revenues may be collected and posted to departmental systems and interfaced to the accounting system or posted directly to the accounting system by the department.

Yes, in the Division of Revenue Yes, in the Department of the Treasury, the Division of Risk Management



No, there are two separate retirement systems for the state that are separate agencies with separate boards.

No, agencies are responsible for their own revenue accounting.

Yes, in the Taxation and Revenue Department

Yes, in the General Services Department

No, agencies are responsible for their own federal grants.



Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller and Treasurer

Yes, in the Department of Taxation and Finance

No Yes, in the Division of the Budget by the state comptroller


Yes, in the State Treasurer's Office


No No


(Chapter 9: Q24-28)


204

State and Office




Expenditures of Federal Awards North Dakota Office of Management and Budget

Yes, in the North Dakota Public Employees Retirement System

No No No No


No Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer Yes, in the Office of the State Treasurer


No


No No Yes, by the tax commission Yes, in the Department of Central Services

Yes, in the state comptroller and the state auditor inspector


Yes, this function is centralized between the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and the Office of the State Treasurer. PERS is responsible for administration, collecting contributions, actuarial valuations and paying of benefits. The Oregon Investment Council through the Oregon State Treasurer is responsible for establishing investment policies, investment allocations and investing the assets.

No Yes, income and employment taxes are collected through the Department of Revenue; however other agencies also collect taxes, such as the Department of Transportation (motor fuels and weight-mile taxes).

Yes, in the State Services Division within the Department of Administrative Services

Yes, agencies enter SEFA data into the central accounting system. The state controller's division summarizes the data and prepares a preliminary report for audits division. Audits division audits and publishes the information as part of the statewide Single Audit report.


Yes, in the State Employees Retirement System and School Employees Retirement System

No, revenue deposits are decentralized while revenue accounting is centralized in the state comptroller’s office.


Yes, in the Office of the Budget and the Department of General Services

Yes, in the state comptroller's office


Yes, in the State Treasurer’s Office

No Yes, in the Division of Taxation Yes, in the Department of Administration



Yes, in the South Carolina Retirement Systems


No No


Yes, in the South Dakota Retirement System

No, in the state treasurer office Yes, in the Department of Revenue

Yes, in the Bureau of Administration, Risk Management

Yes, in the Bureau of Finance and Management, Accounting Analysis and Financial Reporting


Yes, in the Department of Treasury


Yes, in the Department of Treasury

No


(Chapter 9: Q24-28)


205

State and Office




Expenditures of Federal Awards Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Yes, the Employees Retirement System, Teacher Retirement System, and the Firefighters Pension Commissioner. Optional Retirement Program is another option at state universities in lieu of the Teacher Retirement System plan.

They are collected by the comptroller's office and individual state agencies.

Yes, the comptroller's office collects 99% of tax revenues.

Yes, in the State Office of Risk Management

Yes, prepared by the comptroller's office


Yes, in the Utah State Retirement System office

Yes, in the Division of Finance, central accounting system. However, some agencies/programs have point-of-sale or other revenue collection systems which are summarized and posted to the statewide accounting system.

Yes, by the State Tax Commission Yes, in the Division of Risk Management







Yes, by the Board of Risk and Insurance Management

No


Yes, in the Consolidated Public Retirement Board, under Administration

No Yes, in the tax department Yes, in the Department of Administration



Yes, in the Employee Trust Funds

Yes, in the Department of Revenue Yes, in the Department of Revenue. An insignificant amount of taxes are posted by other state agencies.

Yes, in the Bureau of Risk Management in the Department of Administration

Yes, in the Legislative Audit Bureau and signed by the state controller


Yes, in the Retirement System Board

No, non-tax revenues are collected by agencies


Yes, in the Risk Management Office of the Division of General Services, Department of Administration and Information

Yes, the Department of Audit prepares for the state's A-133 audit


206


Table 24f PERFORMANCE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONS IN STATE GOVERNMENT

(Chapter 9: Q29-33)


207

State and Office


Management of Travel Policies Preparation and Processing

of Vouchers/Claims Preparation and Processing

of Data Systems/IT Other Functions and Which

Office Performs Them Other Programs Processed

Outside of Central Accounting Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

No, the function is centralized with the state comptroller, but there is no software.

No Yes, in the Finance - Information Systems Division

Unemployment Compensation is completely outside. Medicaid, Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) and State Purchasing are largely outside.


Yes, in the comptroller's office No Yes, in the comptroller's office; legacy system

Data warehouse for financial and payroll reporting is centralized in the comptroller’s office.

There are approximately 100 interfaces from subsystems into the accounting system. The major interfaces include: Unemployment Compensation, Medicaid Payments, Retiree Payments, State Self- Insurance Program for Health Benefits, Corporate Taxes, and Permanent Fund Dividends.





Yes, the state controller issues travel fiscal rules and the Statewide Travel Management Program, also the Department of Personnel and Administration implements the state's travel program.

No Yes, Colorado is in its third year of centralizing IT systems.

The state is currently in the process of implementing an e-procurement system.




Yes, in the Department of Finance, Division of Accounting. Centralized payments greater than $2,500 and data entry are decentralized.


(Chapter 9: Q29-33)


208

State and Office






Outside of Central Accounting Florida Department of Financial Services

No Yes, in the Office of the CFO, Division of Accounting & Auditing. Some agency's programs use business systems, (i.e., Unemployment Comp, retirement benefits, tax refunds) to bypass the departmental accounting system when submitting vouchers to the CFO.

No, the state has embarked on a long-term goal to reduce stand-alone agency data centers through data center consolidation.

State treasury is centralized in the CFO (Division of Treasury).1

State Board of Administration: investment management of Florida Retirement System trust fund, college prepaid program, hurricane catastrophe trust fund


Yes, in the State Accounting Office and the office of Planning and Budget

No No Most benefit related payments (examples include Medicaid, unemployment compensation, TANF)



Yes, preparation is at the office level. Processing for payment is done by the Department of Accounting and General Services for majority of executive departments.


Yes, by the State Board of Examiners. Agencies may define more restrictive internal policies if they so choose

No No


Yes, by the Travel Control Board No, it is done by various agencies.

No, agencies







Yes, in the Office of the Controller No, it is delegated to individual agencies

No Statewide accounting system


(Chapter 9: Q29-33)


209

State and Office






Outside of Central Accounting Louisiana Division of Administration

Yes, in the Division of Administration, Office of State Purchasing and Travel. State entities are allowed to have their own travel regulations, but those regulations may not exceed the limits set by the state's official travel policies.

No, the preparation and approval of individual transactions occurs at each state entity when the entries are keyed into the statewide accounting system or when entity's system transfers the transactions to the statewide system through an interface.

No, Louisiana has a statewide accounting system that is maintained by the Division of Administration. However, most large state agencies maintain their own computer hardware and software that meet their individual needs. Some of these systems interface with the statewide system.

Unemployment compensation, Medicaid, tax refunds, Department of Transportation and Development payments to contractors for road and bridge construction, child support collections and remittances to parents, parish and municipal taxes collected by the state, higher education (colleges and universities)


Yes, in the Office of the State Controller Yes, in the Office of the State Controller

Yes, in the Office of Information Technology



No, it is delegated to state agencies.

Tax law enforcement


Yes, in the Executive Office of Administration and Finance


Yes, in the Information Technology Division


Yes, in the Office of Vehicle and Travel Services

No No



Yes, in the Office of the Comptroller No, agencies prepare vouchers and the comptroller approves for payment.

No Unemployment compensation, medical assistance, retirement payments, individual economic assistance


Yes, in the Office of Administration, Division of Accounting

No Yes, in the Office of Administration, Information Technology Services Division

Medicaid and tax refunds


Yes, in the controller's office No


Yes, in state accounting No No Unemployment compensation and child support disbursement unit


In the Department of Administration No Yes, in the controller's office N/A Unemployment compensation, medical assistance, WIC, SNAP, TANF



(Chapter 9: Q29-33)


210

State and Office






Outside of Central Accounting New Jersey Office of Management and Budget


No, it is centralized in one statewide accounting system but each department processes vouchers and claims.

No



No, the final approval is centralized at the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division.

Yes, Department of Information Technology

2


Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller

The central accounting system is centralized in the Office of the State Comptroller


Yes, in the Office of State Budget and Management

No


Yes, the state comptroller No No


Yes, in the Office of Budget and Management (OBM)

Yes, in the OBM All public assistance programs, Workers' Compensation Taxation


Yes, in the Office of the State Comptroller No No


Yes, in the State Controller's Division No, agencies may have independent payment systems from which summary information is interfaced into the statewide financial management system; each agency prepares its own vouchers/claims.

No Unemployment compensation and medical assistance


Yes, in the state comptroller's office. The Office of Administration and Department of General Services have input into the travel policy requirements.

Yes, travel vouchers are centralized in the Office of the Budget.

Yes, in the Office of Administration, Office of Information Technology. State comptroller is the business process owner for finance, payroll and travel systems in the SAP suite.

Internal audit function is centralized in the state comptroller's office. The Department of Public Welfare is the only exception where they have CMS-driven audit plans.

Unemployment compensation, medical Assistance and other DPW eligibility programs, State Workers Insurance Program, Tax Revenue Accounting.


Yes, in the state controller’s office No Yes, in the Department of Administration

Unemployment insurance, SNAP, TANF, Medical Assistance, and WIC


(Chapter 9: Q29-33)


211

State and Office






Outside of Central Accounting South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General

Yes, in the Budget and Control Board Yes, prepared by agencies (decentralized) and processed by the Comptroller General's Office (centralized)

Yes, in the Budget and Control Board. Some auxiliary/subsidiary systems are maintained decentralized by agencies; however, for integration to the ERP, the central Division of State Information Technology oversees the operation.

Client Service Payments - DSS and DHHS; Unemployment Compensation - Employment Workforce and Comptroller General's Office; Income Tax Collection - Department of Revenue; Debt and Investment Management - State Treasurer


Yes, in the Bureau of Administration, Fleet and Travel

No Yes, in the Bureau of Finance and Management, Financial Systems and Operations



No Yes, in the Department of Finance and Administration

Accounting policies are centralized in the Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration.

None


Yes, in the comptroller's office. Individual agencies may also set more stringent internal travel policies.

No, the preparation of vouchers is decentralized. Processing is centralized at the comptroller's office.

No, information systems are decentralized in many cases.2

Unemployment compensation


Yes, in the Division of Finance No Yes, the Department of Technology Services has consolidated most state servers into a central location using large blade servers that are partitioned into virtual servers for each application.

All state programs are processed outside of central accounting but use the central accounting system. Some programs have their own management/payment systems such as Medicaid, unemployment insurance, Utah Correctional Industries, and Office of Education.




Yes, in the Office of Financial Management


No No


(Chapter 9: Q29-33)


212

State and Office






Outside of Central Accounting West Virginia Finance Division

Yes, in the Department of Administration No Unemployment compensation and medical assistance


Yes, in the Office of State Employee Relations

No Administration Division of Enterprise Technology


No, agencies set travel policies within statutory parameters.

No, agencies prepare vouchers and input into financial system administered by the auditor's office.

No, all agencies are required to have their financial data in the system maintained by the state auditor's office whether through direct input or through interfacing. There is currently underway a centralization of the state's IT functions.

All programs must run through the state auditor's financial system

Notes 1. Florida: A single financial institution has the treasury concentration account for the initial deposit of all state funds and another financial institution is the paying

bank from which state warrants are drawn. Most revolving fund accounts are concentrated into a single institution for better cash management.

2. New Mexico:

Administrative Office of the Courts – JURIS; Children, Youth and Families Department – FACTS: “M” Warrants; Educational Retirement Board – IRIS; Department of Finance and Administration – Local Government Subsidiary System (Grants); Department of Game and Fish – License Refunds General Services Department – Workers’ Comp system; Human Services Department – Child Support Enforcement & Medicaid & LIHEAP & EBT – JP Morgan; Department of Workforce Solutions – Unemployment Claims System; Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) – RIO; Taxation and Revenue Department – Gentax; Division of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR) – RISTRAS; AAging & Long Term Services – APSS (Adult Protective Services System); State Treasurer's Office – QED; State Investment Council – QED.

3. Texas: The decentralized systems do report to a central statewide accounting system maintained by the comptroller's office, but much of the information that is maintained centrally is summarized. Detail exists primarily in a decentralized fashion.

Table 25a STATE PAYROLL: TIME AND ATTENDANCE, LEAVE ACCRUALS AND MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS

(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


213

State and Office Payroll Centralized or Decentralized? Online Time and Attendance? Responsibility for Accounting and Reporting Leave Accrual

Maintenance of Records for Payroll

Maintenance of Records for Personnel


All final payroll processing is centralized at the state comptroller's office. Payroll preparation is decentralized at individual agency levels within the state.

No, however, there are near-term plans to acquire an online time and attendance.

State Personnel Department except in legislative and judicial branches of state government

Electronic files of payroll records are maintained at the State Finance Department. Payroll documentation is maintained at the originating agency for a specified period of time.

State Personnel Department; originating agencies also maintain personnel records.


State agencies enter timesheets. Department of Administration, Division of Personnel reviews and certifies on statewide payroll system, comptroller's office operates the statewide payroll system.

No, time and attendance system is currently under contract. Implementation of an online system is expected in 2013.

The Department of Administration and the Division of Personnel. Records are maintained on the statewide payroll system.

The Department of Administration, the Division of Personnel and various agencies

The Department of Administration, the Division of Personnel, and various agencies





System programming and maintenance is centralized. Five staff members manage the central payroll function including batch process initiation, W-2 preparation, liability tracking and payment, and hand drawn separation payments. The payroll process is largely turn around, but payroll officers at each agency enter adjustments and hourly payroll data.

Yes, mostly; however, all agencies are not on the same system.

Each agency is responsible for leave accounting, although several departments use the same system.

Payroll and personnel records have recently been combined into a single central system on the state mainframe. Some higher education institutions have payroll systems integrated into their stand-alone accounting systems or ERPs.



Yes, the PeopleSoft Time and Labor module is installed in approximately 5% of organizations.

Individual organizations report leave accruals if they are not using the PeopleSoft module. Department of Finance, Division of Accounting reports for organizations using the PeopleSoft system.

They are maintained within the organization.


(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


214





Payroll processing is centralized and accomplished by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) - calculation, payment, employee records, withholding, and reporting. Payroll input comes from a variety of state agencies and systems.

Yes, most employees maintain time and attendance in the HR system via a web interface. A few agencies have staff timekeepers for those individuals without daily access to a computer, such as correctional officers.

Based on HR system generated reports produced at fiscal year-end, each agency records information about leave accruals.

CFO (Division of Accounting and Auditing): earnings and records for tax administration

Department of Management Services (outsourced HR / personnel system) and agencies: employee and position records


Moving in the direction of centralized payroll No; however, there are near-term plans to acquire an online time and attendance.

Each agency Differs by agency Differs by agency


The preparation of payroll is decentralized to each department following the same policies and procedures. Payroll payments are centralized to the Department of Accounting and General Services.

No, and there are not any near-term plans to acquire an online time and attendance.

Each department is responsible for its own information.

The Department of Accounting and General Services; central payroll maintains payroll records. Each department maintains its own payroll records.

Each department maintains personnel reports.


Payroll is centralized. Time and attendance is web employee self-service in the agencies, with agency payroll staff releasing summarized data to the state controller's office, where it is centrally processed.

Yes The Office of the State Controller is responsible.

All but two HR/payroll forms are web-based. The online forms are stored online in an archive for either agency payroll/personnel staff of employees to access. Hard copy forms are retained in the state controller's office.

All but two HR/payroll forms are web-based. The online forms are stored online in an archive for either agency payroll/personnel staff of employees to access. Hard copy forms are retained in the state controller's office.


State agencies initiate payroll transactions by submitting vouchers to the Illinois Office of the Comptroller (IOC) indicating gross pay and deductions by employee.1

No, payroll record keeping is decentralized so practices vary. Currently, there are not any near-term plans to acquire an online time and attendance system.

Each employing state agency is responsible.

They are kept in the Office of the Comptroller and various agencies.

They are kept in the Office of the Comptroller and various agencies.



The majority of payroll is centralized with a few other decentralized systems. These include the Regents Institutions, Department of Transportation, Fair Board and Community Based Corrections.

Yes The accrual is calculated automatically by the payroll system. Manual adjustments are made by the personnel assistants.

They are maintained in the Department of Administrative Services.

They are maintained in the Department of Administrative Services.



(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


215





Payroll is centralized under the Personnel Cabinet.

Yes, the state has multiple time entry systems.

The Personnel Cabinet is responsible for leave accruals.

They are maintained in the Personnel Cabinet.


Legislative and judicial branch entities do not use the centralized payroll system, nor do the colleges and universities. Otherwise, most state entities in primary government use the centralized system.

Yes Division of Administration, Office of State Uniform Payroll (LEO system) for entities on the centralized system. For entities not on the centralized system, the information is gathered when the agencies complete financial statements for the compilation of the CAFR by DOA, Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy.

Division of Administration, Office of State Uniform Payroll

Division of Administration, Human Resources and the Department of Civil Service, which is an agency not part of the comptroller's oversight.


Payroll is centralized with the exception of highway crew, which is interfaced.

Yes, however, not all the departments are on the system.

Responsibility is mostly within the controller's office.

Office of the State Controller


Approval of pay is decentralized; checks are issued through Central Payroll Bureau of the Comptroller.

Yes, it is kept through paper and online timekeepers.

Responsibility lies within each agency.

The Central Payroll Bureau, which is in the Office of the Comptroller, is responsible.

Each state agency is responsible.


Through one payroll system, HR/CMS, all 150 departments of the commonwealth process payroll actions. The Office of the Comptroller then oversees bi-weekly payroll processing, accounting, and tax reporting. Only the University of Massachusetts runs a separate instance of Oracle/PeopleSoft and we coordinate policies and coding requirements.

Yes, the commonwealth is currently implementing time and attendance self-service statewide. We expect to have 30,000 or so employees live by the end of the calendar year and another 20,000 by the end of fiscal year 2013.

Office of the Comptroller HR/CMS is the system of record for payroll. Departments that are not on Time and Attendance self-service (TA SS) are the record keeper for the individual time sheets.

The department is the record keeper for personnel records.


Time entry is decentralized, while payroll processing and calculation are centralized.

Yes The Office of Financial Management is responsible for leave accruals, subject to policies and procedures established by the state personnel director.

It is maintained in the state's integrated human resources, benefits, and payroll system.

It is maintained in the state's integrated human resources, benefits and payroll system.



State agencies generate payrolls and the comptroller's office processes and distributes the payrolls.

No, some agencies interface information but most agencies enter from paper records. Currently, there are near-term plans to acquire an online time and attendance.

Agency employees enter and post time and leave accruals. For financial reporting, the comptroller's office generates the information from the statewide system.

They are maintained in agencies and by the comptroller.

They are maintained in agencies and by the State Personnel Board.


(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


216





Centralized payroll processing and payment; however, decentralized time keeping and data entry of payroll transactions

Yes, some agencies use online time and attendance. The ones that don't do not plan to do so in the future.

Decentralized accounting but centralized viewing

They are centralized. They are decentralized.


Primarily centralized Yes, most agencies have moved to paperless entry. Some still require paper timesheet with the related payroll information interfaced into the central system.

The leave information is tracked on the payroll system. The controller's office records the leave accrual on the accounting system prior to fiscal year-end.

They are maintained in agencies and central payroll.

They are maintained in agencies and state human resource division.


Time collection and pre-payroll processing is decentralized in the agencies. Final payroll processing and tax reporting is centralized in state accounting.

Yes; however, only some agencies use online time and attendance. The ones that don't do not plan to do so in the future.

The ERP system does the accounting and reporting of leave.

At the agencies At the agencies


Currently, Department of Transportation has their own payroll system, and the rest of the state receives payroll processed by the Department of Personnel. However, a project is in progress that will consolidate the DOT payroll into the central system.

Yes Responsibility lies in the Department of Personnel.

The Department of Personnel maintains the records.

The Department of Personnel maintains the records.



There is a centralized payroll system with time collection performed in each department. Departments vary as to the method of time submission. There are electronic interfaces and also the submission of paper documents.

Yes For year-end financial statement liabilities, the accrual is performed in the Office of Management and Budget. For employee leave balances, departments perform the function.

They are maintained in the Office of Management and Budget.

They are maintained in the Department of Personnel (soon to be incorporated into the Department of Labor and Workforce Development).


Human resource functions are decentralized to the agency level. Once an agency has approved employees' timesheet in the central accounting system, the processing, distribution and reporting of payroll is centralized.

Yes, in the central accounting system.

The central accounting system with agencies monitoring the accumulation and use of the leave. Each agency is audited and reports their accrual on their financial statements. Then the agencies financial information is accumulated for the CAFR.

All time information is kept in the central accounting system. Each agency may have a policy for manual timesheets. Payroll registers, check stubs, tax reports.

The Financial Control Division keeps personnel action request forms, performance evaluations, W-4 and I-9s.


Payroll is processed by the state comptroller.


Each agency is responsible. The state comptroller's office maintains the records.

Each agency is responsible for maintaining the records.


(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


217





Payroll is 85% centralized. Yes State personnel are responsible for leave accruals.

Both centrally and agency Both centrally and agency


State comptroller office processes the payroll and each agency prepares their payroll.

Yes State comptroller Each agency Each agency


Preparation is decentralized; processing is centralized.

Yes; however, only some are online (decentralized). The ones that don't, plan to do so in the future.

DAS is responsible for leave accruals.

Agencies maintain the records Agencies maintain the records


Each agency processes its own payroll in the state central system.

Yes, some agencies are using online entry, but it is not fully utilized yet.

Each agency is responsible for leave accruals.

Each agency maintains payroll records.

Each agency maintains payroll records.


The payroll application and support is centrally provided by Oregon Statewide Payroll Services in the State Controller's Division. The agencies employ their own payroll staff and use the statewide payroll application to pay their workforce.

Yes, the statewide payroll application has a mainframe-based paperless time and attendance module.2

The Oregon Statewide Payroll Application has a leave accrual and reporting module.

Statewide Payroll Services in the State Controller's Division and in state agencies maintain payroll records.

The Human Resources Services Division (HRSD) within the Department of Administrative Services maintains HR records.


Payroll is centralized in SAP. Yes, Employee Self-Service is available to all employees.

Agency timekeepers keep track of leave accruals.

HR and payroll records are maintained on the SAP system.

Personnel records are maintained on the SAP system and legacy system.


Processing is centralized. Yes, some agencies use online systems for this purpose.

The system is tracked based on data input from time and attendance reports.

State controller’s office Division of Personnel


Payroll is centralized except for the higher education institutions.

Yes Individual agencies enter, approve and monitor leave usage. The ERP houses the information and recognizes accrual and loss (due to exceeding maximum) as systematic programming established by Office of Human Resources policies.

Payroll records are maintained by the Comptroller General's Office and individual agencies.

HR records are maintained by the Budget and Control Board, Office of Human Resources and individual agencies.


With a few rare exceptions, employees enter time and attendance (timesheets) into a centralized payroll system. Payroll is then processed and paid from that central system.

Yes Bureau of Personnel and Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM) - Accounting Analysis and Financial Reporting

Bureau of Personnel and BFM - Financial Systems and Operations

Bureau of Personnel


Adjustments to payroll are performed decentralized and payroll processing is centralized.

Yes, but it is not used by all agencies.

The Department of Human Resources is responsible for leave accruals.

Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration

Department of Human Resources and agencies keep HR records.


(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


218





Payroll functions are hybrid, neither centralized nor decentralized. The Uniform Statewide Payroll/Personnel System (USPS) was established to process payrolls for state employees using a centralized and standardized payroll calculation.3

Yes, this function is decentralized across the state. Agencies and departments vary in terms of technology and sophistication.

Individual state agencies maintain leave accruals.

Payroll is maintained in the comptroller's office for most agencies.

HR records are kept in the comptroller's office for most agencies.


We have a centralized payroll system which is run by the Division of Finance. Most state employees use the Employee Self-Service (ESS) module to enter their time online which is also approved online by their supervisors. Payroll time support functions were recently consolidated in our Department of Human Resources. The Department of Transportation and the Department of Technology Services have their own time entry systems which interface with the state payroll system.

Yes, most employees use our ESS module for time entry and approval.

The Division of Finance maintains leave accounting records for the executive and judicial branches within the statewide payroll system. The legislative branch tracks its own leave and reports to Division of Finance annually for reporting in the CAFR.

Payroll records are kept in the Division of Finance.

HR records are kept in the Department of Human Resource Management.




The payroll function is decentralized, using a variety of systems. General government agencies use one system, but each agency has their own payroll office.4

No, however, there are discussions of implementing an online attendance/time system, but the discussions are preliminary at this time.

Each agency processes its own leave. Accruals are calculated within each system.

Payroll records are maintained in the payroll office. A few agencies have combined files, but most payroll/personnel records are filed separately.

HR records are maintained in the Human Resource Office. A few agencies have combined files, but most payroll/personnel records are filed separately.


The payroll function is decentralized for input/preparation, and is centralized for the processing of payroll.

No, most agencies utilized manual input. Some larger more complex agencies have online time and attendance that interfaces into the state’s payroll processing software - EPICS. Currently, there are not any near-term plans to acquire an online time and attendance.

Accruals are maintained at the agency level.

Payroll records are kept in agencies.

HR records are kept in agencies.


Each major department processes their own payroll through a centralized system overseen by the auditor’s office.


Agencies annually submit info to the state comptroller.

Individual agencies or departments maintain the records.

Individual agencies or departments maintain the records.


(Chapter 9: Q34-37)


219





Each state agency has a payroll officer. Agencies with their own payroll systems interface information for payroll processing. All others enter info directly to central payroll. The university and legislature process their own payroll.

Yes, however, a very small number of agencies still use paper.

State controller's office State agencies maintain payroll records.

HR records are maintained in various state agencies.


University of Wyoming does its own payroll. All other state employees are paid through the payroll system administered by the auditor's office.

Yes, the state has an online time and attendance system and is working on rolling it out to state agencies; agencies aren't required to use the system, so buy-in is difficult and agencies can chose to use their own system instead of what the state auditor's office already has.

The state auditor's office is responsible for leave accruals.

Database information is maintained by the state auditor's office. The payroll reports from database are available to the agencies.

Human Resources Division of the Department of Administration and Information. The state agencies have HR personnel.

Notes 1. Illinois: The IOC then processes the vouchers by performing both a manual and system pre-audit. Once the pre-audits are performed and exceptions cleared,

the payroll warrants are written, recorded in the registers, and appropriations charged. Warrants are delivered to state agencies in advance of the distribution date. On the scheduled pay date, state agencies distribute the warrants. Direct deposit net pay transactions post the same day as the scheduled pay date. State agencies are required to retain support (including deduction authorizations) for payroll transactions and perform a thorough pre-audit of the payroll vouchers. IOC centralizes payroll tax reporting and W-2/W-3 reporting for the state of Illinois.

2. Oregon: However, only 39 percent of state employees use that system to record their time. A few agencies have their own electronic time and attendance systems. The balance of the employees use paper timesheets to report their time and leave.

3. Texas: The decision was made to allow larger state agencies to remain off USPS, so a reporting system was developed for them. The reporting system and USPS both incorporate edits to ensure compliance with HR and payroll law for regular state agencies. The institutions of higher education report HR information and some payroll data to a third system. Each agency and institution of higher education is an independent employer with its own federal identification number. There is also no single statewide HR office.

4. Washington: Some payroll offices process their payroll centrally, while others also process payroll in the field. Four universities have their own systems. Each institution processes its own payroll. Each community college has its own payroll office, but one system is used. Two universities also use this system. Each has their own payroll office.


220


Table 25b STATE PAYROLL: DIRECT DEPOSIT, DISTRIBUTION OF CHECKS, SELF-SERVICE AND PROCESSING OF W-2s, 1099s, etc.

(Chapter 9: Q38-43)


221

State and Office

Is Direct Deposit Optional or Mandatory?

Percentage of State’s Workforce on Direct Deposit

How Payroll Information is Distributed to

Those on Direct Deposit How Checks Are Delivered to Those Not on Direct Deposit

Areas of Self-Service Offered to Employees

Processing and Filing of W-2s, 1099 MISCs,

and Payroll Taxes Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Optional 88% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite or paper remittance information sent through the mail

Hand-delivered at worksite or mailed to employee's home

State comptroller's office


Optional 95% Website Hand-delivered at worksite or mailed to employee's home

Benefits

The comptroller





Mandatory Approximately 95% Website; however, there are limited exceptions to the requirement to use our self-service website for earnings advices.

Hand-delivered at worksite Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs and W-2

These functions are performed by the Office of the State Controller for most agencies, and by individual institutions of higher education.



Mandatory 98% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite or paper remittance information sent through the mail


Time and attendance and benefits

W-2/1099 - Department of Finance, Division of Accounting; fed and state payroll taxes - Office of the State Treasurer


Mandatory 98.9% Website Hand-delivered at worksite or mailed to employee's home

Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs and W-2

The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (Division of Accounting and Auditing)


Mandatory 96% Website Mailed to employee's home Changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs and W-2

Each agency - since each agency has unique Tax ID #


Mandatory 85% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite

Hand-delivered at worksite The Department of Accounting and General Services handles W-2s and federal and state taxes; various departments handle 1099-MISCs.


(Chapter 9: Q38-43)


222

State and Office







and Payroll Taxes Idaho Office of the State Controller

Mandatory 94.8% Remittance information (pay stub) is published on a secure website. Any individual without Internet access can contact their agency HR person and request a printed copy.



The Office of the State Controller processes and files them.


Optional 95% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite or through the website

Distributed to agencies The Office of the Comptroller handles such filings.



Optional 95% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite, paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website


Benefits and pay stubs Such things are processed by the Department of Administrative Services.




Hand-delivered at worksite Changing payroll information, benefits and pay stubs

The Personnel Cabinet files W-2s. The Office of the Controller is responsible for 1099s.


Mandatory 100% Website N/A (all employees are on direct deposit).

Time and attendance, benefits, pay stubs and W-2

For entities on the state's uniform payroll system, the Office of State Uniform Payroll processes W-2s, some 1099-MISCs (related to employees) and payroll taxes. State vendor 1099-MISCs are processed by the Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy based on vendor information codes.


Mandatory 99% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite, paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website


Time and attendance, changing payroll information and pay stubs




Pay stubs and W-2 The comptroller's office handles these filings.


(Chapter 9: Q38-43)


223

State and Office







and Payroll Taxes Massachusetts Office of the Comptroller

Mandatory 96% - the balance are exceptions

Paper remittance information delivered at worksite or through the website

Hand-delivered at worksite Time and attendance, pay stubs and W-2

Office of the Comptroller


Optional 87% Website Mailed to employee's home Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits and pay stubs

These are handled by the Office of the State Comptroller.



Optional 70% Website Hand-delivered at worksite or mailed to employee's home

Pay stubs and W-2 These are handled within the Office of the Comptroller, Office of Fiscal Management and Bureau of Financial Reporting.


Mandatory 98% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite, paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website


Pay stubs and W-2 The Office of Administration, Division of Accounting


Optional Approximately 75% - 80%

Paper remittance information sent through the mail, paper remittance information delivered at worksite or employee access to print it from the Human Resource System


Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits and pay stubs

State payroll deals with the W-2s along with federal and state payroll taxes, while the controller's office handles 1099s.


Mandatory 100% Pay stub information is resident on the ERP system that employees can log into via the web.

N/A (all employees are on direct deposit).

Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs, W-2 and direct deposit banking information

State accounting


Optional 95% Website Hand-delivered at worksite Time and attendance, pay stubs and W-2

W-2s and payroll taxes are done by Department of Personnel. 1099-MISC filing is done by the state controller.





Time and attendance, benefits, pay stubs and W-2

Office of Management and Budget


(Chapter 9: Q38-43)


224

State and Office







and Payroll Taxes New Mexico Financial Control Division

Optional 95% Paper remittance information sent through the mail or paper remittance information delivered at worksite

Mailed to agency or picked up by approved personnel

Time and attendance Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division


Optional The majority of employees

Paper remittance information sent through the mail

Hand-delivered at worksite Time and attendance, changing payroll information and benefits

Each agency and the state comptroller are responsible for these.


Mandatory 99% Website N/A (all employees are on direct deposit).

Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits and pay stubs

State controller and various other decentralized payroll centers - universities


Mandatory Website N/A (all employees are on direct deposit).

Benefits and pay stubs State comptroller


Mandatory 90% Website Hand-delivered at worksite or mailed to employee's home


W-2s and federal and state taxes are completed by DAS; 1099s are handled by OBM.


Mandatory 99.17% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite, paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website


Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits and pay stubs. Not all agencies are online at this time.

These filings are handled by the state comptroller.


Optional 87% Paper remittance information sent through the mail or paper remittance information delivered at worksite


Time and attendance and benefits

The payroll section of the State Controller's Division calculates and pays the payroll tax deposits, files quarterly and annual payroll tax reports, and produces and files W-2 forms.1


Mandatory 99.93% Paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website. Online employee self-service in SAP for most employees. Those without access to self-service receive paper through mail.

Mailed to employee's home Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs, W-2, employee donations and W-4 information

Office of the Budget, Comptroller Operations


Optional >85% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite

Hand-delivered at worksite Deferred comp plans State controller's office


(Chapter 9: Q38-43)


225

State and Office







and Payroll Taxes South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General

Optional 86% Website Mailed to the supervisor at the employee's work location for delivery to the employee

Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs, W-2 and leave statements generated at the end of each month

Comptroller General's Office


Mandatory 100% Email N/A (all employees are on direct deposit).

Time and attendance, changing payroll information and benefits

State auditor's office with assistance and support from Bureau of Finance and Management.


Mandatory 94% Website Mailed to employee's home Time and attendance, benefits, pay stubs, W-4 information, address changes and depository information



Optional 86% Paper remittance information sent through the mail, paper remittance information delivered at worksite, email or through the website


Benefits and pay stubs The comptroller's office processes W-2s for some agencies.2


Mandatory 99% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite, paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website3

Hand-delivered at worksite, mailed to employee's home or by a payroll VISA card

Time and attendance, changing payroll information, pay stubs and W-2

The Division of Finance





Each system processes W-2s centrally and sends a tape to the Social Security Administration.4


Optional Greater than 90% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite, paper remittance information sent through the mail or through the website


Benefits Agencies handle these.




Benefits, pay stubs and W-2 Processing is done by each agency, while W-2s are prepared in the auditor’s office, and 1099s are prepared in the department of administration.


(Chapter 9: Q38-43)


226

State and Office







and Payroll Taxes Wisconsin Department of Administration


Hand-delivered at worksite Pay stubs State controller's office


Optional 99.96% Paper remittance information delivered at worksite or through employee self-service module accessible by employees

Mailed to employee's home Time and attendance, changing payroll information, benefits, pay stubs and W-2

The Office of the State Auditor processes and files these documents.

Notes 1. Oregon: The section of the State Controller's Division responsible for managing the central accounting system files the 1099s.

2. Texas: The agencies that administer the retirement systems file and report 1099Rs to annuitants. Individual state agencies that are required to withhold and

report state and local taxes file and report directly to the state or local entity.

3. Utah: Approximately 94 percent of our employees do NOT get a printed statement. They can view or print their pay statements themselves from the Employee Self-Service website. We have two years of pay advices online that employees can view, save or print.

4. Washington: Each general government agency or institution distributes the W-2s to employees. Each general government agency or institution processes and mails 1099-MISCs. For general government agencies, data from the central accounting system can be used to compile 1099 data. Each general government agency and institution has its own EIN. Each is responsible for filing federal taxes. The state of Washington does not collect state income taxes.

Table 26 INTERIM FINANCIAL REPORTING: ANALYSIS AND AVAILABILITY

(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


227

State and Office

Information Sufficient to Meet Management’s Needs In Financial

Analysis of Interim

Information Types of

Analysis Performed

How Are Interim Financial Data

Made Available?

Accounting System Used for Ad Hoc

Inquiries? Agencies May Read Only or

Print Reports?

Agency Personnel Can

Download Files to PC

Applications? Data Warehouse for Compiling Reports?

# of Years Accounting Records are

Retained Comptroller’s

Office Other

Agencies Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Yes Yes No Electronic files No No No Law requires 7, so the paper is destroyed after that time. Electronic accounting ledgers currently go back 22 years.


Yes Yes No Paper and online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes, data warehouse has been completed for financial information and payroll information.

Original supporting documentation = 4 years; data warehouse electronic = from 2001 to CY; CAFR files = 7 years





No No Yes 1 Paper, online, mainframe green screen, and through a web-based financial data warehouse

No No Yes, ad-hoc and canned reports are available for general ledger and the state personnel payroll system.

The Office of the State Controller has aggregated trial balance information back to 1992.2



Yes Yes No Paper and online Yes, print reports Yes No


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


228

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Florida Department of Financial Services

No No No Paper, online, and Report Distribution System, a library of stored reports; download of transaction and configuration data to agency business systems

Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes 3


Yes Yes No Online and PeopleSoft data


Yes No Archived after current plus 2 years in production environment; generally maintained for 7 years


Yes Yes No Online Yes, print reports Yes Yes Generally maintained for 7 years.


No No No Online and monthly and quarterly “standard” reports are generated from the statewide accounting system and available online. Licensed agencies create reports from the data warehouse.

No No Yes A records retention policy is not currently in place. Accounting transactions and reports are available since the implementation of the current accounting system July 1, 1990.


Yes No No Paper and online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes



(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


229

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Iowa State Accounting Enterprise


Yes Yes 10 years



Yes Yes No Online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes 8 years


Yes Yes No Paper and online Yes, print reports Yes Yes The time period varies by type of accounting record: the shortest time is 3 years.


Yes Yes Yes On request only, some analysis of internal service funds

On request and on spreadsheets


Yes Yes Since 1993


Yes Yes No Paper, online and data files


Yes Yes Generally, retain in agency current fiscal year and three additional years, transfer to State Records Center for 5 additional years, then destroy.


Yes Yes Yes Summary AR information

Via PartnerNet Yes, print reports Yes Yes 7 years unless the record retention policy dictates longer.


Yes No Yes Revenue, expenditure and budgetary reports by appropriated fund

Paper and online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes Generally, retain in agency current fiscal year and 1 additional year, then transfer to Records Retention for additional 7 years, then destroy.


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


230

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Minnesota Management and Budget


Yes Yes No Paper, online and through system distribution

No No Yes


Yes Yes Yes Reconciliation of balance sheet accounts to PMT schedules, general ledger to subsystem reconciliations, and idle account elements

Paper and through spreadsheets that are primarily emailed

Yes Yes Expenditures are retained for 5 years. Some records are kept permanently such as check registers, bank reports, trial balances, balance sheets, fixed assets and warrant intercepts.


Yes No No Online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes No, when we have accumulated 3.5 years of information we archive one year of online data. Specific information is maintained in an online database that can be queried and reported on. We also maintain electronic copies of financial reports in Remote Data Storage in perpetuity; these can be extracted in Excel.



Yes No 9 years


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


231

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Nevada Office of the State Controller

No No Yes Quarterly report on distributive school account

Paper Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes Generally for 3 years: electronic records for 5 years, CAFR and CAFR workpapers 10 years



Yes No Yes Daily, monthly, annual accounting and reports of revenue and expenditure data

Paper, online and ad- hoc reporting


Yes Yes 7 years


Yes Yes No Yes, print reports Yes No, the state has a central accounting system that is used by agencies to perform daily functions and produce financial reports.

At least 3, the state record retention policy is different for the various types of accounting data; however, many documents are now being scanned for future reference.


Yes No No Paper and online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes


Yes Yes No Online and Cognos 7/10 decision support software


Yes Yes 3 years to permanent



Yes Yes 3 years plus current year



Yes Yes 10 years


Yes No No Online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes Online is 5 years


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


232

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Oregon State Controller’s Division

Yes Yes No Paper, online and datamart query tool

Yes, print reports Yes Yes, it is managed by the State Controller's Division.

Online = 4 years; paper, fiche, disc/tape = 6 years; datamart = 6 years


Yes Yes Yes Monthly financials are prepared for some funds.


Yes Yes, a data warehouse is essential.

Currently 9 years of data is available in SAP; Pennsylvania has not addressed its archiving needs as of this date.



Yes No Generally 7 years


Yes Yes No Paper and online; paper is limited to agencies in transition to the ERP.


Yes Yes The Comptroller General's Office policy is 3 years.


Yes Yes Yes Online Yes, read only inquiries and print reports

Yes Yes Central accounting system retains data for 5 years. However, information can be retrieved through other methods for a long period of time but in less detail.



Yes No, we are in the midst of installing a business intelligence module to our ERP system.

7 years for everything but transactions around tax exempt bonded debt. These records are retained for 31 years.


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


233

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Yes No Yes Travel expenses compared to cap, salary expenses compared to cap, capital expenditures, analysis of property reported, various appropriation cycle analyses and cash flow analyses

Paper, online, tape, cartridge, diskette and download for PC


Yes Yes, initially limited to payroll. It will be expanded to include accounting and property data.

In some cases electronic records go back to fiscal year 1994.


Yes Yes No Online and ad-hoc queries by agency personnel against our data warehouse of financial and payroll information. There are also standard reports from our data warehouse that agencies can run at any time.

No No Yes, in addition to ad-hoc reports that agencies can run from our data warehouse, most of the standard reports of accounting system data are generated by our data warehouse and available to agencies to view or to print.

For trust funds, records are kept indefinitely; for all other accounting records they are retained for 7-10 years.





No No Yes Various types as requested


No Yes


Yes Yes No Actual monthly vs. budget prepared for agencies within the department of administration

Paper and online Yes, print reports Yes Yes Since inception of the statewide accounting system in 1993.


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


234

State and Office


Analysis of Interim


Analysis Performed


Made Available?



Print Reports?






Office Other

Agencies Wisconsin Department of Administration

Yes Yes No Online Yes, print reports No No 7 years


Yes Yes No Online Yes, print reports Yes Yes Determined by state’s retention policy


(Chapter 9: Q44-52)


235

Notes 1. Colorado: The Office of the State Controller developed a suite of diagnostic exception reports that measure budgetary compliance and GAAP compliance.

These reports run daily under one system that is web-based and at relevant closing and preclosing dates on the state's green screen mainframe system.

2. Colorado: The state mainframe retains general ledger transaction back to accounting system inception (1992), but related table information is purged after a set number of years.

3. Florida: Information warehouse: Central Accounting - four years. Departmental Accounting - transactions table has two years plus current fiscal year, other tables up to five years.


236


Table 27 PRE-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q53-56)


237

State and Office

Who Develops Policies and Procedures for Pre-Audit Function?

Are There Any Types of Claims or Expenditures

That Are Not Pre-Audited?

Do Your Pre-Audit Procedures Provide Materiality Levels for

Not Looking at a Claim? Not Correcting an Error? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Performed centrally by state comptroller

Certain Alabama code allowed payments are the responsibility of the originating agency: child welfare, income tax refunds and retirement payments.

No No


Delegated to state agencies No, review, approval and certification are performed at the agency level for each payment made.

No No





Delegated to state agencies No No No



Performed centrally by the Department of Finance, Division of Accounting, for transactions over $2,500. Delegated to state agencies.

Yes, for expenditures greater than $2,500

No


Performed centrally by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Division of Accounting and Auditing

Yes, sampled payments under $10,000, certain expenditure types: unemployment compensation, Department of Revenue tax refunds, Medicaid reimbursements, retirement and workers' compensation benefits, public assistance, and journal expenditure re-distributions

Yes, the materiality level is $10,000.

No


Delegated to state agencies


Performed centrally; the Department of Accounting and General Services pre-audits payments for majority of executive branch departments. Pre-auditing of payments under $1,000 is delegated to executive branch departments. State statutes provide that other branches of government (judicial and legislative) and a few executive branch departments pre-audit their own payments.

No No No




Performed centrally by the Office of the Comptroller. Agencies have statutorily charged primary responsibility for pre-audit.

No Yes, the materiality level varies.

No

Table 27 PRE-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q53-56)


238

State and Office





Not Looking at a Claim? Not Correcting an Error? Indiana Office of the Auditor of State


Delegated to state agencies. The Department of Administrative Services pre-audits international travel, settlement claims, outdated warrants, small agencies, educational assistance and moving claims.

No No No



Delegated to state agencies Yes, some agencies generate payments and have been delegated pre-audit authority.

No No


Delegated to state agencies No, all transactions of the statewide computer system are input by an employee and must then be reviewed and approved by another employee, usually a supervisor.

No No


Performed centrally by the Office of the State Controller for items over $5,000

Yes, items less than $5,000 and items received on interface


No


Performed centrally by the Comptroller's Office, General Accounting Division

Yes, corporate purchasing card which are included in the post-audit function; other types specially exempted such as health benefits

No No


Delegated to state agencies Yes, there is no pre-audit of payments required other than standard approvals that are built into department internal control plans.


Delegated to state agencies Yes, travel and utility invoices (ETP application)

Yes, it depends on each agency policy.



Performed centrally by Comptroller's Office, Office of Fiscal Management, and Bureau of Financial Control

Yes, employee travel No No


Delegated to state agencies No, all are pre-audited with standard approval process and segregation of duties

No No


Delegated to state agencies No No


Delegated to state agencies Yes, under $1,500 are not required to be pre-audited.


No


Delegated to state agencies Yes, purchases made on the procurement cards

No No


Table 27 PRE-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q53-56)


239

State and Office





Not Looking at a Claim? Not Correcting an Error? New Jersey Office of Management and Budget



Performed centrally by Department of Finance and Administration; Financial Control Division does a random sample of vouchers. Delegated to state agencies. Each agency has some sort of pre-audit and post audit function prior to submitting information to the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division.

Yes, the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division, does a random sample of auditing payments/expenditures.

Yes, it depends on agency. No


Performed centrally by the state comptroller

Yes, expenditures under certain dollar amounts

No






Performed centrally by the Office of Budget and Management (some)

Yes, subsidy payments No No


State comptroller pre-audits except for approved agencies

Yes, sampling techniques are used.

No No


Central guidance is provided by the State Controller's Division in the Oregon Accounting Manual. Specific policies and procedures are developed by each agency.

No No No


Performed centrally by state comptroller; state treasurer also pre-audits payment requests

Yes, purchase card transactions are post-audited.

No No


Performed centrally by accounts payable

No Yes, the materiality level is $10,000.

No


Performed centrally by the Comptroller General's Office

No Yes, the materiality level is $15.

Yes, the materiality level is $15.


Performed centrally by state auditor's office; delegated to state agencies; outside payment systems - (i.e., entitlement programs)

No No No


This is done by the Division of Accounts for items over $2,000. State agencies pre-audit all transactions.

No Yes, the materiality level is $2,000 for central review only.

No

Table 27 PRE-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q53-56)


240

State and Office





Not Looking at a Claim? Not Correcting an Error? Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

The comptroller's office pre-audits settlements and judgments, land and buildings over $100,000.

Yes, agencies contract with the comptroller's office for post-audits. Pre-audit conditions can be imposed on agencies not electing to contract or not complying with contract terms.

No


Delegated to state agencies No, our accounting system requires all payments to be reviewed and approved.

No No





Performed centrally by the state auditor's office

Yes, certain threshold limits for very limited agencies within higher education

No


Performed centrally by the auditor's office

No No No


Delegated to state agencies No, state agencies may have dollar thresholds under which expenditures are sampled.

No No


Delegated to state agencies No

Table 28a STATE DISBURSEMENT ACTIVITIES: INTER-AGENCY PAYMENTS; METHODS OF PAYMENT AND ISSUER

(Chapter 9: Q57-62)


241

State and Office Handling of

Inter-Agency Payments Method of Payment and Issuer If Checks Are Used, Are Warrants,

Used for Internal Processing? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Internal accounting transactions

1. Warrants: state comptroller


Warrants, checks, payment cards, and reimbursable service agreements or electronic transfers

1. Warrants: the comptroller's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: agencies certify transactions individually, and request for settlement is prepared by comptroller's office. 3. Checks: individual agencies with checking accounts 4. Procurement card

No





Warrants, checks, and internal accounting transactions. These are primarily done through accounting system intergovernmental transfer transactions except for interactions with institutions of higher education that do not use the state's accounting system for primary entry of their transactions.

1. Warrants: issued through the Office of the State Controller based on data entry by state agencies with final acceptance and payment by the state treasurer 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: vendors and employees apply for the EFT payment method, agencies data enter the relevant information, and the Office of the State Controller authorizes the EFT processing. 3. Checks: primarily institutions of higher education 4. Procurement card

No




1. Warrants: the Office of the State Treasurer 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: the Office of the State Treasurer 3. Checks: the Office of the State Treasurer

No


Warrants, payment cards, and internal accounting transactions

1. Warrants: Office of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Division of Accounting and Auditing 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: CFO authorizes all EFT disbursements and approves all electronic payment instructions except payments for unemployment compensation. 3. Checks: payments from revolving funds. There are a few large programs using these instead of having warrants issued. 4. Procurement card

Yes


Checks and ACH with ARIS electronic transactions

1. EFT/EDI/ACH: agencies 2. Checks: each agency 3. Procurement card

No


Checks, and internal accounting transactions

1. EFT/EDI/ACH: Department of Budget and Finance 2. Checks: Department of Accounting and General Services 3. Procurement card

No


Warrants and internal accounting transactions

1. Warrants: the state controller 2. EFT/EDI/ACH, state agencies authorize the disbursement, all EFTs are processed through the state controller and state treasurer. 3. Procurement card

No



1. Warrants: Office of the Comptroller 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: Office of the Comptroller

No



(Chapter 9: Q57-62)


242



Used for Internal Processing? Iowa State Accounting Enterprise


1. Warrants: Department of Administrative Services 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: Department of Administrative Services 3. Procurement card 4. Federal wire




1. Warrants: Office of the Controller 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: Office of the Controller 3. Checks: state treasurer 4. Procurement card

Yes


Checks and internal accounting transactions

1. EFT/EDI/ACH: state agencies authorize the state treasury to use EFT/ACH as a means of disbursing funds to vendors 2. Checks: Division of Administration, Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy 3. Procurement card 4. Agencies draw warrants from the state treasury to obtain cash authorization to disburse funds kept in the treasury.

Yes



1. EFT/EDI/ACH: controller's office and treasurer's office 2. Checks: treasurer's office 3. Procurement card

No



1. Warrants: comptroller's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: comptroller's office 3. Checks: state treasurer's office 4. Procurement card

Yes



1. EFT/EDI/ACH: Office of the State Treasurer 2. Checks: Office of the State Treasurer 3. Procurement card

Yes



1. Warrants: state treasurer 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state treasurer 3. Procurement card




1. Warrants: state comptroller 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state comptroller 3. Checks: some agencies have authority to use bank accounts and they write the checks. 4. Procurement card

No


Internal accounting transactions. Transactions are processed like external payments; however, transactions do not run through the disbursement cycle (i.e., they don't go to the bank).

1. Warrants: certification by the commissioner of administration by statute; however, they are approved decentrally 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: Division of Accounting and state treasurer's office split the duties 3. Checks: Division of Accounting and state treasurer's office split the duties 4. Procurement card

Yes


Checks, payment cards and internal accounting transactions1

1. EFT/EDI/ACH: controller's office 2. Checks: controller's office, however some university system components issue their own checks. 3. Procurement card (We do not issue warrants; even though we refer to these as warrants within state governments they are technically checks.)

No


(Chapter 9: Q57-62)


243



Used for Internal Processing? Nebraska Department of Administrative Services


1. Warrants: state accounting issues co-signed by the state treasurer and director of Administrative Services. 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state accounting issues routine ACH transactions and the state treasurer issues wires and other specialized ACH transactions. 3. Procurement card

No



1. Warrants: state controller 2. EFT/EDI/ACH 3. Checks: state controller 4. Procurement card

No




1. EFT/EDI/ACH: Office of Management and Budget 2. Checks: Office of Management and Budget 3. Procurement card

No


Warrants and operating transfers

1. Warrants: Financial Control Division 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: Financial Control Division and the Office of the State Treasurer 3. Procurement card



1. Warrants 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state comptroller 3. Checks: state comptroller 4. Procurement card

Yes



1. Warrants: Department of State Treasurer 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: the agencies 3. Checks: the agencies 4. Procurement card

No



1. EFT/EDI/ACH: state comptroller 2. Checks: state comptroller 3. Procurement card

No



1. Warrants: OBM 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: OBM 3. Procurement card



1. Warrants: state treasurer 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state treasurer when necessary 3. Procurement card

Yes


Warrants, payment cards and internal accounting transactions. Internal accounting transactions are most used and most encouraged.

1. Warrants: State Controller's Division 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: State Controller’s Division authorizes EFT/EDI transactions for payroll; state agencies authorize EFT/EDI transactions for agency payments. 3. Checks: State Controller's Division issues payroll checks. Also, some agencies have check issuance authority. 4. Procurement card

No


Checks and internal accounting transactions. Agencies using the ERP system (SAP) do not receive checks for internal activity.

1. Warrants: state treasurer 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: agency program managers, state comptroller and the Department of Treasury 2. Checks: Department of Treasury. Advancement account checks are issued by the agency, after state comptroller pre-audit. 3. Procurement card

Yes



1. EFT/EDI/ACH: state treasurer 2. Checks: state treasurer

No


(Chapter 9: Q57-62)


244



Used for Internal Processing? South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General

Warrants, checks and internal accounting transactions

1. Warrants: comptroller general's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state treasurer's office 3. Checks: state treasurer's office 4. Procurement card 5. Inter-departmental transfers

Yes



1. Warrants: state auditor's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state auditor's office 3. Checks: state auditor's office 4. Procurement card

Yes



1. Warrants: Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration 3. Procurement card: Department of General Services 4. Payroll checks are issued by the Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration

No


Warrants, checks and internal accounting transactions

1. Warrants: comptroller's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: comptroller's office 3. Checks: individual agencies and institutions of higher education 4. Procurement card

Yes



1. Warrants: Division of Finance 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: mainly the Division of Finance; however, there are a few agencies that issue their own EFTs, including the Treasurer's Office and the Office of Recovery Services. 3. Checks: a few state agencies have checking accounts from which they issue checks. 4. Procurement card 5. Electronic credit card payments, implemented in June 2012

No




No



1. Warrants: state auditor's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state auditor's office 3. Checks: treasury 4. Procurement card

Yes


Warrants, checks, payment cards and internal accounting transactions

1. Warrants: auditor's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: auditor's office 3. Checks: treasurer's office 4. Procurement card

Yes


Checks, payment cards and internal accounting transactions

1. EFT/EDI/ACH 2. Checks: state controller's office 3. Procurement card 4. Wire transfers

No



1. Warrants: state auditor's office 2. EFT/EDI/ACH: state auditor's office 3. Checks: state auditor's office 4. Procurement card

Yes


(Chapter 9: Q57-62)


245

Notes 1. Montana: We are aware that some agency systems were built around payments to other agencies via claims or

EFTs. This is a violation of state accounting policy (since 1987), but the cost of converting these will be significant so these agencies continue to process these payments. Payment card usage is limited to agencies outside of Helena purchasing from central stores and payments to enterprise activities that primarily receive these through credit card transactions (i.e., university system class and conference registrations).


246


Table 28b STATE DISBURSEMENT ACTIVITIES: AUTHORIZATION, DISTRIBUTION AND LAPSE PERIOD

(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


247

State and Office

Responsibility for Authorizing

Payment of Vouchers Responsibility for

Signing Checks and Warrants Responsibility for the

Distribution of Payments

Lapse Period for Encumbrances and Accounts Payable for Old FY?

Length of Lapse Period?

Old FY Invoices Paid in Lapse Period? Explanation

About Those Not Paid Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

State comptroller The state comptroller is responsible for signing warrants.

State agencies Yes, 60 days Yes, a small number are paid from the current year when ordered by the Board of Adjustment.


State agencies Varies for checking accounts. Warrants are signed by the comptroller's office on behalf of the governor.

Department of Administration, general services mail room

Yes, 2 months – July through August Yes, charged to current year appropriations





This function is delegated to the individual state agencies.

Checks are primarily issued from controlled imprest accounts that use facsimile signatures or signature plates from the state controller. Warrants are facsimile signed by the state controller and the state treasurer.

Certain remote agencies receive their warrants through interoffice mail delivery direct from the mainframe location, but most are routed through the Office of the State Controller. Separate processes are used for tax refunds, unemployment benefits, and higher education institutions issuing warrants.

Yes, the close of period 12, which varies with the calendar, but is never less than 10 days into July and never more than 16 days into July. Encumbrances that have not been converted to payment vouchers by a date set in period 12 are automatically expired unless action is taken to roll them forward.

No, all old-year invoices not paid in period 12 (through the lapse period) are accrued as payables through journal vouchers manually entered on the accounting system. When invoices are received in the new year they are paid against the accrued payable directly or by reversing the accrual.



Secretary of Finance for transactions greater than $2,500, and individual organization personnel less than $2,500

Both are done by the state treasurer.

State treasurer No


Chief financial officer (CFO), Division of Accounting and Auditing

Checks are only used for revolving funds held in local financial institutions. The agency head or designee of the agency administering the revolving fund is responsible for signing the checks. The CFO is the only person authorized to sign state warrants.

The CFO (Division of Accounting and Auditing) is responsible for the printing and distribution of warrants and EFT payment advices to the state agencies generating the payments. The agencies are responsible for delivery to payees. The CFO funds and manages the EFT payment file.

Yes, in general, the lapse period is 3 months for operating appropriations and a minimum of 8 months for fixed capital outlay (real property) appropriations.

No, old-year invoices not paid within the time period specified after fiscal year-end must be paid with then available budget.


(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


248

State and Office








About Those Not Paid Georgia State Accounting Office

Agency personnel when they approve voucher/invoice

Signed by ERP system Agencies No No, paid out of prior year only if encumbered or accrued for in prior year.


Departments State comptroller Department of Accounting and General Services

Yes, one year after the end of the fiscal year; this applies to non-contract encumbrances in operating funds for the executive branch.

Yes, if encumbered; if not encumbered, paid with current year's funds.


State agencies Department of Labor, State Insurance Fund. The state controller's signature is electronic and simultaneously printed on the warrant with all the other data.

The majority of disbursements are picked up at the state controller's office by state postal workers. A few warrants are returned to agencies.

Yes, accounts payable may be processed for approximately one week in the new fiscal year. Encumbrances approved to be carried forward can be paid against indefinitely.

No, invoices not paid by FYE closing are paid out of current year appropriations.


Agency head Comptroller and treasurer are responsible for signing warrants.

Office of the Comptroller Yes, 2 months No, the location is not relevant. Invoice-vouchers are paid if expenditure authority is sufficient and the invoice-vouchers are submitted timely. Invoices not paid may be referred to the Court of Claims for adjudication.



Individual departments certify and the Department of Administrative Services authorizes

Warrants are singed by the director of the Department of Administrative Services.

The individual departments Yes, 60 days No, claims are presented to the State Appeal Board and are paid from a standing appropriation of the agency.



Office of the Controller The treasurer signs the checks. Electronic warrants are authorized and issued by the Office of the Controller.

Treasurer Yes, 30 days No, they are paid from the "new" year budget.


(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


249

State and Office








About Those Not Paid Louisiana Division of Administration

Usually a supervisor. An employee at the place of origin inputs a request for payment into the statewide system. An employee with "approver" password authority (usually a supervisor) must approve the transaction before a payment will be processed.

Division of Administration (DOA), Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy is responsible for signing manual checks using a signature machine bearing the governor's signature. The warrant process is an agency function, and is automatic in drawing cash authorization for expenditures and an agency official (with password authorization) approves the warrant document/transaction in the statewide computer system.

1) DOA - state mail office for consolidated checks (payments to a vendor originating from more than one agency's request for payment) 2) State treasurer for single checks and EFT/ACH transactions

Yes, 45 days for accounts payable. Encumbrances cannot be charged to the old fiscal year.

No, some large programs (such as Medicaid) are budgeted on a cash basis, meaning that the invoice will be paid with funds from the most recent year.


Controller's office Governor, state treasurer and state controller

Postal operations No No, paid with new year funds if not encumbered


Agency initially approves while the comptroller's office does the final authorization.

State treasurer's designee and state comptroller's designee signs checks. Warrants are signed by the comptroller's office.

Comptroller's office mails the checks, and the state treasurer's office transmits ACH's.

Yes, 45 days Yes, accrued in accounting system


Office of the Comptroller based on agency head or delegated authorized department approver

Office of the State Treasurer Office of the State Treasurer Yes, 2 months - July and August Yes, only during the accounts payable period of July and August; invoices for prior year received after the accounts payable period become part of the prior fiscal year deficiency process.


Depends on each agency policy

State treasurer signs warrants. State comptroller and state treasurer

Yes, approximately 60 days No, it depends on nature of invoice and amounts.



Comptroller Authorized agency employees sign checks. The comptroller signs warrants.

State agencies Yes, 60 days Yes, old year claims can be paid in the subsequent year under specific guidelines.


(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


250

State and Office








About Those Not Paid Missouri Division of Accounting

Office of Administration Depends on check series, either the Commissioner of Administration or the head of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. Office of Administration signs warrants.

Office of Administration No No


Agency staff The signature of the director of the Department of Administration is electronically imprinted on the state checks. The university system checks are electronically signed by a university system official and the director. The Department of Administration director is the ex-officio state treasurer, with the related duties falling under the controller's office, except for investment.

Most are mailed from the controller's office through central mail. Some are picked up by agencies and mailed with related information to the payees. Wires are made from the treasury unit within the controller's office. ACH payments generated are sent directly to the bank from the financial system under the controller's office.

No, we have a fiscal year-end period where agencies can pay claims from both the previous and current fiscal years. This is normally around 3 weeks.

No, if claims are not paid during the cutoff period they are coded against the reverted appropriations.


Approving authorities in the various agencies

Director of Administrative Services and co-signed by the state treasurer

State accounting No No, but they can be encumbered.


Individual state agencies Checks and warrants are signed by the state controller and state treasurer.

State treasurer Yes, 60 days No, they are submitted to the budget division for payment through the centralized stale claims process.



Departments Checks are signed by the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the state treasurer.


Yes, until the order is closed; after one year certain order types are closed automatically.

No, if not paid and the order is closed, the order can be reinstated or the payment is made out of current year appropriations.


Agencies initiate the transactions; the Financial Control Division finalizes them.

Secretary of Department of Finance and Administration (electronic)

Agency Yes, 30 days after year end unless the appropriations are multiple year.

No, by law the agency is required to use current year budget for any amounts not paid by the 30 days after year end.


State comptroller Checks are signed by the state comptroller and the commissioner of tax and finance. Warrants are signed by the state comptroller.

State comptroller Yes, 6 months No, federal funds may allow use of current year funds.


(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


251

State and Office








About Those Not Paid North Carolina Office of the State Controller

Agency heads The agencies Yes, 31 days No


Each agency State treasurer and state auditor Each agency Yes, 30 days No


Agencies Warrants are signed by the director of the Office of Budget and Management (OBM).

Department of Administrative Services for warrants; OBM for EFTs

Yes, 5 months – July to November No


State comptroller Both checks and warrants are signed by the state treasurer.

State agencies Yes, 4.5 months for most funds Yes, prior year debt must go through a settlement procedure to be paid from current year funds.


Each agency head is responsible for delegating the authority to approve payment of vouchers.

Authorized signers are determined by the individual agencies that issue checks; the State Controller's Division (SCD) signs payroll checks. The SCD is responsible for signing warrants.

The SCD distributes state warrants 90% through the mail and 10% through state agencies. SCD distributes state payroll checks through state agencies.

Yes1 No, old-year invoices paid after the lapse period has expired will be charged to the next biennium's appropriation.


State comptroller Checks are signed by the state treasurer. Advancement account checks are signed by authorized agency signatory. Warrants are signed by the state treasurer.

Department of Treasury, agencies issue only advancement account checks under $1,500.

Yes, 4 months; however, can be longer with a waiver from the Secretary of the Budget.

Yes, only amounts delayed due to litigation, audit, or special circumstances are permitted after 4 months without a waiver, current year charged only when prior year funds are insufficient.


State controller’s office Checks are signed by the state treasurer’s office.

State treasurer’s office Yes, generally 20 days Yes


Comptroller general's office Checks are signed by the state treasurer’s office. Warrants are signed by the comptroller general's office.

Individual agencies Yes, set by the Appropriations Act annually and can vary. For the 2012 fiscal year it is 13 calendar days.

No, cash basis budget with prescribed number of grace period days. After the grace period the invoice must be paid with current year budgeted funds.


The authorized state employee

The state auditor's office is responsible for signing both checks and warrants.

State auditor's office Yes, 60 and 90 days No, we are on a cash basis budgeting. However prior year budget can be carried over if approved.


Commissioner of Finance and Administration

The commissioner of finance and administration is responsible for signing both checks and warrants.


Yes, 13 business days (while number of days varies slightly each year, usually between 10 and 13)

No, they establish accrued liabilities.


(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


252

State and Office








About Those Not Paid Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Individual agencies, oversight agencies and institutions of higher education.

Individual agencies sign checks while the comptroller's office signs warrants.

Individual agencies and institutions of higher education

Yes, we can spend prior year appropriation after the year is over, 2 years from the end of the budget year for non-construction items and 4 years for construction appropriations.

Yes


State agencies Agencies that have checking accounts (very few and small accounts) sign their own checks. Warrants have a signature printed on them when they are printed; the signature is the disbursements manager in the Division of Finance.

Division of Finance and state agencies

Yes, approximately 6 weeks Yes, invoices received after the prior year has closed are paid out of the new year, but state statute requires that agencies must have enough budget carry-forward from the prior year to cover these invoices. Documentation is required to be sent to the Division of Finance.





An agency at local level, then the state auditor's office centrally

Checks are signed by the state auditor and the state treasurer; warrants are signed by the state auditor.

Treasury releases to central mailing

Yes, 1 month Yes, claims not paid in lapse period are submitted to the Court of Claims.


Auditor’s office Checks are signed by the treasurer's office; warrants are signed by the auditor's office.

Treasurer's office Yes, 31 days Yes, vendor must file claim with Court of Claims Division.


Authorized state agency staff

Secretary of the Department of Administration and the state treasurer.

State controller's office Yes, 1 month Yes


State agencies Both checks and warrants are signed by the state auditor.

Both state agencies and the Office of the State Auditor

Yes, 90 days Yes


(Chapter 9: Q63-67)


253

Notes 1. Oregon: Furthermore, the encumbrance must be canceled and re-established in the new biennium by the close of month 13. Any remaining unexpended

appropriations lapse December 31 following the end of the biennium, except for appropriations related to capital construction. In addition, at the end of each biennium, agencies have six months to pay liabilities accrued at fiscal year-end and charge them to the old fiscal year appropriation.


254


Table 28c STATE DISBURSEMENT ACTIVITIES: CARRY-FORWARD AND CENTRAL VENDOR FILES

(Chapter 9: Q68-72)


255

State and Office

Carry-Forward of Old-Year Allotments Does Your State Have a Central Vendor File? Who Controls the File?

Is It Allowed?

Is It Allowed for All Types of Allotments? Funds in Which Carry-Forward Is Allowed


No No Yes, the finance department


No Yes, the comptroller





Yes No Carry-forward is only allowed under explicit statutory direction or when extenuating circumstances beyond the control of the agency prevent taking delivery or goods or services by June 30.

Yes, the Office of the State Controller



Yes No Yes, the Department of Finance, Division of Accounting


Yes No Fixed capital outlay (real property): carry-forward of uncommitted operating appropriations is statutorily restricted to a few specific programs.

Yes, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Division of Accounting and Auditing


No No Other funds, federal funds and state with approval only

Yes, State Accounting Office.


Yes Yes Yes, the Department of Accounting and General Services


Yes Yes Carry-forward is not determined by fund. The legislature approves carry-over by individual agency budgets.

Yes, the Office of the State Controller


Yes Yes Capital projects Yes, the Office of the Comptroller



Yes No Any fund for which legislation has passed to allow carry-forward.

Yes, the Department of Administrative Services



Yes No Only the continuing appropriations/allotments for a limited number of accounts in the general fund and transportation fund.

Yes, the Office of the Controller


Yes No All federal funds are allowed to be carried forward. To carry forward any other types of funds, approval must be obtained from the Joint Legislative Committee on the Budget.

Yes, the Division of Administration, Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy


Yes No Encumbrances Yes, the Office of the State Controller


Yes Yes Yes, the comptroller's office


Yes No Budgeted accounts must have specific legislative authorization; non-budgeted accounts follow the authorization of the account - trust or federal grant.

Yes, the Office of the Comptroller


(Chapter 9: Q68-72)


256

State and Office


Is It Allowed?



Yes Yes Yes, the state comptroller



No No Yes, the state comptroller


No Yes, the Office of Administration, Division of Accounting


Yes No No, the state has a central vendor file maintained by the controller’s office. A special process allows agencies to make confidential payments and some refunds without using the central vendor file so these vendors are not available for vendor payments.


Yes Yes All budgeted funds Yes, state accounting


Yes No Funds for agencies which generate their own revenues are carried forward, as are some general fund revenues.

Yes, the state controller



Yes No Yes, the Office of Management and Budget


No No Yes, the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division


Yes Yes Yes, the state comptroller


Yes No Based on Office of State Budget and Management determination of priority

Yes


Yes No Yes


Yes No All funds Yes, the Office of Budget and Management


Yes No Yes, the state comptroller, the Department of Central Services, and the Department of Higher Education


Yes No Capital construction and capital improvement Yes, the State Controller's Division


Yes No Continuing appropriations, restricted receipts and restricted revenues; pass-through funds and annual appropriations are waived from the lapsing provisions in state law.

Yes, the Office of the Budget


Yes No Judiciary, legislature and other departments based on decision of governor

Yes


Yes No As provided through general and specific provisos within the Annual Appropriations Act

Yes, the comptroller general's office


(Chapter 9: Q68-72)


257

State and Office


Is It Allowed?



Yes No Yes, Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM) - Financial Systems and Operations


Yes No By appropriation bill language or Tennessee Code Annotated only

Yes, Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration


Yes Yes Any funds as authorized by the legislature Yes, the comptroller's office


Yes No The legislature determines each year which, if any, programs or line items may carry-forward money into the next year. It varies considerably based on the budget conditions and the will of the legislature at the time.

Yes, the Division of Finance





Yes Yes Yes, the Department of Administration


Yes No Miscellaneous funds specified in code or the budget

Yes, the Department of Administration


Yes Yes All funds Yes, the state controller's office


No No Carry-forwards are allowed only under special circumstances unless the funds are already otherwise encumbered.

Yes


258


Table 29a MANAGEMENT OF DEBT COLLECTION: LOCATION OF FUNCTION AND METHODS OF COLLECTION

(Chapter 9: Q73-76)


259

State and Office Where Is Debt Collection Managed? Which Office Promulgates Policies

and Procedures for Debt Collection?

Which Office Promulgates Policies and Procedures for

Writing Off Delinquent Accounts? How Is Your State Authorized

To Pursue Past-Due Receivables? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

State agencies Individual agencies Individual agencies


State agencies Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, and Department of Law is brought in on claims that are $5,000 or more





Centralized debt collection office. Debt collection is performed by the Central Collection Services unit in the Division of Finance and Procurement in the Department of Personnel and Administration. However, some agencies and institutions have waivers that allow them to keep and collect on their accounts for a period in excess of the statutory limit before placing them with the Central Collection Services unit.

Centralized debt collection office; the Department of Personnel and Administration in which the Central Collections Services unit resides issues the policies.

Comptroller's office and the state treasurer must also sign off on accounts that are released or compromised.

Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, and the state may also offset tax refunds, vendor payments, lottery winnings and gaming winnings.



State agencies No policies and procedures No policies and procedures; the Office of Management and Budget

Use collection agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, and place liens


State agencies Blended – The Office of the Chief Financial Officer (Division of Accounting and Auditing) promulgates minimum standards for collection and reporting. Agencies develop their own procedures.

Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, and place liens. Authorized action depends on the receivable type. The state's authority to place liens is constrained by the type of debt. Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles can suspend, revoke, and deny renewal of driver's licenses and vehicle registration for debts specific to that agency. Department of Lottery has authority to offset any state owed debt on prize amounts greater than $600.


(Chapter 9: Q73-76)


260





To Pursue Past-Due Receivables? Georgia State Accounting Office

State agencies State Accounting Office State Accounting Office Use collection agencies


State agencies No policies and procedures No policies and procedures Use collection agencies, place liens, and tax intercept program


State agencies Individual agencies; the state controller does provide statewide policy guidance.

Individual agencies; the state controller does provide policy guidance.

Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, place liens, and intercept cash disbursement for delinquent accounts owed the state


Centralized debt collection office, located in the Department of Revenue

Comptroller's office and the centralized debt collection office

Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, place liens, and offset



Centralized debt collection office, and state agencies

Centralized debt collection office. The state allows both centralized debt collection office and individual agencies to promulgate policies and procedures for debt collection.

No policies and procedures Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, and collect through the Offset Program






Use collection agencies and vendor offset internally and the U.S. Treasury Offset Program


State agencies Individual agencies Individual agencies. Accounts can be written off for financial reporting purposes but not for legal purposes. These policies and procedures must be approved by a Cash Management Review Board.

Use collection agencies and place liens


State agencies Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, place liens, offset tax refunds, and suspend licenses


Centralized debt collection office, located in the Department of Budget and Management; the state comptroller's office for delinquent taxes

Centralized debt collection office and the comptroller's office

Centralized debt collection office and in the comptroller's office

Use collection agencies, revoke drivers' licenses, and withhold issuance of professional licenses


(Chapter 9: Q73-76)


261





To Pursue Past-Due Receivables? Massachusetts Office of the Comptroller

State agencies. Office of the Comptroller manages the statewide debt collector contract that is used by the individual state agencies.

Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Use collection agencies and intercept/debt offset program


Centralized debt collection office, located in the state treasurer's office

Centralized debt collection office Centralized debt collection office Add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, and place liens



State agencies No policies and procedures No policies and procedures Each agency collects its own debt.


State agencies Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, place liens and intercept vendor payments and tax refunds


State agencies. Initially agencies maintain their debt files. When these are determined to be non-collectible they are sent to the Department of Revenue for collection.

Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Add the cost of collection to a bad debt and offset tax refunds and other state payments


State agencies Individual agencies Agencies submit to the State Claims Board to write off delinquent accounts.

Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, and place liens


Centralized debt collection office. The state controller manages debts turned over from the agencies, but that is voluntary and many agencies handle their own debt.

Individual agencies Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt



Centralized debt collection office, and also in state agencies; centralized in the Department of the Treasury, Division of Revenue

Centralized debt collection office and also in the Office of Management and Budget

No policies and procedures; the Department of the Treasury Administration in conjunction with the Office of Management and Budget

Use collection agencies and place liens


State agencies Comptroller's office (by statute receivables cannot be written off)

Comptroller's office (by statute receivables cannot be written off)

Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, and place liens


State agencies Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Place liens


State agencies with assistance of state attorney general and state controller

Attorney general Comptroller's office and attorney general Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, place liens, and debt offset


(Chapter 9: Q73-76)


262





To Pursue Past-Due Receivables? North Dakota Office of Management and Budget

State agencies Other office Use collection agencies


Centralized debt collection office, located in the Attorney General's Office

Centralized debt collection office No policies and procedures; Ohio Revised Code

Use collection agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt


State agencies No policies and procedures No policies and procedures. The state constitution does not allow debt forgiveness. Each agency determines the collectible amount for reporting purposes.


State agencies Comptroller's office No policies and procedures. Department of Justice promulgates guidelines that have been incorporated into the Oregon Accounting Manual.

Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, place liens. Agencies may turn over their debts to the Other Agency Collection Unit in the Department of Revenue, which functions as the state's central collection agency; file a small claims suit.


State agencies; however, the state attorney general is responsible for ultimate debt collection where agency efforts are exhausted.

Comptroller's office. The state comptroller works with agencies and attorney general on policies.

Centralized debt collection and the office state attorney general

Use collection agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, place liens and offset payments due the debtor from the commonwealth of Pennsylvania.


State agencies Individual agencies Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, and place liens


State agencies Individual agencies Individual agencies Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, place liens and garnish individual income tax refunds


State agencies Other office Board of Finance We are not "authorized" to do any but we are not prohibited from using any, or all of the above.


State agencies The Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration

The Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration

Use collection agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, revoke drivers' licenses, and place liens


Centralized debt collection office. The Attorney General's Office (AG) is responsible for collections above a certain tolerance. The AG and individual agencies set the tolerances.

AG State auditor's office Use collection agencies and place individuals/vendors on payment hold and report liability to the AG


(Chapter 9: Q73-76)


263





To Pursue Past-Due Receivables? Utah Division of Finance

Centralized debt collection office, located in the Office of State Debt Collection, which is now part of the Division of Finance

Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, add the cost of collection to a bad debt, place liens, and garnish state disbursements such as tax refunds and vendor payments





State agencies No policies and procedures No policies and procedures Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, and place liens


State agencies Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Use collection agencies and place liens


State agencies. Old debts are referred to the Department of Revenue.

Comptroller's office Comptroller's office Use collection agencies and vendor offset


State agencies Individual agencies. The state auditor's office encourages prompt collection of write-off in accordance with GAAP.

State auditor's office encourages prompt collection of write-off in accordance with GAAP.

Use collection agencies, report to credit reporting agencies, and depending on type of past-due amount professional licenses can be held in some cases


264


Table 29b MANAGEMENT OF DEBT COLLECTION: CENTRAL OFFSET PROGRAMS

(Chapter 9: Q77-80)


265

State and Office

Central Offset Program Through the Statewide Accounting System? Managed by Whom?

Use of a Common ID Number for Debtors on the Centralized

File? Which Number?

Are Debtors Notified Before Any Offset of Payments Is Made?

Does Debt Notification Say That Future Payments

From the State May Be Used to Satisfy the Debt?

System of Priorities to Settle Debts to

Multiple Agencies? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

No


No No No No




Yes Yes


Yes, the Department of Revenue for the tax refund, lottery and gaming offset programs; the Office of the State Controller for the vendor offset program

Yes, the Federal ID number and Social Security number

Yes Yes Yes, by law (statute)



No


No, the Departments of Lottery and Revenue have authority for off-sets.

No Yes Yes, central authority


No N/A N/A N/A N/A


No; only applied against tax refund payments by other state departments

No Yes No Yes, first in, first out


No, the State Tax Commission, Department of Health and Welfare, Department of Labor, State Lottery Commission, and the federal government do offsets via the State Tax Commission. The state controller intercepts payments to vendors who are delinquent on unemployment taxes.


Yes Yes No


Yes, the comptroller’s office


Yes Yes Yes, administrative rule and first in, first out



Yes, the Department of Administrative Services


Yes No Yes, by law (statute)


(Chapter 9: Q77-80)


266

State and Office



File? Which Number?





Multiple Agencies? Kansas Office of Management, Analysis and Standards






No, there are some offset programs related to other debts. For instance, offset of an income tax refund for past-due child support payments, but not done through the statewide accounting system.

No No No


Yes, Maine Revenue Services

No Yes No




Yes Yes Yes, by law (statute) and central authority



Yes, unique vendor customer code which directly relates to an FEIN

Yes Yes Administrative rule


Yes, the state treasurer Yes, the Federal ID number and Social Security number

No No



No No


Yes, the comptroller’s office (the Department of Revenue and Information Technology)


Yes No No


Yes, the Department of Revenue


Yes Yes Yes, by law (statute) and first in, first out (income tax first then child support) and generally based on FIFO


No




Yes Yes No



Yes, the Division of Revenue




(Chapter 9: Q77-80)


267

State and Office



File? Which Number?





Multiple Agencies? New Mexico Financial Control Division

No No No No


No Yes, the Federal ID number and Social Security number

Yes Yes Yes, administrative rule


Yes, the Department of Revenue - currently the offsets are for taxes receivable only.

Yes, the Social Security number

No Yes Yes, first in, first out


No


No No Yes Yes No , central authority


Yes, the tax commission


Yes Yes Yes, administrative rule


No. Currently, only tax refunds are offset, which the Department of Revenue administers.


Yes Yes Yes, by law (statute) and first in, first out (taxes are offset first; then debts collected by the central collection unit for other agencies)


Yes, the Committee of Office of General Counsel/Department of Revenue; Department of Labor and Industry, Office of the Budget

Yes, the Federal ID number

Yes Yes No




Yes No




Yes Yes Yes, first in, first out


No No No



No No Yes, by law (statute)


Yes, the comptroller’s office. The Lottery Division also offsets lottery prizes against specific state debts allowed by the lottery offset statute.

Yes, the Federal ID number and Social Security number and the system-assigned comptroller taxpayer identifier

Yes No Yes, by law (statute) and administrative rule


(Chapter 9: Q77-80)


268

State and Office



File? Which Number?





Multiple Agencies? Utah Division of Finance

Yes, the comptroller’s office. We have a vendor intercept program available on our statewide accounting system. However, not many agencies take advantage of it.


Yes Yes Yes, by law (statute) and administrative rule





Yes, the state auditor's office acting as comptroller

No No Yes, first in, first out


No Yes, the Federal ID number, Social Security number and vendor ID

No




Yes Yes No


No No Yes No No

Table 30 POST-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q81-88)


269

State and Office

Post-Audit Work Done in Comptroller’s

Office? Methods to Determine Areas?

Materiality Threshold for

Subjecting Claims to Post-Audit?

Sampling Methods Used to Select Transactions

for Post-Audit?

Types of Testing Performed as Part of

the Post-Audit?

How Often Are Post-Audits Performed?

Follow-Up Conducted to Ensure Corrective

Action? Which Types?

Expenditures Subject to Post-Audit Also Subject to

Pre-Audit? By Whom? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

No


No





No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A



No


Yes, determined by type of expenditure, dollar amount/threshold and risk assessment

Yes, classification of expenditure and risk

Random selection when there are many similar transactions; payment magnitude

Compliance, substantive and internal control tests

Monthly and as needed

Yes, formal report, verbal discussion and management letter

Yes


No N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A


Yes, determined by type of expenditure, internal control and dollar amount/threshold

No Compliance, substantive and internal control tests

Annually Yes, formal report, verbal discussion and management letter

Yes, Department of Accounting and General Services pre-audit branch


No No Stratified random sample Compliance, substantive and internal control tests

Legislative audit division audits each agency at least every three years.


Yes


Yes, determined by type of expenditure and dollar amount/threshold

Compliance tests Monthly and daily

Yes, formal report and verbal discussion

Yes

Table 30 POST-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q81-88)


270

State and Office






for Post-Audit?


the Post-Audit?





Pre-Audit? By Whom? Indiana Office of the Auditor of State


Yes, determined by general review of claims of all departments or a specific notice that someone is doing something wrong

No Compliance and internal control tests

Monthly; each department is sampled on a rotating basis.

Yes, verbal discussion and management letter

Yes, by the individual departments



Yes, determined by type of expenditure and internal control

Yes, materiality developed as part of the audit plan

None - exception reports are used

Compliance and internal control tests

Monthly and periodically

Yes, formal report Yes, delegated to agencies


No. State agencies, not the central office, use reports that are generated by the computer system.

No Random sampling Substantive tests As prescribed by agency management

Yes, this is a function of management at individual state agencies.

Yes, state employees with “approver” password authorization



No Questionable purchases and random review


Monthly Yes, formal report, verbal discussion and management letter

Yes


Yes, determined by type of expenditure, internal control and purchases done by the state's corporate credit card are subject to post-audit.

No Random sampling as well as risk-based models and specific audit programs


Monthly Yes, formal report, verbal discussion and management letter

No


Yes, determined by internal control

No Compliance and internal control tests

Annually Yes No


No



Yes, determined by type of expenditure

No Random sampling Compliance and substantive tests

Daily Yes, revise documents and submit to agency

No

Table 30 POST-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q81-88)


271

State and Office






for Post-Audit?


the Post-Audit?





Pre-Audit? By Whom? Missouri Division of Accounting


No Compliance tests On-going basis, different frequencies depending on audit area and transaction type

Yes, verbal discussion Yes, decentralized pre-audit as part of approval process


No



No N/A Compliance, substantive and internal control tests

3-year rotating basis

Yes, verbal discussion Yes, by the agency


No No Annually, internal audit for controller's office only

Yes, management letter and internal to controller's office

No, no pre and post-audit responsibility for other agencies


.



Yes, $50,000 Random generated based on daily population by agency

Compliance tests Monthly Yes, test future transactions

Yes, agencies


Yes, determined by type of expenditure, internal control and dollar amount/threshold. The random sample is specific to agencies and the above are all considered.

No Various such as materiality, risk based, etc.

Compliance and substantive tests

Daily Yes, rejection of document, the formal communications and/or meetings

Yes, the Department of Finance and Administration’s Financial Control Division




Monthly and as needed


Yes, State Expenditures Bureau and the state comptroller’s office


No Random sampling


No

Table 30 POST-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q81-88)


272

State and Office






for Post-Audit?


the Post-Audit?





Pre-Audit? By Whom? Ohio Office of Budget and Management

Yes, determined by type of expenditure.

No Agency discretion Compliance, substantive and internal control tests

Monthly Yes, memorandum Yes, Office of Budget and Management



No Bureau of Quality Assurance developed script of items to be post-audited; it is a combination of criteria and thresholds used depending on the type of purchase or reimbursement.


As resources allow

Yes, formal report and verbal discussion

Yes, state comptroller’s office


No. Pre-auditing and post-auditing of expenditures and expenses is left to the discretion of the individual state agencies.

Agency discretion Agency discretion

Agency discretion Yes, agency discretion


Yes1 No Substantive tests Ongoing2 Yes, formal report, verbal discussion, management letter and written correspondence

No


No, determined by dollar amount/threshold

Yes, $10,000 Risk based Compliance and substantive tests

Monthly No Yes


No Use audit software on a selected month's transactions


Yes, determined by internal control

No Generally accepted sampling techniques are used to stratify the population for each category for a given agency by expenditure type and amount.


Yes Yes, state auditor’s office


Yes, internal control No Use audit software on a selected month’s transactions

Compliance tests, internal control tests

Annually, disbursements are reviewed in randomly selected months.

Yes, management letter and email commu-nication; and results are also shared with the Pre-Audit section in the Division of Accounts.

Yes

Table 30 POST-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q81-88)


273

State and Office






for Post-Audit?


the Post-Audit?





Pre-Audit? By Whom? Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts

Yes, determined by type of expenditure and internal control.

No Compliance tests Monthly3 Yes, formal report and verbal discussion

Yes, they are audited by agencies before they are submitted for payment.


Yes, determined by type of expenditure and dollar amount/threshold. We look for duplicate payments.

No Compliance and substantive tests

Quarterly Yes, management letter and agencies are required to send in documentation showing that they have corrected the error or taken corrective action.

Yes, by the state agency issuing the payment





Yes, determined by type of expenditure, dollar amount/threshold and the statutory requirement for annual audits

No Random under a specific amount

Compliance and substantive tests

Quarterly Yes, verbal discussion No



No Yes



Yes, they vary with audits.

Compliance tests Annually, every four years

No Yes


No

Table 30 POST-AUDIT

(Chapter 9: Q81-88)


274

Notes 1. Pennsylvania: Determined by purchasing card and advancement account transactions plus certain travel expense reimbursements with high risk. We post-

audit purchase order transactions under $10,000, time and attendance transactions, payroll anomalies and employee travel reimbursements

2. Pennsylvania: Post-audits are performed bi-weekly on the purchasing card purchases, monthly for large dollar payments, daily for duplicate payments and quarterly for less risky transactions.

3. Texas: Typically once a biennium for large agencies, less often for other agencies - the actual frequency is determined by an annual risk assessment of all state agencies.


275

Chapter 10. Administrative Responsibilities Table 31. Guidance/Tools on Best Practices and Ethics Table 31 shows which actions state comptrollers have taken to identify best practices or to develop benchmarks. Guidance and tools which the states have developed with respect to ethics in government services are also reported. The last column of the table provides information related to guidance and tools for ethical behavior in the accounting function. Table 32. Performance Reporting Eighteen of the 26 respondents replied that performance reporting is being done by their state (either answered “yes” or provided comments about the reporting). Information about the agencies that are doing performance reporting was provided by 17 states. Table 33. State Travel Policies and State Regulation of Local Governments’ Financial Practices State employees’ travel expenses are paid by (38 responses):

The employee: 36 A state travel card: 21 Billed directly to state/agency: 32 A state procurement card: 24

The task of booking flights for employees’ business travel is (38 responses):

Central (outside travel agency): 10 Decentralized to agencies: 30 Central state travel office: 2 Travel agency associated with corporate

credit card: 4 Other: 3

States policies on frequent-flier miles are:

Miles to belong to the state: 13 Miles belong to the employee: 10 No policy: 15

Direct deposit for the reimbursement of travel expenses in required in 8 of the 38 reporting states. State governments often regulate their local governments’ accounting, auditing and financial reporting practices. Such is the case in 27 of the 36 reporting states. The requirement that the state regulate its local governments’ accounting, auditing and financial reporting practices comes from statute in all 27 reporting states.


276


Table 31 GUIDANCE/TOOLS ON BEST PRACTICES AND ETHICS

(Chapter 10: Q1-4)


277

State and Office What Actions Have Been Taken to Identify Best Practices or to Develop Benchmarks? Guidance/Tools for Ethics in Government Services

Guidance/Tools for Ethical Behavior in Accounting Functions


None None None


The Alaska Ethics Act is in Statute. The Department of Law provided training January 2011 to our Division of Finance staff, which included a video and a PowerPoint presentation.

The Alaska Administration Manual includes policies that encourage ethical behavior.





None Colorado passed a very strict constitutional amendment on ethics. An Ethic Commission has been established and has issued rulings on questions posed by Colorado governmental entities.

None specific to the accounting function




Performance measures


Accounts payable and payroll shared services Executive Order



Computer service center Attorney general, Idaho Ethics in Government manual The State Board of Accountancy has a new rule requiring 4 CPE hours in ethics over 2 years to qualify for license renewal.


Public Accountability Report New hires undergo ethics training when hired. We provide annual training with group discussions and all employees must take and pass an ethics test on the computer.

No special training. We do describe examples in our annual training.



Income offset collections and payroll rewrites The state has two recurring training courses on government ethics and these courses are offered to all state employees.

The state offers and encourages continuing education of ethics and ethical behavior through training from the Association of Government Accountants.


(Chapter 10: Q1-4)


278





Currently implementing a "spend analysis" review of all contracts and negotiating with vendors to reduce cost. Implementing a Smart Government Initiative to reduce cost across state government. Implementing a Kentucky Business One Stop (KyBOS) portal to include all state agencies that issue licenses or collect taxes from the business community.

Kentucky has an Executive Branch Ethics Commission that provides training and issues opinions on various governmental practices.

Key employees are required to attend ethics training at least once every two years.


Performance indicators or benchmarks are tailored to each agency based on the types of services provided or agency activities. In addition, the implementation of the governor's Transparency Initiative culminated in the development of The Louisiana Transparency and Accountability Portal (LATRAC) for the public.

The governor has an initiative on Ethics Reform in State Government. In addition, Revised Statutes 42:1101 (et seq.) provide the platform for the "Louisiana Code of Governmental Ethics" and creates the Board of Ethics. The board issues opinions and can file charges. In addition, all state employees have had training in ethics in state government and a training portal has been set up for refresher classes.

Louisiana has the State Board of Louisiana Certified Public Accountants that monitors and investigates ethics for CPAs. This board is not part of the Division of Administration.


FFATA reporting expectations Ethics standards and ethics class for financial managers


The requirement that all debts to the comptroller be satisfied before a driver's license or registration can be issued; issuance of an RFP to procure CAFR software services

Public Ethics Law requires certain government officials and employees to disclose their financial affairs and to set minimum ethical standards for the conduct of state and local business.

Confidentiality of tax information required; filing Maryland personal income tax return required; preparing federal or state tax returns for others prohibited



The state is involved in an ongoing "vision and values" initiative. One of the four core values promoted is integrity.

CPAs on staff are required to obtain annual ethics training. All staff are encouraged to attend ethics training and we have sponsored a number of audio conferences related to ethics.




We are pursuing a best practice style statewide debt management policy.


(Chapter 10: Q1-4)


279




We have upgraded our accounting system to the current version of Oracle PeopleSoft. This helps us maintain best practices in the system side of accounting processes. This also helps us keep up with other industry best practices as we evolve to stay abreast. We have not benchmarked but we participate in user groups and national organizations to assist in following and implementing best practices as they develop.

Ethics policy is distributed to each employee when hired. We are considering distributing a copy of this to each employee and having them sign off on it every year.

There is an overall section in the state employee handbook discussing the ethical requirements for state employees. We also make sure ethics is included in the annual Governmental Accounting and Auditing Education Network training.



There is guidance in state statute about ethical behavior, and a statement is being developed that all employees will be asked to sign.

The state controller's office offers training annually regarding ethics and accounting.



Through Hackett benchmark study; finance, procurement and human resources

State Ethics Commission


None, we follow the Department of Finance and Administration's Financial Control Division's manual of model accounting practices.

State office of personnel re-evaluated the performance reviews beginning with fiscal year 2007. These forms and the agency's code of conduct policies are the current tools in use for the state.

Agency specific


The comptroller's office has identified many best practices in most of our operations including auditing and accounting and financial reporting.

The comptroller's office has established several ethics training courses and programs and the state ethics process is overseen by a public integrity office.

The comptroller's office has established several ethics training courses and programs and the state ethics process is overseen by a public integrity office.


Faster CAFR, month-end and year-end budgetary closeout

North Carolina State Ethics Commission: http://www.ethicscommission.nc.gov/

http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/index.html



(Chapter 10: Q1-4)


280




Budget planning system Longstanding state ethics law that: 1) requires annual personal financial disclosure for persons holding certain positions to identify and protect against conflicting interests; 2) prohibits unethical conduct in government and provides criminal sanctions for engaging in unethical conduct; and 3) establishes uniform review of ethics issues by statewide commissions located in each of three branches of state government. Governor's Executive Order 2001-03K establishing an ethics policy and requiring ethics training.


State ethics commission laws and rules Annual CPE


Performance measures are developed and monitored in all sections of the state controller's division. Annual business plans are developed by each section as well. Each year, we apply for the Achievement of Excellence in Financial Reporting award from the Government Finance Officers Association.

The Oregon Government Ethics Commission (OGEC), established by vote of the people in 1974, is a seven-member citizen commission charged with enforcing government ethic laws. Oregon government ethic laws prohibit public officials from using office for financial gain, and require public disclosure of economic conflict of interest. The OGEC also enforces state laws which require lobbyists and the entities they represent to register and periodically report their expenditures. The third area of OGEC jurisdiction is the executive session provisions of public meetings law (ORS Chapter 244).

The Oregon Government Ethics Commission has created rules with respect to ethical behavior in state government. However, none of the requirements are specific to accounting. Some agencies have developed their own internal codes of conduct.


Implementing government risk and compliance (GRC) software to monitor segregation of duties and role conflicts. Established a policy requiring receipts for all travel expenses and requiring most cost effective use of ground transportation.

State code of ethics and State Ethics Commission State code of ethics - annual reporting to Pennsylvania Ethics Commission; Management Directives to establish policies and guidance


Process for CAFR preparation Developed an ethics code for financial professionals in state government and developed an antifraud policy

Developed an ethics code for financial professionals in state government


Best practice recommendations were made for inventory, capital assets, grants and accounts payable.

Created by the South Carolina General Assembly, the State Ethics Commission establishes and enforces rules of ethical conduct for all public officials and employees. The commission also establishes rules for election campaign finance practices and provides for disclosure of economic interest and administers the lobbyist portion of the Ethics Reform Act of 1991.

Reminders of professional responsibilities are included in the Reporting Policies and Procedures Manual.


(Chapter 10: Q1-4)


281




Training


None None


Transparency and accountability via the Financial Allocation Study for Texas (FAST) report: http://fastexas.org/

The State Ethics Commission provides training for state officers and executive branch employees and for members of the legislature and legislative branch employees.

The comptroller’s office encourages staff to consult with the agency ethics officer for guidance – employees are not required to use the chain of command to contact the ethics officer. The ethics officer also provides guidance on ethics issues to employees through mandatory training and FAQ sessions.


Automated accounts payable and electronic content management; automating travel authorization and reimbursement; consolidated payables and budget and accounting functions.





Participating in the NASACT Hackett/Accenture benchmarking study

West Virginia Ethics Act West Virginia Ethics Act


Developed course materials for training in ethics



282


Table 32 PERFORMANCE REPORTING

(Chapter 10: Q5-9)


283

State and Office Performance Reporting? Agencies That are

Doing the Reporting Areas Reported Results Reported Link or Contact

Information Required by Mandate,

Policy or Operational Need? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

N/A N/A N/A






Yes, vendor contracts are required to rate vendor performance at close out.

All agencies that participate in the Contracts Management System, which excludes higher education institutions, are required to enter the data into CMS.1

All contracts of nonexempt agencies are recorded in the CMS, with performance reporting on completed contracts.

The vendor contract performance report goes to the governor and General Assembly. The Contracts Management System makes the underlying individual contracts available to the public through a website.

Vendor performance reporting from the Contracts Management System is mandated by statute.




Yes, agencies are rated for prompt payment of invoices, compliance with CAFR checklist.

CFO (Division of Accounting and Auditing)

Accounts payable function in each agency and annual financial reporting

Reported to each agency Prompt payment - Division of Accounting and Auditing, Vendor Ombudsman; (850) 413-5516

Statutory requirement to monitor compliance within the allowed processing time limits; CAFR compliance checklist developed as an operational need


Performance audits Department of Audits and Accounts

Inquiries by legislative or executive leadership

Published the Department of Audits and Accounts (DOAA) website

http://www.audits.ga.gov/rsaAudits/loadRSAAudits.aud;jsessionid=8AD397C9F4336ED75F214F636A07BDA5

Some of all - depends on the audit



(Chapter 10: Q5-9)


284




Policy or Operational Need? Idaho Office of the State Controller

Yes Each state agency must submit their annual performance reports to the Division of Financial Management.

Each state agency must report on not more than 10 key quantifiable performance measures.

The reports are posted on the Idaho Division of Financial Management website.

http://dfm.idaho.gov/Publications/PerfRpt_Publications.html

The performance reporting is required by Idaho Code.


Annual Public Accountability Report; Budgeting for Results

Comptroller's office coordinates, 79 agencies submitted in FY11.

All programmatic areas Comptroller's office website http://www.ioc.state.il.us/index.cfm/linkservid/899BABEC-1CC1-DE6E-2F48E1EE03E2597B/showMeta/0/

Statute: 15 ILCS 20/50-25



Yes, it was implemented in FY04.

All executive branch agencies excluding the Board of Regents

Department of Management http://www.dom.state.ia.us/ By statute



Yes Office of the State Budget Director

High level on progress of state programs

Office of State Budget director

N/A Mandate


Yes Division of Administration, Office of Planning and Budget (DOA-OPB)

Departments/agencies each have their own performance indicators that are developed during the budgetary and legislative process.

The data is found in LaPAS (Louisiana Performance Accountability System), which is on the DOA-OPB's website.

http://www.doa.louisiana.gov/opb/lapas/lapas.htm

Mandated by Revised Statute 39:31(C)(8)


No






(Chapter 10: Q5-9)


285




Policy or Operational Need? Mississippi Department of Finance and Administration

Yes The Office of the State Auditor

Internet http://www.new.ms.gov/webcontent/partnerSite.html


No N/A


No This is not reported currently.

N/A N/A No. We report our goals and objectives and discuss these along with performance measures in budget presentations but not in actual financial reports.



Performance reporting is being developed by the Department of Administration.

The budget division of the Department of Administration will have that responsibility.

Budget has identified 8 core functions of government. Of these, the controller's office will report within State Support Services and Business Development and Services.

Not yet in place; probably the budget website

Performance reporting is not yet mandated.




No N/A N/A N/A N/A



Yes Office of State Budget and Management

N/A N/A No. There is summary level reporting in the CAFR statistical section.



(Chapter 10: Q5-9)


286




Policy or Operational Need? Ohio Office of Budget and Management

Performance reporting is offered in the area of state employee data, overtime data, and alternative fuel usage.


Performance reporting is offered in the area of state employee data, overtime data, and alternative fuel usage.


http://das.ohio.gov/ (see Performance Government section of webpage)

Mandate


Some agencies perform their own performance reporting.

Each individual agency Programs at agencies In each agency’s report Oklahoma Health Care Authority

Operational need


Internal


Yes Office for Performance Improvement within the Office of the Budget

The report reviews goals in the areas of education, economic development, health and human services, the environment, public safety, consumer protection and government efficiency.

www.budget.state.pa.us: select link to Performance Reports


Yes; program managed by budget office

Budget office In budget documents, which are available on web



No No performance reporting No performance reporting No performance reporting No performance reporting


No


Yes Various state agencies and universities may issue their own performance reports regarding specific subject matter. The Legislative Budget Board conducts performance reporting on a statewide basis: http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/.

2 Legislative Budget Board website

http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/ All of the above


(Chapter 10: Q5-9)


287




Policy or Operational Need? Utah Division of Finance

Yes, depending on the definition of performance reporting.

Internal balanced scorecards from agencies are sent monthly to the governor's office which publishes limited high-level measures from the agencies on a website. Various agencies also voluntarily report their performance measures on their own websites.

Limited measures for the Division of Finance, such as type of audit report received on the CAFR

Governor's office website Operational need







No None

Notes 1. Colorado: The Office of the State Controller prepares a report from CMS and submits it the governor and General Assembly.

2. Texas: Agency Performance Review; Higher Education Performance Review; School Performance Review; Government Effectiveness and Efficiency;

Transform State Residential Services for Persons with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities; Predictors of Access and Success at General Academic Institutions; Health and Human Services; Higher Education; Public Education; Public Safety and Criminal Justice; Federal Funds; Transportation; etc.


288


Table 33 STATE TRAVEL POLICIES AND STATE REGULATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS’ FINANCIAL PRACTICES

(Chapter 10: Q10-15)


289

State and Office

How Are State Employees’ Travel

Expenses Paid? Booking of Airfare

for Employee Travel State’s Policy on

Frequent-Flyer Miles

Is Direct Deposit Required for Travel Reimbursements?

State Regulation of Local Governments’ Accounting, Auditing and Financial Reporting

Practices: Who Has Responsibility?

Source of Regulation: Statutory or Regulatory?


Paid by employee Decentralized to agencies Miles belong to the employee.

No


Paid by employee, state travel card, billed directly to state/agency and state procurement card

Central (outside travel agency) and decentralized to agencies

Miles belong to the employee.

No





Paid by employee, state travel card and billed directly to state/agency

Decentralized to agencies and travel agency associated with corporate credit card


No Yes, the Colorado state auditor Statutory




Paid by employee, billed directly to state/agency and state procurement card

Traveler typically books the airfare


Yes Yes, the chief financial officer (Division of Accounting and Auditing)

Statutory



Decentralized to agencies and central state travel office; in progress of moving from decentralized to centralized process


No No



Decentralized to agencies Miles belong to the state.

No No



Decentralized to agencies Miles belong to the employee.

No Yes, the state controller Statutory




290

State and Office










Paid by employee and billed directly to state/agency

Decentralized to agencies No policy No Yes, the Office of the Comptroller Statutory



Paid by employee and state travel card


Miles belong to the state.

No Yes, The County Finance Committee and the City Finance Committee

Statutory





No policy No Yes, the Governor's Office for Local Development Statutory


Paid by employee and state travel card

Central (outside travel agency) Miles belong to the employee.

No No, Louisiana Legislative Auditor has a website of best practices for local government: www.lla.state.la.us/localgovernment/bestpractices/.




Yes Yes Statutory


Billed directly to state/agency

Central (outside travel agency) Miles belong to the state.

No Yes, the Department of Legislative Services Statutory



Decentralized to agencies; employee makes arrangements and is reimbursed.

No policy Yes Yes, Department of Revenue, Division of Local Services

Statutory



Decentralized to agencies, while all agencies are required to use the same outside travel agency


No Yes, the state treasurer Statutory





291

State and Office











Decentralized to agencies, travel agency associated with corporate credit card and the Internet if cost is less than using approved travel agencies


No Yes. State law requires local subdivisions conform with legal requirements and with generally accepted accounting principles as promulgated by nationally recognized professional organizations. The State Auditor's Office will assist local governments through its Technical Services Bureau with those issues.

Statutory



Decentralized to agencies No policy Yes No



Decentralized to agencies Miles belong to the employee.

No Yes, the Local Government Services Bureau within the Controller's Office provides the accounting and reporting guidelines.

Statutory



Decentralized to agencies No policy Yes Yes, the state auditor Statutory



Decentralized to agencies No policy No No





No Yes, the Department of Community Affairs and The Division of Local Government

Statutory


Paid by employee Decentralized to agencies No policy No Yes, the state statute and the Office of the State Auditor

Statutory




No policy No Yes, the state comptroller Statutory




Yes Yes, the North Carolina Department of State Treasurer - Local Government Commission

Statutory




292

State and Office















Yes Yes, the auditor of state Statutory




No policy No Yes, the legislature Statutory




No Yes, the secretary of state, Audits Division Statutory


State travel card, billed directly to state/agency and state procurement card


Yes Yes, the Department of Community and Economic Development and the Department of Education

Statutory


Paid by employee and state procurement card

Central (outside travel agency) No policy No Yes, the auditor general Statutory




No No Statutory



Decentralized to agencies No policy No Yes Statutory




No policy Yes Yes, the Department of Audit Statutory




293

State and Office











State agencies make arrangements with an outside travel agency on contract with the comptroller's central travel management office. If the traveler shows a valid exception, he/she may book through other means, such as online or directly.


No No. The comptroller does not regulate, but has the authority to prescribe the method and manner of stating accounts for counties.

Statutory



Central state travel office Miles belong to the employee.

No Yes, the Utah State Auditor's Office Statutory








No Yes, the state auditor Statutory





Paid by employee and state procurement card

Decentralized to agencies No policy No Yes, the Department of Audit Regulatory


294



295

Chapter 11. Enterprise Resource Planning and Other Financial Management Systems Table 34. ERP Systems Twenty-seven of the 36 responding states have an enterprise resource planning system, 21 of which have been implemented and six of which are currently in process. Table 35. ERP: Hosting and Governing Respondents were asked to provide information about how their ERP systems are governed. Twenty-nine states provided information regarding the hosts of the software and hardware, standard setting and maintenance, application support for software, and their governance committee. Table 36. ERP Information Tables 36a and b provide ERP information including the date implemented, the name of the system, software and service vendors, integrator and the cost. Software vendors cited include (26 states responded):

CGI: 9 Infor: 2 Oracle: 11 SAP: 4

The functionality implemented for budget development is (17 states responded):

Agency: 15 Legislative: 9 Executive: 14

The functionality implemented for budget control is (25 states responded):

Agency: 24 Legislative: 15 Executive: 20

Table 37. Functions Implemented Tables 37a and b list the functions (modules) states have implemented. The functions most frequently implemented by the states are:

Accounts payable: 26 General ledger: 26 Procurement-core system: 24 Accounts receivable/billing: 23 Supplier management/vendor master

data: 23 Table 38. ERP: Customization, Scope, Duration and Re-Engineering The scope of the project included all agencies in 17 of the 26 responding states. The duration of the project is eight years in West Virginia with many of the states reporting anywhere from two to five years. Table 39. ERP: Budget, Deployment, Enhancements and Agency Information Twenty-five states provided information about the project budget, cost reduction, deployment strategy and ERP enhancements. The proportion of state agencies that maintain their own internal accounting system in addition to submitting information to a centralized accounting system is (32 responses):

0 percent: 1 1-5 percent: 12 6-20 percent: 11 21-50 percent: 3 51-95 percent: 5 96-100 percent: 0

Table 40. ERP: Transaction Entry, Payroll Handling, Method of Data Entry and Modifications The table includes information regarding who enters the individual financial and payroll transactions, how the payroll transactions are handled, how the data is entered, the system


296

modifications and the ERP customizations. Thirty-seven states provided information regarding who has the responsibility of entering individual financial and payroll transactions. Financial and payroll transactions are entered by departments in 27 states. Three states enter payroll transactions centrally by the comptroller and seven via another method.

Thirty-seven states indicated the methods they allow for the entry of data:

Online: 36 Batch mode: 27 Electronic file transmissions/interfaces:

36 Other: 1

Twenty-five of the responding states said that their central system ERP has been modified to fit their environment. However, 28 states provided information about who performed the ERP customization. The ERP was customized by:

Staff: 2 Implementation consultant/systems

integrator: 6 Combination: 20

Table 41. ERP: Customization and Platforms Twenty-two states provided information about the areas that were customized. The primary database platform used in 18 of the reporting states is Oracle, five use DB2 and four report using other platforms. Table 42. ERP: Records, Applications and Data Warehouses Fifteen of the 37 responding states said that hard copy documents are forwarded to the central agency for pre-auditing prior to payment. Imaging for central financial system functions is used in 20 of the 36 responding states. States store records in the following forms (37 responses):

Paper: 28 Disk: 29 PDF files: 24 Film: 6

Microfiche: 17 Other (including CD and online): 6

Client-server applications are used in connection with the central financial system in 15 of the 35 reporting states. Web-based applications are used in connection with the central financial system in 32 of the 36 states that responded. Twenty-eight of the 36 responding states reported that they have a centralized data warehouse. Table 43. ERP: Customer-Focused Web Applications and Business Intelligence Customer-focused web applications, such as vendor self-service or employee self-service, are used in 23 of the 33 states that responded. Stand-alone applications are used in 14 of the 24 states that replied to the question. The Big Bang (completed simultaneously for all agencies) deployment process was used in 14 of the 27 states. Table 44. ERP: Implementation, Lessons Learned, Challenges and Employee Retention Twenty states provided the number of state staff assigned to the implementation project. Seventeen states provided responses regarding the significant lessons learned during implementation and the major challenges.

Table 34 ERP SYSTEMS

(Chapter 11: Q1-2)


297

State and Office Does Your State Have

an ERP System? If Yes, What

Is the Status? Implementation Date Are There Plans to Move to an

ERP System in the Next 4 Years? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

No No


Yes In process FY2015 - July 1, 2014





No The General Assembly appropriated funds to begin an ERP implementation, and it is in the contract execution stage.



Yes Implemented


No Until the summer of 2007, the state was implementing PeopleSoft for financials and treasury/cash management. This project was suspended for an undetermined period of time.1


Yes Implemented


Yes In progress Estimated FY2018


No We are considering requesting funding to have a study done to determine if an ERP would be an appropriate solution.


We already implemented an ERP system.



Yes Implemented June 2004



Yes Implemented We currently have an ERP system.


Yes In process July 2016 The ERP system has been implemented as a single agency pilot (Transportation & Development), with statewide implementation to be completed in July of 2016.


Yes Implemented Intend to have accounting, procurement and payroll handled by ERP with budget interface.


No


Yes Implemented



(Chapter 11: Q1-2)


298




ERP System in the Next 4 Years? Minnesota Management and Budget


No Our ERP implementation is in process.


Yes Implemented 2000


Yes Implemented July 1, 2000


Yes Implemented 2003/2012





No No




Yes In process We redesigned the accounting system and upgraded payroll systems and integration with a statewide financial management system, but not actually a truly statewide ERP that integrates HR, etc.




Yes Implemented


Yes Implemented December 2006 (payroll); July 2007 (financials)




No No




Yes Implemented


Yes In process To be completed 2013


Yes Implemented 1987 ERP systems are constantly enhanced.


Yes Implemented Payroll - October 1, 2008; Financials - January 1,2009


(Chapter 11: Q1-2)


299




ERP System in the Next 4 Years? Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts







Yes In process October 2013


No



Notes 1. Florida: For FY 2012-13 received an appropriation to contract for a review of the state's legacy accounting, cash

management, and agency business systems to provide a recommendation for the replacement or remediation of the accounting and cash management systems.


300


Table 35 ERP: HOSTING AND GOVERNING

(Chapter 11: Q3)


301

State and Office Host of Software Host of Hardware Standard Setting and Maintenance

Application Support for Software Governance Committee



ERP Software - CGI Advantage version 3.9. The state of Alaska has engaged in a software maintenance program with CGI Managed Advantage (MA) whereby all application related support for operating system, database, and operational support will be performed by MA.

The hardware is hosted by the state of Alaska within our enterprise data center - primary (Juneau) and disaster recovery (Anchorage) with database synchronization being performed by CGI Managed Advantage.

The state of Alaska and CGI have agreed to upgrade the hardware and software (minor and/or major releases) 2 times during a 10 year period. The latest software version release 3.9x will be used during implementation and the hardware leverages the new virtual server architecture.

The state of Alaska will be responsible for configuration and all other software application support will be performed by CGI Managed Advantage - including operational performance and jobs necessary to support application.

Current governance structure during implementation (no agency has more than one representative): 2 - Administrative Services Directors; 2 - State Finance Officers; 2 - Procurement Specialist; 4 - Application Owners (i.e., Comptroller). A separate executive committee is used to reconcile issues and garner top level support for controversial decisions during implementation.





N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A





SAO Georgia Technology Authority (GTA) State Accounting Office and GTA

SAO The State's COO and CFO as well as members from SAO, GTA and the Department of Administrative Services




IBM and comptroller staff IBM and comptroller staff Office of the Comptroller Office of the Comptroller Office of the Comptroller


(Chapter 11: Q3)


302





Information Technology Enterprise

Information Technology Enterprise Information Technology Enterprise

Information Technology Enterprise

There is no committee.



CGI Commonwealth Office of Technology (COT) which is an Internal Service Fund that provides centralized computer services.

The controller's office sets standards, CGI maintains software, and COT maintains hardware.

CGI Controller, budget director, CIO and deputy secretaries in the Finance and Administration Cabinet


Division of Administration (DOA) - Office of Computing Services (OCS)

DOA-OCS DOA-OCS DOA-OCS State CIO, DOA assistant commissioner for management and finance, executive branch undersecretary


CGI CGI Primary standards originate with Office of Information Technology, with application level standards done jointly with the Controller's Office.

Office of the State Controller and CGI

Office of Information Technology, Office of the State Controller, Bureau of the Budget, Division of Purchases and Bureau of Human Resources.


Under the Governor's Office Under the Comptroller's Office Comptroller's Office sets standards

Governor's Office Governor's Office and Comptroller's Office


Comptroller manages the financial application and shares responsibility with Human Resources Division for HR/PR system. A data warehouse has data from both ERP.

All ERP systems run in the state data center which manages the hardware and infrastructure.

Financial - comptroller maintains the application; HR/PR and Warehouse - central IT department maintains both hardware and software.

Same as above. Comptroller's Payroll Bureau is actively involved in supporting business users of the HR/PR system. Comptroller's office provides training for all three enterprise applications.

Comptroller governs financial system. Comptroller, Human Resources Division, and Information Technology Division govern HR/PR. Comptroller, Human Resources Division and Administration and Training govern the warehouse.


Department of Information Technology

Department of Information Technology Department of Information Technology


We use an ERP system for human resources, benefits, and payroll. The governance committee consists of the state personnel director, state employer, state comptroller, and the state chief information officer or their representatives.



(Chapter 11: Q3)


303





Office of Administration Office of Administration Office of Administration Office of Administration Office of Administration


The financial system software is maintained by the Statewide Accounting, Budgeting and Human Resources System (SABHRS) Bureau within the controller's office. The Payroll and Human Resource modules in the ERP are managed by the State Human Resource Division.

The software resides on virtual servers managed by the Department of Administration, Information Technology Services Division (ITSD).

The hardware is maintained by ITSD. The software is an upgraded version of software selected through an RFP process in 1997. System functionality is maintained and enhanced under the direction of the controller's office (financial modules, less budgeting), State Human Resource Division (HR and payroll), Governor's Budget Office (budgeting) and Legislative Fiscal Division (budgeting).

The SABHRS Bureau within the controller's office for the financial modules and the Human Resource division for the HR and payroll modules

One does not exist. We have convened periodic work groups to look at the systems and have agency user groups to provide agency advice and guidance.


State accounting for financial system; Workday hosts new HR/benefits software as a service

Office of the CIO; Workday hosts new HR/benefits hardware

Office of the CIO Office of the CIO and State Accounting


Controller's office hosts, governed by state law and internal controls

Controller's office Standards are set by performance measurement; maintenance is addressed by controller's IT staff and manufacturers.

Controller's IT staff The controller is the governance entity





Department of Information Technology Department of Information Technology and the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division

Department of Information Technology and the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division

Cabinet Secretaries for the Department of Information Technology, the Department of Finance and Administration, and the State Personnel Office


(Chapter 11: Q3)


304




State comptroller hosts Central Accounting System and Statewide Payroll System.

Comptroller Comptroller Comptroller


Information Technology Services

Information Technology Services Information Technology Services

Office of the State Controller We do not have a governance committee.


Information Technology Department (ITD)

ITD ITD Office of Management and Budget (OMB) - ITD

OMB - ITD


Ohio Administrative Knowledge System (OAKS) Project Management Office within the Office of Information Technology (OIT)

Accenture OAKS Project Management Office within OIT

1. OAKS Project Management Office within OIT 2. Requirements and Configuration Management (RACM) within the Office of Budget and Management (OBM) 3. Accenture

OIT, OBM, and Department of Administrative Services


Office of State Finance Office of State Finance Office of State Finance Office of State Finance Director of state finance


We have a centralized accounting system (it is not an ERP). The State Controller's Division manages the central accounting applications.

The hardware/mainframe is managed by a central services organization (Statewide Data Center).

The State Controller's Division sets the standards for the accounting applications. The State Data Center sets the standards for the hardware.

Enterprise Application Services provides software support.

N/A


Office of Information Technology

Office of Information Technology Office of Information Technology

Office of Information Technology

Office of Administration, Office of the Budget, Department of General Services, and comptroller.


State IT office State IT office State IT office State IT office Director of administration, chief information officer, state budget officer, state controller and state purchasing agent.


Division of State Information Technology (DSIT)

DSIT DSIT and Comptroller General's Office for accounting

State CIO and DSIT An Executive Oversight Committee made up of agency directors, executive directors, and chiefs of staff from across the state


(Chapter 11: Q3)


305




The Bureau of Finance and Management owns all of the state of South Dakota's ERP systems. Some components are hosted in the state's data center, some are in a private cloud.

Some hardware is in the state's data center, some is with an application service provider.

The state's Bureau of Finance and Management sets standards for the software, the state's Bureau of Information sets standards for the state hardware.

The software vendors and an application service provider

There is no governance committee.


The Department of Finance and Administration

The Department of Finance and Administration

Office of Information Resources of the Department of Finance and Administration set the standards and maintains the hardware. Edison Division of the Department of Finance and Administration maintains the software.

Edison Division of the Department of Finance and Administration

Commissioners of finance and administration, general services, and human resources, state comptroller and state treasurer, as well as deputies or assistant commissioners of the same departments



The state of Utah, Division of Finance

The Utah State Department of Technology Services

Division of Finance sets the standards for the business rules. Department of Technology Services sets the standards for hardware and software.

Staff from the Division of Finance and Department of Technology Services

Director of finance, assistant director of finance, manager of financial information systems - Division of Finance, representatives from each state agency





West Virginia ERP Board West Virginia ERP Board West Virginia ERP Board West Virginia ERP Board and CGI

State auditor, treasurer and governor



Vendor Vendor Vendor Vendor State auditor and deputy auditor


306


Table 36a ERP INFORMATION: IMPLEMENTATION, SYSTEM AND VENDORS

(Chapter 11: Q4)


307

State and Office Date Implemented System Name and Version Software Vendor Service Vendor



Financial/Procurement - July 1, 2014; HR/Payroll - January 1, 2016

Advantage 3.9x CGI, Inc CGI, Inc





N/A N/A N/A N/A





1999 (due to Y2K) PeopleSoft Financials 9.0; PeopleSoft HCM 9.1

Oracle N/A






June 2004 CGI Advantage Financial v3.9; CGI Advantage Performance Budgeting v3.8

CGI CGI



Original July 1, 1999 (Client Server); Upgrade July 1, 2006 (Web Based); Upgrade April 17, 2012

CGI Advantage 3.9 CGI CGI


November 15, 2010 Name: LaGov; Software: SAP ECC 6.0 EHPS SPS 09 AgileAssets

SAP and AgileAssets STA Consulting provided staff augmentation


July 1, 2011 Advantage 3.8.01 CGI CGI



(Chapter 11: Q4)


308



Financial - implemented FY05, upgrades in FY06 and FY08; HR/PR - implemented February 2000, upgrades in FY01 and FY10

Financial - Advantage 3.7.01; HR/PR - PeopleSoft 9.0; Warehouse - custom developed software that uses Cognos, Informatica and Netezza HW

Financial - Advantage 3.7.01; HR/PR - PeopleSoft 9.0; Warehouse - custom developed software that uses Cognos, Informatica and Netezza HW

Applications are managed by state employees.




SAP


2000 Advantage version 2.2 CGI CGI


July 1, 2000 Oracle PeopleSoft, version 9.1 Oracle PeopleSoft Oracle PeopleSoft


2003 JDEdwards; 2012 Workday

EnterpriseOne version 9.0; Workday version 16

Oracle/JDEdwards Workday

Oracle Workday


2002 Advantage Integrated Financial System, version 2.1

American Management Systems, now CGI

Controller's IT staff




07/01/2006 The system consists of two of the PeopleSoft ERP Suites (Financial and Supply Chain Management [FSCM] release 8.8, and the Human Capital Management [HCM] release 8.9). Numerous modules within each of the suites have been implemented throughout the state, including general ledger, payroll, HR, benefits administration, payables, purchasing, time & labor, and more.

PeopleSoft Oracle


Begin April 2012 PeopleSoft/Oracle


July 1, 1995 Infor E Series Financials Infor N/A


October 2004 PeopleSoft Financials version 9.0; PeopleSoft HCM version 9.1

PeopleSoft\Oracle


July 2007 (Financials) PeopleSoft 8.9 Oracle Accenture


Financials - 2003; HCM - 2004-2006; EPM (budget) - 2005

Financials - PeopleSoft 8.4 (upgraded to 8.9); HCM - PeopleSoft(upgraded to 9.0); EPM - PeopleSoft 8.9

Oracle



(Chapter 11: Q4)


309



07/01/2002 ECC 6.0 SAP


July 2006 Oracle General Ledger, Purchasing, Accounts Payable, Fixed Assets and I Supplier Modules

Oracle


FY2008 through FY2013 Customized SAP SAP


Different components have been rolled out at different times. Financials: 1987; HR/Payroll: 2001

Financials: Infor E:Series; HR/Payroll: Infor/Lawson S3 version 9.0.0

Infor/Lawson Lawson and ACS


Human Capital Management, Enterprise Learning Management, and Portal were implemented in October 2008. Financials and Supply Chain, including eSupplier portal, were implemented in waves beginning in January 2009 and ending with the last wave in October 2009.

PeopleSoft HCM 8.9; PeopleSoft FSCM 8.9; and the following third-party applications: iNovah – Cashiering; Fleet – Fleet; AiM -- Facilities Management; NeoGov -- Applicant Services

Oracle and various vendors for third-party applications



July 2006 Advantage Financial 3.1 CGI CGI





October 2013 Advantage Software 3.9 CGI CGI



1989 CGI - AMS Advantage Financial 3.7.02; CGI - AMS Human Resource Management 3.7.02; AMS - InfoAdvantage 3.7.02

CGI - AMS CGI - AMS


310


Table 36b ERP INFORMATION: INTEGRATOR, COST, BUDGET DEVELOPMENT AND CONTROL

(Chapter 11: Q4-6)


311

State and Office Integrator Cost

Functionality Implemented for

Budget Development


Budgetary Control Alabama Office of the State Comptroller


CGI, Inc $13,918,034 software license and maintenance (10 years); $33,116,689 professional services for implementation; $23,605,002 Managed Advantage (10 years)





N/A N/A



Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive



Various companies have been used over time: Bearing Point, CherryRoad, Accenture.

Agency/legislative/executive






CGI Approximately $10-$12 million Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive



CGI Original cost: $30 million Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive


IBM Approximately $94 million, including state staff salaries

Agency/executive


CGI Approximately $5 million annual Agency/legislative/executive



Financial - Advantage – CGI; HR/PR - PeopleSoft – Accenture; Warehouse - internal to Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Financial - Advantage - $50 million for design, implementation and hardware infrastructure; approximately $1 million annually for ongoing software maintenance HR/PR – PeopleSoft



(Chapter 11: Q4-6)


312



Budget Development


Budgetary Control Michigan Office of Financial Management



SAP


N/A Executive Agency


Accenture (was Anderson Consulting)

$18 million Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive




AMS/CGI $25 million for controller's office; $50 million total





Maximus, Inc. $35,000,000 Agency/executive Agency/legislative/executive


Deloitte and IBM Agency/executive


Accenture and Dun & Bradstreet

$20 million to $30 million Agency Agency


Agency Agency


Accenture $130 million Executive Executive


Maximus/Cherry Road $38,677,167 Agency Agency



IBM and Bearing Pointe

$212 million Agency/executive Agency/executive




$82.4 million Agency/executive Agency/executive


ACS Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive


Maximus, currently operating as CherryRoad Consulting

$130 million including state staff

Agency



(Chapter 11: Q4-6)


313



Budget Development


Budgetary Control Utah Division of Finance

CGI $6 million Agency/legislative/executive





CGI Approximately $100 million Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive



CGI - AMS Agency/legislative/executive Agency/legislative/executive


314


Table 37a FUNCTIONS IMPLEMENTED

(Chapter 11: Q7)


315

State and Office Gene

ral L

edge

r

Acco

unts

Pay

able

Supp

lier M

anag

emen

t/ Ve

ndor

Mas

ter D

ata

Acco

unts

Rec

/Billi

ng

Cust

omer

Rela

tions

Ma

nage

men

t

Cost

Acc

ount

s/ Al

loca

tion

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t

Gran

ts M

anag

emen

t

Proc

urem

ent-C

ore

Syst

em

E-Pr

ocur

emen

t

Cont

ract

Ad

min

istra

tion

Mate

rials

Mana

gem

ent

War

ehou

se In

vent

ory

Cont

rol &

Acc

ount

ing

Asse

t Man

agem

ent

Line

ar A

sset

s

Cash

Man

agem

ent &

Fo

reca

stin

g

Trea

sury

Man

agem

ent

Flee

t Man

agem

ent

Real

Esta

te

Mana

gem

ent

Facil

ities

Man

agem

ent


Alaska Division of Finance X X X X X X X X X X






Delaware Department of Finance X X X X X X X X


Georgia State Accounting Office X X X X X X X X X





Iowa State Accounting Enterprise X X X X X X X X


(Chapter 11: Q7)


316


ral L

edge

r

Acco

unts

Pay

able

Supp

lier M

anag

emen

t/ Ve

ndor

Mas

ter D

ata

Acco

unts

Rec

/Billi

ng

Cust

omer

Rela

tions

Ma

nage

men

t

Cost

Acc

ount

s/ Al

loca

tion

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t

Gran

ts M

anag

emen

t

Proc

urem

ent-C

ore

Syst

em

E-Pr

ocur

emen

t

Cont

ract

Ad

min

istra

tion

Mate

rials

Mana

gem

ent

War

ehou

se In

vent

ory

Cont

rol &

Acc

ount

ing

Asse

t Man

agem

ent

Line

ar A

sset

s

Cash

Man

agem

ent &

Fo

reca

stin

g

Trea

sury

Man

agem

ent

Flee

t Man

agem

ent

Real

Esta

te

Mana

gem

ent

Facil

ities

Man

agem

ent


Kentucky Office of the Controller X X X X X X X X X X

Louisiana Division of Administration X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Maine Office of the State Controller X X X X X X X X X X X


Massachusetts Office of the Comptroller X X X X X X X X X




Missouri Division of Accounting X X X X X X X X X

Montana State Accounting Division X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Nevada Office of the State Controller X X X X X X




(Chapter 11: Q7)


317


ral L

edge

r

Acco

unts

Pay

able

Supp

lier M

anag

emen

t/ Ve

ndor

Mas

ter D

ata

Acco

unts

Rec

/Billi

ng

Cust

omer

Rela

tions

Ma

nage

men

t

Cost

Acc

ount

s/ Al

loca

tion

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t

Gran

ts M

anag

emen

t

Proc

urem

ent-C

ore

Syst

em

E-Pr

ocur

emen

t

Cont

ract

Ad

min

istra

tion

Mate

rials

Mana

gem

ent

War

ehou

se In

vent

ory

Cont

rol &

Acc

ount

ing

Asse

t Man

agem

ent

Line

ar A

sset

s

Cash

Man

agem

ent &

Fo

reca

stin

g

Trea

sury

Man

agem

ent

Flee

t Man

agem

ent

Real

Esta

te

Mana

gem

ent

Facil

ities

Man

agem

ent

New Mexico Financial Control Division X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

New York Office of the State Comptroller X X X X X X X X

North Carolina Office of the State Controller X X X X X X X X X

North Dakota Office of Management and Budget X X X X X X

Ohio Office of Budget and Management X X X X X X X X

Oklahoma Office of State Finance X X X X X X X X X X X X X



X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Rhode Island Office of Accounts and Control X X X X X X

South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General X X X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X


Utah Division of Finance X X X X X X X X X X X


(Chapter 11: Q7)


318


ral L

edge

r

Acco

unts

Pay

able

Supp

lier M

anag

emen

t/ Ve

ndor

Mas

ter D

ata

Acco

unts

Rec

/Billi

ng

Cust

omer

Rela

tions

Ma

nage

men

t

Cost

Acc

ount

s/ Al

loca

tion

Proj

ect M

anag

emen

t

Gran

ts M

anag

emen

t

Proc

urem

ent-C

ore

Syst

em

E-Pr

ocur

emen

t

Cont

ract

Ad

min

istra

tion

Mate

rials

Mana

gem

ent

War

ehou

se In

vent

ory

Cont

rol &

Acc

ount

ing

Asse

t Man

agem

ent

Line

ar A

sset

s

Cash

Man

agem

ent &

Fo

reca

stin

g

Trea

sury

Man

agem

ent

Flee

t Man

agem

ent

Real

Esta

te

Mana

gem

ent

Facil

ities

Man

agem

ent




West Virginia Finance Division X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X


Wyoming Office of the State Auditor X X X X X X X X

Table 37b FUNCTIONS IMPLEMENTED

(Chapter 11: Q8)


319

State and Office Risk

Man

agem

ent

Tax &

Rev

enue

Ma

nage

men

t

Poin

t-of-S

ale

Trav

el Pl

anni

ng

Trav

el Re

imbu

rsem

ents

HR/P

erso

nnel

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Posit

ion

Cont

rol

Recr

uitm

ent &

Ap

plica

nt S

ervic

es

Train

ing

& Em

ploy

ee

Deve

lopm

ent

Clas

sifica

tion

& Co

mpe

nsat

ion

Tim

e Rep

ortin

g &

Empl

oyee

Lea

ve

Bene

fits

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Empl

oyee

Rela

tions

&

Perfo

rman

ce M

gmt.

Empl

oyee

Self

-Ser

vice

Payr

oll A

dmin

istra

tion

Pens

ion

Mana

gem

ent

Wor

kflo

w Fu

nctio

nalit

y

Busin

ess I

ntell

igen

ce/

Data

War

ehou

se


Alaska Division of Finance X X X X X X X






Delaware Department of Finance X X X X


Georgia State Accounting Office X X X X X X X X X





Iowa State Accounting Enterprise X X X X


(Chapter 11: Q8)


320


Man

agem

ent

Tax &

Rev

enue

Ma

nage

men

t

Poin

t-of-S

ale

Trav

el Pl

anni

ng

Trav

el Re

imbu

rsem

ents

HR/P

erso

nnel

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Posit

ion

Cont

rol

Recr

uitm

ent &

Ap

plica

nt S

ervic

es

Train

ing

& Em

ploy

ee

Deve

lopm

ent

Clas

sifica

tion

& Co

mpe

nsat

ion

Tim

e Rep

ortin

g &

Empl

oyee

Lea

ve

Bene

fits

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Empl

oyee

Rela

tions

&

Perfo

rman

ce M

gmt.

Empl

oyee

Self

-Ser

vice

Payr

oll A

dmin

istra

tion

Pens

ion

Mana

gem

ent

Wor

kflo

w Fu

nctio

nalit

y

Busin

ess I

ntell

igen

ce/

Data

War

ehou

se


Kentucky Office of the Controller X X X

Louisiana Division of Administration X X X X X X X X X X X X X



Massachusetts Office of the Comptroller X X X X X X X X X X




Missouri Division of Accounting X X X X X X

Montana State Accounting Division X X X X X X X X X



Nevada Office of the State Controller X X X X X X X X X




(Chapter 11: Q8)


321


Man

agem

ent

Tax &

Rev

enue

Ma

nage

men

t

Poin

t-of-S

ale

Trav

el Pl

anni

ng

Trav

el Re

imbu

rsem

ents

HR/P

erso

nnel

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Posit

ion

Cont

rol

Recr

uitm

ent &

Ap

plica

nt S

ervic

es

Train

ing

& Em

ploy

ee

Deve

lopm

ent

Clas

sifica

tion

& Co

mpe

nsat

ion

Tim

e Rep

ortin

g &

Empl

oyee

Lea

ve

Bene

fits

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Empl

oyee

Rela

tions

&

Perfo

rman

ce M

gmt.

Empl

oyee

Self

-Ser

vice

Payr

oll A

dmin

istra

tion

Pens

ion

Mana

gem

ent

Wor

kflo

w Fu

nctio

nalit

y

Busin

ess I

ntell

igen

ce/

Data

War

ehou

se

New Mexico Financial Control Division X X X X X X X

New York Office of the State Comptroller X X

North Carolina Office of the State Controller X X

North Dakota Office of Management and Budget X X X X X X X

Ohio Office of Budget and Management X X X X X X X X X X X X

Oklahoma Office of State Finance X X X X X X X X X





South Carolina Office of the Comptroller General X X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X X


X X X X X X X X X X X X


Utah Division of Finance X X X X


(Chapter 11: Q8)


322


Man

agem

ent

Tax &

Rev

enue

Ma

nage

men

t

Poin

t-of-S

ale

Trav

el Pl

anni

ng

Trav

el Re

imbu

rsem

ents

HR/P

erso

nnel

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Posit

ion

Cont

rol

Recr

uitm

ent &

Ap

plica

nt S

ervic

es

Train

ing

& Em

ploy

ee

Deve

lopm

ent

Clas

sifica

tion

& Co

mpe

nsat

ion

Tim

e Rep

ortin

g &

Empl

oyee

Lea

ve

Bene

fits

Adm

inist

ratio

n

Empl

oyee

Rela

tions

&

Perfo

rman

ce M

gmt.

Empl

oyee

Self

-Ser

vice

Payr

oll A

dmin

istra

tion

Pens

ion

Mana

gem

ent

Wor

kflo

w Fu

nctio

nalit

y

Busin

ess I

ntell

igen

ce/

Data

War

ehou

se




West Virginia Finance Division X X X X X X X X X X


Wyoming Office of the State Auditor X X X X X X X X X X

Table 38 ERP: CUSTOMIZATION, SCOPE, DURATION AND RE-ENGINEERING

(Chapter 11: Q9-12)


323

State and Office Degree of Customization Scope of the Project Duration of the Project Level of Business Process Re-Engineering Alabama Office of the State Comptroller


Configuration only! A portion of the professional service costs are reserved for product enhancements for business requirements that are unique to the state of Alaska - any application customizations will become the baseline offering of Advantage. Managed Advantage will support until the application version upgrade that contains the enhancements is installed at the state of Alaska.

Executive, legislative and judiciary branches of government along with some state corporations (not all).

Financial/Procurement - 7/1/2012 to 6/30/2014; HR/Payroll - 1/1/2014 to 12/31/2015; Each go-live date has a subsequent stabilization period supported by CGI.

Intent is to perform comprehensive business process re-engineering to conform to software capabilities - no customization.





N/A N/A N/A N/A



All agencies



Moderate 90% of all agencies on PeopleSoft. Main organizations not on PeopleSoft are Board of Regents and Department of Labor.

Ongoing - agencies are continually being added.

Minimal






(Chapter 11: Q9-12)


324

State and Office Degree of Customization Scope of the Project Duration of the Project Level of Business Process Re-Engineering Iowa State Accounting Enterprise

We currently have approximately 35 custom modifications which vary in complexity.

All executive, legislative and judicial branch agencies in central state government, except the Department of Transportation. DOT submits summary data, but we are working on individual payments being implemented in fall 2012. Regents Institutions do not use our ERP system.

Approximately 2 years This is varied. To avoid customizations, business process reengineering is needed. Financial and Budget received a good amount of reengineering and continue to do so.



Minimum customization All state agencies including all three branches of government.

15 months (original implementation)

Complete reengineering of business processes.


A moderate amount of customization was completed, but only in designated user exit type modules or through available configuration options. Core software was left intact to allow regular application of upgrades from SAP.

LaGov was set up to accommodate all state agencies, but only Department of Transportation and Development (DOTD) was implemented initially as a pilot. Statewide implementation is expected to be completed in July 2016. Colleges and universities are not within the scope.

Approximately 3 years as of this date; statewide rollout to occur later over an additional 18 months

No response


Moderate All agencies 1 year for last upgrade, 2 years initial implementation

Relatively minor



Financial - 5%; HR/PR - 20%; Data Warehouse - 100%

Every branch of government, including judiciary, constitutional, legislative and independents, is covered.

HR/PR and Financial are two different platforms and two different project schedules

Financial - significant change to reflect commercial off-the-shelf software; HR/PR - latest upgrade removed many of the customizations





Little customization to the basic core programs, but we do have a fair amount of customization to do all that we want the programs to do and show.

All agencies in the state, excluding colleges and universities

3 years Very little


Moderately customized. We have eliminated many of our initial customizations as the result of the vendor incorporating these into the related modules but some very critical ones remain in place.

All state agencies, excluding the university system

3 years Minimal, the business processes did not change significantly.


(Chapter 11: Q9-12)


325

State and Office Degree of Customization Scope of the Project Duration of the Project Level of Business Process Re-Engineering Nebraska Department of Administrative Services

Significant customization in JDEdwards; Workday custom integrations and reports

All agencies excluding the University of Nebraska and state colleges

Ongoing


The system is so highly customized that vendor support is not available.

All agencies 4 years for implementation High degree to accommodate state's unique laws.




Minimal Executive, legislative and judicial branches 2 years to implement, and on-going fixes through current date

Moderate


Phase-in approach for most agencies Ongoing


Moderate to heavy Most agencies, excluding the Department of Transportation, the university system and the Community Colleges

2 years Moderate


Varies by module All agencies


Medium All state agencies, boards and commissions 4+ years (delayed due to administration change)

Little for initial implementation


Low All primary government agencies and some component units.

Phase I - Financials - 21 months; Human capital management - 28 months; Enterprise legal management - 15 months; Phase II - ongoing rollout

Low



Extensive customization was done to meet governmental accounting and reporting requirements.

Agencies under the governor and the Office of Attorney General; state treasurer and legislature opted out

18 months for all components except HR/Payroll. HR/Payroll took 24 months

Initially very little. Five years later all business functions were centralized and processes were standardized to improve efficiency.


Limited All departments and agencies of the state; excludes component units and higher education

Significant


Highly customized All agencies excluding legislative and statewide operations of Department of Revenue

FY2008 through FY2013 Minimal


(Chapter 11: Q9-12)


326

State and Office Degree of Customization Scope of the Project Duration of the Project Level of Business Process Re-Engineering South Dakota Bureau of Finance and Management

Minimal All agencies


Customization is minimal All agencies 2 ½ years of design and implementation

Minimal



Moderate All agencies under the governor plus the judicial and legislative branches; does not include retirement system, public employee's health plan, and other independent and/or quasi-state agencies

22 months Minor process re-engineering. We went from a mainframe system to a client-based system but most of the functionality stayed the same. The look and feel of the input screens changed a lot but with training and time and some minor customization agency personnel become comfortable with them.




West Virginia Office of the State Auditor and/or in conjunction with the Division of Finance

Low All agencies to some degree 8 years Currently being reviewed and will implement best practices where applicable



Minimal All agencies We have upgrades about every 2 - 3 years; duration of upgrade is 10 months

Minimal

Table 39 ERP: BUDGET, DEPLOYMENT, ENHANCEMENTS AND AGENCY INFORMATION



327

State and Office Project Over/Under

Budget & Timeframes Cost Reduction or Avoidance Deployment Strategy ERP Enhancements

Percentage of State’s Agencies that Maintain

Internal Accounting Systems Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

51-95%


Within budget to date, timeframe extended by 18 months; Enterprise Readiness Phase - 12 months; Financial/Procurement Phase - 18 to 24 months

Identification and measurement of performance efficiencies are part of the project scope - while some are known others will become apparent during business process re-engineering.

Convert on fiscal boundary for financial/procurement and calendar boundary for HR/payroll - all agencies simultaneously

Sympro debt management and Meridian learning management systems will be operational CY2012 prior to go-live dates of the various ERP modules.

6-20%





N/A N/A N/A N/A 51-95%




51-95%


Big bang for majority of agencies due to Y2K.

ePro Leave Management 1-5%


21-50%


6-20%






328




Internal Accounting Systems Iowa State Accounting Enterprise

The project was delayed twice, which impacted the budget.

Elimination of duplicate systems, some manual processes, and better reporting that could be automated

Big Bang-Performance Budget went live in fall 2003. Financial and Data Warehouse went live in June 2004.

The main enhancement is to better secure the taxpayer identification number.

1-5%



Completed within budget Substantial, however, no actual dollar amounts calculated

All agencies operational on same date

Two major upgrades: one moving from client server to web-based technology and the other from Version 3.6 to Version 3.9

1-5%


The project was on time and on budget.

Cannot determine this yet Decision has not yet been made

Most were SRM (procurement) changes, but were primarily made to meet requirements that were deferred due to immaturity of the product. Full system upgrade was successfully applied 6 months after go-live.

21-50%


Over N/A For modules deployed, all agencies at once with fiscal year-end cutover

One minor upgrade with implementation of managed services

1-5%



Both were close to budget and on time

Bringing the treasurer's office (constitutional elected position) facilitated the reduction in costs as well as eliminating legacy application that was 100% custom and on 25 plus year old technology.

Both applications involved statewide rollout for core applications. Some optional functionality was phased in at the department's discretion.

Financial - cash management / treasury accounting; HR/PR - self-service time and attendance (in process)

0%





Unknown Portion was completed all at once and some phased in

Warrant intercept was added; fixed asset depreciation corrected

51-95%




329




Internal Accounting Systems Montana State Accounting Division

On time and on-budget No direct cost reductions, but the old mainframe systems would have eventually failed

Deployed statewide (all agencies) at the beginning of fiscal year 2000

Upgrading the applications and implemented new modules

1-5%


Upgraded from 7.33 to 8.10 to 9.0 6-20%


On budget and finished early in the controller's office; state came in on time and within budget.

Unknown Financial system completed first, then HR, then NDOT

Project management, contract management, budget management, purchasing management functionalities were added later.

6-20%



6-20%


On time and under budget Prior to ERP all agencies had disparate systems to provide their operating budget management. Daily journal entries were provided to a “central” system from the agency systems to provide a consolidated financial picture for the state controller. All purchases and payables were done through the “central” system. There now is a centralized book or record with the replacement of all of the agency systems.

Big Bang rollout to all agencies and branches. This was done at the end of a pay period as well as the end of the fiscal year.

e-Procurement, Project Costing with Time and Labor capture for grant accounting, asset management for a single agency, numerous reporting and queries developed.

1-5%


Phase in approach


On time but a little over budget Not measured but considerable, since the state had no integrated financial system and only general ledger standards before this implementation

Pilot followed by full rollout SR's and software upgrades; enhancements to meet the reporting requirements of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

6-20%


1-5%




330




Internal Accounting Systems Ohio Office of Budget and Management

Over on cost and time Not measured Full rather than staggered Fixed assets, travel and expense and shared services functionality

51-95%


Phase I - Financials - Implementation was extended by 3 months; Human capital management (HCM) - rolled out implementation rather than "big bang" to minimize risk; Phase II - rolled out with several projects delayed based on agency readiness or resource constraints

Some of the savings are dependent upon the rollout of Phase II to agencies and elimination of their legacy systems. Some efficiencies gained include more consistent data, more efficient pre-audit and state auditor access to databases.

Phase I to replace legacy system for GL, AP and Purchasing. HCM to replace HR and payroll legacy systems. Phase II rollout of additional functionality and streamlining procure to pay and project accounting.

Upgraded Financials, HCM and ERP; rolling out supplemental modules.

6-20%


21-50%


Over budgeted amounts Comptroller operations was able to eliminate 30% of complement in 5 years.

e-Procurement, workflow, plant maintenance and flexible real estate

6-20%


I supplier and fixed assets modules 6-20%


Over monetarily and timeframe A combination of volunteer and tiered deployment was taken gradually over the implementation period

Capital Assets Module, Inventory Module, Payroll Processing, Human Resource Management and Cash Source Enhancement

6-20%


Numerous; ERP systems constantly evolve, new modules and components are added.

1-5%


Came in on budget; timeframe was extended 9 months

None calculated Big bang on payroll; financials rolled out in waves over a 9-month period

None 1-5%





331




Internal Accounting Systems Utah Division of Finance

Slightly over budget but on time We avoided the increasing costs of using a mainframe system and the costs of storage that goes along with a mainframe system.

There have been various updates and enhancements to the system through the normal upgrade and patch process with the vendor. We added a grid of coding information on many of the transaction screens to make it easier for users to find the information they use the most. CGI has baselined this modification and will be included in the next upgrade.

1-5%





Not complete yet Too soon to tell Phase 1 - general ledger and procurement etc.; Phase 2 - HR payroll

N/A 6-20%


1-5%


Upgrades completed on time and on budget

Upgrades to stay current with software 1-5%


332


Table 40 ERP: TRANSACTION ENTRY, PAYROLL HANDLING, METHOD OF DATA ENTRY AND MODIFICATIONS



333

State and Office Transaction Entry Handling of

Payroll Transactions Data Entry Methods ERP Modified to Fit Environment?

Who did ERP Customization?


Entered by departments Entered by departments Online, batch mode, and electronic file transmissions/interfaces

N/A


Entered by departments Combination of departments and centralized entry - oversight is at the centralized level. A few time and attendance systems exist that have a unique employee base but are not all inclusive for the agency that it is deployed in.

Online, batch mode, and electronic file transmissions/interfaces

N/A Implementation consultant/systems integrator






N/A Combination of consulting and internal staff






Entered by departments Entered by departments; payroll processed by controller, entered into G/L by agencies


Yes Combination of consulting and internal staff


Entered by departments Entered centrally by comptroller Online, batch mode, and electronic file transmissions/interfaces


Entered by departments Entered by departments Online and electronic file transmissions/interfaces

N/A


Payroll transactions are entered directly by the various agencies into six central payroll processing agents. These agents then create input files that are loaded to the Office of the Comptroller central payment processing system for warrant writing.

Payroll transactions are entered directly by the various agencies into six central payroll processing agents. These agents then create input files that are loaded to the Office of the Comptroller central payment processing system for warrant writing.

Batch mode Yes Staff




334






Entered by departments Only the accounting transaction is entered into the ERP program through an interface.






Yes Implementation consultant/systems integrator








Entered by departments; payroll transactions entered centrally by comptroller

Entered centrally by comptroller Online, batch mode, and electronic file transmissions/interfaces



Entered by departments; a significant number of payments are interfaced electronically from department programmatic systems.

Entered by departments Online and electronic file transmissions/interfaces







N/A






Yes Staff


Entered by departments Entered by departments Online, batch mode, electronic file transmissions/interfaces and spreadsheet uploads



Entered by departments Entered by departments Online, batch mode and electronic file transmissions/interfaces






335





Entered by departments Payroll transactions can be centralized or decentralized depending on the organization


N/A


Entered by departments Individual employees or timekeepers enter time into time and labor (T&L) module. Agency H/R personnel edit the T&L inputs with final submission to the payroll module. Risk management manages the employee benefits with assistance from the ERP support group. Agency H/R manages the employee records relating to wage, demographics, benefit election, etc. Central payroll manages and processes the actual payroll.

Online and electronic file transmissions/interfaces






Entered by departments Entered by departments. Our payroll system is SAP and is separate from our main ERP system.















Some by agency, some by comptroller. Revenue entered at the source; grant invoices entered by agencies; vendor invoices are sent to central location for imaging and workflow; utilities are received via electronic data interchange.

Entered by departments Online and electronic file transmissions/interfaces






Entered by departments Entered by the individual agency and released by the Comptroller General's Office






336





Entered by departments Employees enter their own time records. A central Personnel office manages H/R transactions that are not initiated through employee self-service.




Entered by departments Entered centrally by comptroller Online, batch mode, and electronic file transmissions/interfaces




Entered by departments We have another ERP system that is used to process payroll; it is a SAP application. However, it is only used for payroll processing. For the most part, time and leave are entered by employees online, approved by supervisors online and then processed by payroll system. We have a new consolidated H/R office that handles all additional entries and questions related to state payroll.








N/A Combination of consulting and internal staff






Table 41 ERP: CUSTOMIZATION AND PLATFORMS



337

State and Office Areas Customized Primary Database Platform Primary Hardware Platform Additional Platforms Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

IBM mainframe None


Anticipate most customizations will be in the payroll related to contracts associated with marine highways

Oracle 11g VMware VSphere servers – production; 6 Web Servers 8 cores, 24GB mem, 760GB stor; 4 App Servers 18 cores, 112GB mem, 400GB stor; 6 App Servers 11 cores, 24GB mem, 916GB stor; Windows operating system; Physical Servers; 2 DB Servers, 16 cores, 72GB mem, 2TB stor; RHEL 5 operating system; a separate, but similar, infrastructure for disaster recovery site

Data Warehouse - Oracle 11g database on physical Sun Servers with VmSphere web servers running Windows operating system. A complete list of agency subsystems would be exhaustive to list - primarily physical servers running Windows operating systems.





N/A N/A Current accounting system is mainframe computer based.

The Financial Data Warehouse is on multiple web servers.





The key areas are primarily A/R entry, reporting and purchase to pay. However, there are other areas with customizations besides these.

Oracle Unix/Intel, Solaris




Warehouse is DB2 on IBM mainframe

Warehouse is DB2 on IBM mainframe

WEB LAN/sequel server





338

State and Office Areas Customized Primary Database Platform Primary Hardware Platform Additional Platforms Iowa State Accounting Enterprise

Mostly areas that relate to warrant writing, securing the taxpayer identification number and state specific laws.

DB2v9.4 Websphere Application Server v. 5.1.1.13

Hewlett Packard Microsoft Windows with Business Object application IBM P570 DB2v9



Integrated our incoming credit card processing transactions to post via interface to our financial system

Oracle 11.R2 (Rac Cluster) Linux RHEL 5 (running on virtual machines)

Windows - Virtual Machines


All areas. Answer would be lengthy but the primary reason would be that ERP was customized to meet current business practices and policies.

DB2 Primarily UNIX, but database is on an IBM mainframe running z/OS, and LaGov also has some Windows app servers.

Data is fed to legacy financial and procurement systems on an IBM mainframe until the LaGov ERP is rolled out statewide.


Budget control to adhere to state statutes; internal billing to allow multiple accounting lines on payment

Oracle Linux RHEL 5, Oracle 11g


DB2 Mainframe IBM Z890, IBMZ/OS operating system


Accounts receivable and intercepts

Financial - Oracle with Advantage; HR/PR - Oracle with PeopleSoft; Warehouse - Netezza

HP/AIX/Websphere Netezza for warehouse; SQL for smaller web applications


Oracle HP Unix HP Unix




Fixed assets, all printing such as check writing, POs, invoices, inter-agency billings, cash management screens and additional document types

DB2 Mainframe z/OS, CICS None


Reporting, offset, general ledger and accounts payable; the system did/does not meet all of our business requirements as delivered.

Oracle IBM AIX (virtual) - moving to Linux

Mainframe - RDS application and Web Servers IBM and Dell blade servers


All modules have been customized for JDEdwards.

AS400 for JDEdwards AS400 and JAS servers for JDEdwards

Various


Financial portion was customized to reflect requirements of Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS). HR portion was customized to meet requirements of NRS, and Nevada's established business practices.

Oracle Enterprise database IBM AIX systems N/A




339

State and Office Areas Customized Primary Database Platform Primary Hardware Platform Additional Platforms New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services



Primarily reporting was customized

Oracle 10g version 10.2.03 AIX 5.3 No secondary systems that reside on SHARE hardware. There are other systems statewide (i.e., PERA) that interface their information to SHARE.


Where necessary to meet state needs


Most heavily customized in the inventory module, but most modules have been altered to some degree, and a procurement card reconciliation function has been added.

Mainframe VSAM files Mainframe and IBM OS Data warehouse - Oracle database and IBM Cognos; secure check printing - Bottomline technologies e-Procurement interface


Microsoft SQL Server Cognos


Workflows Controlling Board vendor threshold checking

Oracle Unix Cognos - Business Intelligence


Low - based on statutory requirement and reporting needs for financials and human capital management

PeopleSoft/Oracle IBM Power 7, AIX 6.1 O/S


N/A N/A N/A


Finance, budget, HR, payroll and grants

Oracle IBM Business Intelligence environment is used for reporting


Oracle


Extensive customization from transaction processing to report generation

Microsoft SQL 2005 HP Hardware, Microsoft OS Server 2003

Citrix Websphere, Vertex, RWD-uPerform


Primarily interfaces Oracle MS SQL Server Z series mainframe; RS6000 virtual Windows servers

SQL server


Customization is minimal Oracle Hardware Platform: Oracle RAC for database and VMS (VMWare) for web and middle (application and batch); Operating System: RedHat Enterprise Linux





340

State and Office Areas Customized Primary Database Platform Primary Hardware Platform Additional Platforms Utah Division of Finance

We added grids at the top of each document to display the accounting codes and other information. This information was difficult to find in the original documents due to the many fields and tabs contained in the documents. The vendor has baselined this mod into its next version.

Oracle 10g Sun Servers running Solaris 10 SAP Payroll System: LINUX servers, Oracle Data Warehouse System: Virtual LINUX servers, Sybase





Not done yet Oracle Server based, HP ProLiant, G7 Blade Linux

Warehouse - same as previous question Various


N/A


Fixed assets - fund accounting information needed to remain the same as on the expenditure documents

Oracle Linux Red Hat None

Table 42 ERP: RECORDS, APPLICATIONS AND DATA WAREHOUSES



341

State and Office Hard Copy Forwarded

for Pre-Audit? Use of Imaging? In What Form Are Records Stored?

Use of Client-Server Applications?

For What Purposes?

Use of Web-Based Applications?

For What Purposes?

Centralized Data Warehouse and Date

Implemented? Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

Yes No Paper and disk No No No


Yes. Audit and certification is agency responsibility - Advantage has the ability to upload (scan) hard copy documents and associate the backup to a financial document. The state of Alaska intends to use some of this functionality but must remain mindful of storage requirements.

Not currently - options are being evaluated

Paper, disk, PDF files and microfiche; Data warehouse - financial FY2001 to present; and HR/payroll - 1990 to present

Yes. The Alaska Budget System is a client-server application that is used to develop the annual budget; this is not part of the project scope.

Yes. The Advantage application is a web-based application.

Yes. The Alaska Data Enterprise Reporting (ALDER) data warehouse is a web-based application that will be enhanced to include ERP data for reporting; operational in 2008.





No No Paper, disk and PDF files

Yes; the Financial Data Warehouse is in a web-based client server structure.

Yes, only for the data warehouse, not for the accounting system itself

Yes, 2002 (estimated date)




Yes. Receive all contracts and grants over $1 million upon execution; for invoices greater than $10 thousand and sampled invoices less than $10 thousand receive vouchers and supporting documentation for pre-audit.

No Paper, disk, PDF files, film, microfiche and CD

No Yes, vendor payment history, W-9 and employee salary information

Yes, 1994, central and departmental transactions, configuration and title data


No Yes, procurement documentation

Paper No Yes, the central financial system (i.e., PeopleSoft) is web-based

No




342




For What Purposes?


For What Purposes?


Implemented? Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services

Yes. Except for purchase orders when entered by departments, copies of POs are attached to the voucher when invoices are processed for payment. Vouchers are initially entered by departments into a pending file. Hard copy voucher with supporting documentation attached are forwarded to DAGS for pre-auditing.

No Paper, disk, PDF files, film and microfiche

No Yes. Accessing financial and payroll data. Separate datamart was created to store financial and payroll data which departments access.

Yes, 2002


No Yes. We have incorporated that functionality in our web front end to the statewide accounting system.

Paper, disk, PDF files and microfiche; reports are available online and can be printed/ viewed in PDF.

No Yes, accounts payable, travel reimbursement, financial adjustments, cash deposits, requisition to purchase order, budgetary, recurring transactions, vendor table maintenance

Yes, 2004; payroll and accounting information


Yes. Contracts require hard copy document filing.

Yes; internal agency vouchers, ET authorizations

Paper, disk, PDF files, film and microfiche

No Yes; CAFR, fixed assets and locally held funds

Yes - July 1, 1997



The answer is both yes and no. Iowa does not pre-audit, but are forwarded for final approval.

No Paper and microfiche

No Yes, financial applications (including data warehouse)

Yes - June 2004



No, responsibility delegated to agencies

No Paper, disk and PDF files

No Yes, all applications Yes - July 1, 2006; financial, budget, procurement and human resources




343




For What Purposes?


For What Purposes?


Implemented? Louisiana Division of Administration

No. Online approvals by supervisors (pre-audits) are performed at the agency level. The hard copy documents are also kept by the user agency. Most adjusting journal vouchers/entries require approval by the central control agency, with supporting documentation and justification or explanation.

No Disk Yes. Not necessarily with the financial component, but BSI (tax software) is used with the payroll component, and InfoPak is used for system help throughout LaGov.

Yes. The LaGov SAP components are accessed through several front-end portals, with one single entry portal.

Yes. A central data warehouse is part of the LaGov SAP landscape and was implemented along with the entire LaGov system in November 2010.


Yes for those items over $5,000 Yes; payment documents and journal entries

Disk No Yes, cloud-based managed services solution for Financial, Procurement ERP system; Westbrook technologies for electronic imaging storage/retrieval

Yes, 1993; all accounting, payroll and budget transactions


Yes for payments unless specifically exempted

No Paper, disk, PDF files and microfiche

No No Yes, 1998


No No Disk No, financial, web-based system

Yes, financial - CGI Advantage and custom web-based intercept application and web-based applications to support vendor access to payment information; HR/PR – PeopleSoft

Yes, initial implementation in the 1990s, most recent version has payroll, personnel and financial data


No No Paper, disk and microfiche

Yes, payroll time and attendance processing and labor distribution

Yes, vendor self- service, employee self- service, and data warehouse access

Yes - October 1994



Yes. Paper vouchers are submitted, but electronic vouchers are not submitted. Purchase orders are not submitted.

Yes, payment vouchers, cash receipts, journal vouchers and supporting documentation of each and financial reports

Film and microfiche Yes, data warehousing, learning management, e-procurement, e-payment, fixed assets and fleet management

Yes, data warehousing, learning management, e-procurement, e-payment, fixed assets and fleet management

Yes, 1995




344




For What Purposes?


For What Purposes?


Implemented? Missouri Division of Accounting

No. Hard copy or scanned documents are not necessarily sent to the central (controller's) office. They are maintained in the department where final approval of the document occurred.

Yes, forms and supporting documentation

Paper, disk, PDF files, microfiche and mainframe disk storage

No Yes. Our financial system feeds several web-based systems.

Yes


No. These are to be reviewed and approved at the agency level with the support retained there.

No Paper, disk and PDF files

Yes, nVision and AppDesigner Yes, financial and HR systems

No


No Yes, W-9s, invoices, contracts and JE support

Disk and PDF files Yes, web-based user interface to AS400 server system

Yes, web-based user interface to AS400 server system

No


No Yes, vendor records and workflow additions in purchasing

Paper, disk and film No Yes, limited basis, intranet only; interface between data warehouse and financial system

Yes, 2000; state of Nevada financial and HR data



No. There are a few exceptions depending on the dollar value and type of payment (for example, legal claims settlements).

Yes; garnishments (child support and student loan defaults); employee authorized enrollments and deductions; W-9 vendor information; bank provided imaging for checks

Paper, disk and PDF files

Yes, staging of inbound and outbound data sets

Yes, vendor payment inquiry; data warehouse reporting; employee self-service

Yes - September 2001


Yes, contracts, purchase orders and vouchers

Yes, all financial documents Paper, disk and microfiche

Yes, financial information Yes, financials and human capital management in ERP

No


No, some may be during phase-in period


Yes


No No Disk No Yes, e-Procurement and Decision Support System (DSS) data warehouse

Yes, general ledger data only


No No Paper, disk and PDF files

Yes




345




For What Purposes?


For What Purposes?


Implemented? Ohio Office of Budget and Management

Yes, hard copies and scanned attachments

Yes Paper and PDF files No No Yes, 2007


Yes, limited pre-audit for authorized signature and correct coding

Yes, imaging of claim documents and invoices being rolled out to agencies, with some purchasing being imaged as well


No Yes, all PeopleSoft modules

Yes, December 2011 for GL, AP and AR


No No. The decision to use imaging to archive financial transaction documentation is left to the discretion of the individual agencies.

Paper, disk, PDF files and microfiche

Yes, Datamart and ORBITS (budget system)

Yes. Some agencies use the web to sign into the statewide financial management application. In addition, we are currently testing a web-based version of certain screens in the central accounting system.

Yes, 1997


No, documents are imaged. Yes, contracts, vendor invoices, revenue documents and payment support


Yes, SAP Yes, vendor self-service, employee self-service, procurement bids and vendor payment information

Yes, 2002; financial, budgetary and procurement


Yes Yes, vendor invoices and similar supporting documents

Paper and web-based application

Yes Yes No


Yes, hardcopy is required only for non-SAP agencies

Yes. The state uses Hyland-Onbase software for its imaging solutions.


Yes, Citrix, SAP Yes, vendor registration - websphere, and u-Perform, Citrix

Yes. In conjunction with ERP implementation. Data includes transactional, balance, and subsidiary details.


Yes. Pre-auditing is done by the state auditor's office.

Yes, all personnel records Disk, PDF files, film and microfiche

Yes, data interfaces Yes, user interfaces Yes, 1998; all sorts of financial, procurement, HR and payroll information


No. Documents are imaged and attached to the transactions.

Yes, documentation for all transactions.

Disk and PDF files No Yes. Our ERP system is web-based and all third party applications are accessed via the ERP application through single sign-on.

No




346




For What Purposes?


For What Purposes?


Implemented? Texas Office of the Comptroller of Public Accounts


No Yes. Agencies may attach documents and scans to the transactions they process in the ERP. For our state payroll system, we store W-4s, direct deposit requests, etc., in IBM's Content Manager system.

Disk Yes, the entire system Yes, entry of transactions and viewing of tables and other data

Yes, 2006. It includes most financial data from the ERP and also includes payroll/employee data from our separate payroll system.





Yes, plan to go paperless at some point

Yes, everything Paper, PDF files and electronic storage

No Yes, everything Yes, 1998; most of it


No Yes, checks Paper, PDF files and microfiche

No No No


No No Paper, PDF files and microfiche

No Yes Yes. Data warehouse is for housing computer data for the centralized accounting system, otherwise data is maintained decentralized by individual agencies.

Table 43 ERP: CUSTOMER-FOCUSED WEB APPLICATIONS AND BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE



347

State and Office Are Customer-Focused Web

Applications Used?

Is the Business Intelligence Solution Part of the

ERP or a Stand-Alone?

Technology Used to Support the Business Intelligence Solution

Deployment Process Used Time Duration for Deployment


No


No. Nothing current that is material - Advantage will have both vender and employee self-service.

This is a stand-alone application based on BusinessObjects software.

Oracle 11g on Sun Server VmSphere Web Servers BusinessObjects reporting tool

Deployment will be all agencies simultaneously with a fiscal year and CAFR closeout on the legacy system.

Financial/Procurement - 24 months; HR/Payroll - 24 months





No The Financial Data Warehouse is a stand-alone system.

The database is MS-Sequel Server on a separate server from the web server running Information Builders Webfocus product. Webfocus is the reporting tool that allows both structured and ad-hoc reports.

N/A N/A




Yes. Vendor and employee payment information, transparency reporting for vendor payments, budgeting, receipts and disbursements, and treasury

Stand-alone Hardware & OS: IBM z9 BC (business Class) 2096-x03, z/OS 1.12; Database: DB2 v9, ADABASE; Reporting tools: Information Builders Reporting Tool Suite; allow access via ODBC compliant tools


Yes; employee self-service for typical activities; supplier portal to view status of PO, invoices and payments

Big Bang for most and follow up projects for those not in initial go-live

Agency usually takes 6-9 months to put on P/S; large agencies could be 9-18 months





348


Applications Used?






Yes Stand-alone application MySQL database, Cognos business intelligence suite of reporting tools

A license is required to use the data warehouse. Agencies purchased licenses at their discretion.




No. We have a Vendor Payment Portal for vendors to look up payments, but it currently was produced in-house.

Business Objects is a component of the ERP system. We do not use their ETL process and we have custom universes.

We are running a DB2 database with an AIX operating system. The reporting software is Business Objects 10.

Big Bang Same amount of time as the Financial implementation; the Data Warehouse was brought up at the same time.



Yes, vendor self-service Included as part of our licensing agreement with CGI

Business Objects reporting tool and Oracle Database; Windows Virtual Machines

Big Bang 15 months for entire implementation (original implementation)


Yes, vendor self-service, employee self-service (available to all state employees paid through LaGov, and used by most) and managers self-service.

Component of the LaGov ERP UNIX, DB2, SAP BW, Business Objects & Crystal Reports

Implemented first for Department of Transportation and Development only, which was not on the legacy statewide systems. Next step is to implement one agency that is on the legacy statewide systems, then all remaining agencies in a Big Bang.

DOTD pilot implementation took approximately 3 years, but all SAP ERP components were installed and configured, with additional Louisiana customizations included, for statewide use as part of that project. Next step is of a single agency implementation from the statewide legacy system, which is expected to take 6 months. Full statewide implementation is expected to take 18 months.


Yes. Accounting system uses vendor self-service. Payroll system uses employee self-service.

Stand-alone Oracle 11g and MS-SQL databases using SSRS reporting solution and BI Query User v8.1.1 on Windows NT 5.2

Big Bang





349


Applications Used?






Yes. Vendor self-service - online access to payment scheduling and status (EFT, checks paid, etc.). Employee self-service - in the process of rolling out self service time and attendance with online supervisory/management approvals.

Extract of data from ERPs vs. vendor supported tools.

Netezza, Informatica, Cognos, SQL and Excel/Access tools

Big Bang - full statewide implementation of all three enterprise systems. Some functions were optional with departments deciding when to implement certain features such as workflow, department budgeting, etc.

Financials - Gap analysis; business process and detailed design; development (joint by vendor and state); testing and implementation




No We have a data warehouse and will move to BI as a component of the ERP when implemented.


Yes. Vendor can submit information over the web to become a bidder. Their information transfers over to become a vendor.

Our data warehouse is a stand-alone system with the only input into it being our ERP system.

DB2 mainframe, Cold Fusion is data warehouse front-end

Financial was Big Bang; HR was phased in.


Yes N/A N/A N/A for BI system; Big Bang for state Financial and HR/Payroll

N/A for BI system; Approximately 6 months to deploy the software for statewide Financial and HR/Payroll Systems


Yes, employee self-service Big Bang although payroll implemented two months prior to financials

2 years


No Stand-alone application Oracle Database; IBM AIX hardware and operating system; web-based report application; and Oracle Discoverer query tool

Big Bang Two years to roll out, and two more years of fine-tuning



Yes, employee self-service; paychecks and w-2s; vendor inquiry; payments, payment history and agency questions

Stand-alone N/A no ERP N/A no ERP N/A no ERP


No, employee and vendor self-service are planned for FY13.

ERP was Big Bang ERP was 2 years




350


Applications Used?






Yes Phase-in Still underway


Yes. OSC has also implemented an ERP for HR/Payroll (SAP). HR/Payroll has employee self-service and e-Procurement has vendor self-service.

HR/Payroll BI is a component of the system, but the general ledger data resides in a stand-alone application.

SAP's Business Warehouse for HR/Payroll, and the general ledger resides in an Oracle database with Cognos as the analytical tool.

After piloting several small agencies, we utilized the Big Bang for the rest.

From the time we decided to implement the system until completion of the pilots and Big Bang, five years elapsed.


Yes, employee self-service Stand-alone interfaces with ERP system

Cognos In phases


Yes, vendor and employee self-service

Stand-alone Cognos Released to all agencies in six phases: Release 1 and 2 - HR/CRM, December 2006; Release 3 and 4 - FIN, July 2007; Release 5 - Billing, April 2008 ; Release 6 - Budget Planning and Asset Management, July 2008

Each phase of deployment and development was approximately 18 months.


Yes, employee self-service, vendor portal and manager self-service

Component, Oracle Business Intelligence

IBM Power 7, AIX 6.1 O/S. Oracle 11g database. OBIEE reporting tools.

All at once. Not all agencies have equal access.

18 months


No Stand-alone


Yes; employee self-service and vendor self-service

Component of ERP Hardware platform and reporting tools

Phased in by agency groups over one year; larger agencies implemented last

18 months from first configuration to implementation of first group of agencies


No Deployed simultaneously for all agencies


Yes, Websphere for vendor registration

Component/compliment of ERP system

Business Objects, HP, MicroSoft SQL 2005, SAP/BEX

Waves best describes the deployment process

FY2008 through FY2013


Yes Stand-alone Virtual servers, SQL Server, various ODBC reporting tools, Cognos multi-dimensional cubes

Varied depending on project


Yes, employee self-service and vendor portal

The HCM application was deployed with a Big Bang approach. The FSCM application was deployed in waves.

Each wave of financial deployment was generally done in quarters beginning in January 2009 and ending in October 2009.




351


Applications Used?







Yes. Our statewide SAP payroll system has an employee self-service module for time entry and approval, and changing withholding and direct deposit information. We are also in the process of implementing the travel management module of the payroll system to be used for travel authorization and reimbursement.

It is a stand-alone application: Cognos.

Hardware: 2 virtual LINUX servers; Database: Sybase; Reporting tools: Cognos; and Microsoft Excel and Access.

All agencies went on the new system at the same time.

22 months





Yes; some vendor and some employee - not all, informational only

Currently stand-alone - new one will be integrated

Currently, IBM mainframe, DB2, Crystal and other ODBC compliant tools

Big Bang N/A


No


Yes, employee self-service Yes, it is part of the ERP system SAP and Oracle Big Bang - rolled out to all agencies at once


352


Table 44 ERP: IMPLEMENTATION, LESSONS LEARNED, CHALLENGES AND EMPLOYEE RETENTION



353

State and Office Staff Assigned to the

Implementation Project Lessons Learned During the

Software Implementation Major Challenges After “Go Live”

Major Challenges Post-Implementation

Employee Retention Techniques



Important to have project staff not retain any operational responsibilities.1

N/A - implementation just beginning N/A - just implementing system N/A - just implementing system

Key staff will be targeted for configuration positions needed to operate the system - others will be highly sought by agencies to fill vacant positions after go-live.





N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A





Not readily determinable Executive level buy-in important. Process re-engineering necessary if want to maximize investment.

Volume (# of agencies and transactions); change management (agencies were separate but now part of one solution)



4 technical staff, 1 dedicated 100% to the project; 2 business users responsible for training

Budget for technical support of the data warehouse is separate from other activities. SCO business units absorbed training and user support.





354








5 full-time staff members and many part-time staff for varying lengths of time based on need

Change the business processes, customize as little as possible, and set realistic expectations

Performance and user training. For training, a team was created to act as liaisons between technical and end user staff. Performance was addressed in many ways such as adding job managers, hardware, software tweaks, etc.

Performance of the nightly cycle was a major challenge. Performance was addressed in many ways such as adding job managers, hardware, software tweaks, etc.

No



Approximately 30 state staff were assigned 100% to the project and approximately 30 state employees assigned to devote part-time to the project.

Training and communication is vital to the success of the project.

Help desk and "war room" worked around the clock to assist agencies as needed.

One of the major problems to overcome was the length of time for the nightly cycle to process. Over a period of time we made numerous changes to cycle settings to fine tune the process and eventually the process became very efficient.

Most employees who worked full time on the project received promotions at the end of the project.


50 to 58 central support staff were assigned full-time. Variable numbers of agency employees were loaned to the project at different times and were full-time while they were on the project.

2 3 The support organization structure was already in place from the earlier statewide implementation of SAP products for HR/Payroll. State project staff were rolled into that organization as additional ERP teams.

State staff were given some premium pay while on the project. After implementation, they returned to (or assumed new) positions in the support organization which already had unique job titles (IT Statewide Systems...) created for this purpose, with a significantly better than average pay scale.


4 functional at 95%, 3 technical at 50%

Clear documentation of service levels and operational framework between client (state) and managed services vendor (CGI)

Load-balancing (hundreds of) concurrent users in production system. Additional clusters with increased memory were configured to accommodate production transaction volume.

Defining roles and responsibilities of managed services support team and state business team and maintaining current communication4

No





355







Approximately 50 state staff were assigned to the project, many were dedicated full-time with daily work handled by contractors hired to handle legacy work. This assured that state employees knew the application before the integrators were gone.

Most significantly, we focused on readying users to make the transition. A roadmap from legacy to new was not used...all learning dealt with the new and users hated it. The strategy was designed to not have material obsolete within a year but it made the transition harder.

Massachusetts agreed to joint development of many features but no other large client had implemented the software that we went with. Performance tuning was a major challenge.5

Previous question addressed many of the challenges. Additional challenges included data center staff (mainly mainframe) learning to support multi-tier web-based applications. We used graphics to focus them on supporting the entire application and not just checking that individual components worked.

We were fortunate to live in a major metropolitan area and to be implementing state of the art technology. State staff were provided the opportunity to implement new technology and not relegated to supporting legacy technology.





Varied throughout state agencies It is critical to back fill positions who are dedicated to implementation.

No


N/A for BI system; approximately 30 for the Statewide Financial and HR/Payroll Systems and underlying IT structure development

More change management is needed up front. Also more business process engineering should be performed. Change after the fact is difficult, if not impossible.

We initially used a client server technology but found it difficult to maintain the code on the agency servers. We later moved to a centralized server structure with access through the web. Initially our batch processing ran too long and required too much maintenance by staff. We used indexes, tuned our sequel statements, etc, to improve batch processing times. We also underestimated the number of users and the amount of overall usage the system would receive. We increased the system resources to address this.

The most difficult issue has been managing a central accounting and HR/Payroll system with the State Accounting Division (controller's office) owning/managing the financial systems, the state HR office owning/managing the HR/Payroll systems. One system - two process owners! We also have moved the database administrators to the central IT office because of underlying issues between the process owners.

The employees were offered positions (at a competitive salary) within a new bureau that was responsible for maintaining and upgrading the system. Most of the staff remained with the new bureau. Only a few of these left the project and returned to their original agencies.




356







JDEdwards project had approximately 100 staff 100% dedicated to the project plus consultants.


10 staff persons were full-time on the project for varying lengths of time. Most persons worked 12 hours a day during the design and implementation process.

Extracting and defining the business rules is the key to a clean implementation.

Program bugs, lack of adequate business rules, and the high degree of complexity of our record-keeping were some of the challenges. These were addressed through a series of closed-loop corrective actions, which correct at a system level so that the cause is eradicated.

Training on the new system and attracting and retaining specialty-program qualified people. AMS provided good training and detailed documentation; we created an in-house training program for users and a good system for service requests and code documentation.

Extended contracts to key individuals; at the time, state salaries and benefits were competitive with the private sector.



N/A no ERP N/A N/A N/A N/A


At the peak of the ERP implementation there were 110 people assigned to the project. This was done on an 80-20 basis with 80% state employees and 20% consultants. There were approximately 25 state employees at 100% effort and the remaining at 50% participation.

Don't use volunteer state team. Hand pick the employees with talent. Minimize customizations by changing business processes. Co-locate entire team away from everyday duties. Test, test, test. No vacations during 2 months prior to and 3 months post-implementation. Sign MOUs with agencies to keep implementation team for 3-4 months post-implementation. We lost 75% on day 1. No such thing as too much training. It has to be timed to implementation date and not too soon to allow employees to forget.

Training has to continue. “War Room” concept for agencies to come for hands-on assistance: this was a major factor in our success. Informed help desk hotlines. FAQs on project website.

Continuing support still an issue determining the proper staffing levels of what talent.

Accrued sick and vacation was not allowed to expire due to intense work schedule. Employees were allowed comp time for extra hours worked and this did not expire. Celebrate major and minor milestones with cake or donuts.


Many staff retained operational responsibilities.




357







In addition to the consultants, we had approximately 30 state staffers assigned to the project 100%.

We should have gotten more depth to agency buy-in. As the controller's office, we did a good job with the agency accounting departments, but we did not do enough to bring the materials management agency personnel into the fold.

After several small pilots, the system was quite stable, but the users’ need for help during the Big Bang portion of the implementation was significant. We had a help desk, but they had trouble keeping up with the volume of calls.

The hardest part was training the help desk personnel with enough system knowledge to be able to answer the low-level inquiries. Agencies frequently hired our most knowledgeable employees from the team, so rehiring and retraining were big challenges.

We tried to set up a system of promotion from within, but as agencies offered more money, we would still lose our best employees.


2 FTEs


Approximately 190 full-time and 100 agency part-time staff (part-time staff retained responsibilities within their agencies).

1. Keep vanilla as possible (used delivered processes as much as possible rather than mimic old business processes). 2. Ensure requirements are clear, concise, and detailed. 3. Ensure training is effective. 4. Ensure clear approach for reporting (enterprise performance management requirements were not defined enough).

1. Managing performance across the system. 2. Did not include disaster recovery and business continuity plans during planning. 3. Understanding and managing security at the application/operating system/database tier. 4. Finding qualified PeopleSoft functional experts for post-implementation support. 5. Operating model was created after implementation. 6. Governance model was created after implementation.

1. Dissolved production support component of program management office and returned support staff to agencies. 2. Shared governance across two central agencies.

No


5 state staff dedicated 10%-20% to project

Upgraded to new version before going live

Not complete yet Not completed yet No



Internal staffing was 100% dedicated - each functional area had one to two business specialists and a consultant.

Business transformation and training are keys to success. Executive sponsorship is also essential.

Volume testing lacked the ability to disclose all issues so performance issues and long run times were the most significant. Payroll processing needed to be summarized before posting to finance.

The administration supported a new IT Bureau to support the centralized system. Business process specialists stayed in the new bureau to perform business analysis work for developers.

Yes, quarterly bonuses were provided to project team members to retain the new skill set developed throughout the project. The project team was also placed on a higher pay scale.




358







No


80-90 people full time state employees with 300 people from state agencies that retained agency responsibility

Central agencies and agencies with complex operations should have received the first wave of deployment.

The challenges are a work in progress and state agencies are continuing to adapt: consistency in recording of transactions by decentralized agencies, and utilization and optimization of available data fields for effective reporting and managerial evaluation.

Finding and retaining experienced resources is a constraint.

No


Retain operational responsibilities

People could write entire libraries on this question.


100 state staff who were 100% dedicated

Governance is most important. The user community expected more detailed training than was delivered. The expectation was for training to crosswalk the new ERP system to the old legacy systems. The actual delivery was more geared to the new ERP system.

Lack of accounting expertise and training

We maintained the 100 staff for production support. The wave approach on financials resulted in staff supporting two production applications simultaneously.

No



6-7 IT staff that were 100% dedicated to the project. 10-15 functional staff that maintained their operational duties. Representatives from each agency were brought it for input and testing as needed while maintaining their operational duties.







359







50+, some are 100% and some are not

Too soon to tell Not there yet Not there yet N/A



Test, test and test No

Notes 1. Alaska: Seventeen FTE - permanent positions. Twelve FTE - long-term non-permanent positions. Anticipate those in the permanent positions will be highly

sought after and will be picked up by agencies after go-live; commitment to incumbent that placement will be the method used to transition out of the position (otherwise it would be difficult to fill positions).

2. Louisiana: 1) Strong consistent governance structure is needed throughout the project, which can be difficult if an election is held and the administration changes in mid-project. 2) Involvement of some state personnel who will also be assigned to project work later is important in the initial requirements gathering phase. 3) Contract should be structured to ensure optimum presence of contract personnel onsite to work with state staff (i.e., ensure state project director had adequate control of contract resource availability and schedules, as well as of state staff. 4) Do not underestimate the amount of state resources needed on the project, or for subsequent support. 5) Do not underestimate resources needed for change management and training, or the amount of end-user involvement needed. 6) Ensure the frequent use of multiple channels of communications, and constant communication with management, stakeholders and the various areas of project staffing.

3. Louisiana: 1) Bad/incomplete data loaded from many Department of Transparency and Development (DOTD) stovepipe systems - much manual review and correction, and custom reports needed to identify problems and verify error correction. 2) Complexity and size of the system, along with the geographic spread of DOTD users and the resulting difficulty in delivering adequate training, especially to outlying areas, resulted in more user error and inadequate use of the system. A central lab was established and manned by project personnel for several months, workshops were provided to outlying districts (with DOTD power user participation) and support channels were increased. 3) Immature SRM (procurement) software caused many problems, breaks in processing flow, data errors, and inadequate functionality. Many work-arounds were developed until application fixes could be developed, tested and applied. This also caused a heavier workload on support staff in identifying errors, defining work-arounds, designing fixes for the vendor to develop, and then testing and implementing the fixes.

4. Maine: Clear operational framework document was created and agreed to by all parties; weekly operations status meetings scheduled with clear outlines and agendas; weekly incident tracking/remediation meetings scheduled with clear action plans, assignment of responsibility and due dates.

5. Massachusetts: Inefficient code (particularly for online queries and searches) had a very detrimental impact on response time when hundreds of users online. We worked with the vendor to build in controls to close holes in sloppy code and to fine tune the online as well as batch performance. There was a tension between techies wanting to solve the technical problem and users needing reliability of online availability. To focus resources on availability, we established a "magnetic north" to guide all decision-making. Our "magnetic north" was online available 8AM to 6PM every work day. This provided a framework for decision-making including how to handle issues arising during nightly batch processing.


360



361

Chapter 12. State Accounting Principles Table 45. Accounting Principles and State Accounting Manual The establishment of state accounting principles is the responsibility of the state comptroller (or equivalent) in 35 of the 38 responding states. The authority to establish state accounting principles is statutory in 29 states and administrative in nine. Thirty-four of the 38 responding states have developed a comprehensive accounting manual. Thirty-five states provided information as to how their accounting manuals are made available:

Paper: 8 Intranet: 12 Internet: 27 Other: 1

Table 46. Tax Accrual at Fiscal Year-End Unemployment compensation taxes are accrued at fiscal year-end in 31 of the 36 states that responded. The number of states that report accruing taxes in the governmental fund are: Personal income tax: 24 Corporate income tax: 26 Sales tax: 28 Use tax: 26 Alcoholic beverage tax: 24 Motor fuel tax: 27 Tobacco or cigarette tax: 25 Excise tax: 22 Property tax: 7 Other tax: 10


362


Table 45 ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES AND STATE ACCOUNTING MANUAL

(Chapter 12: Q1-5)


363

State and Office Who Establishes State Accounting Policies?

Type of Authority?

Comprehensive Accounting Manual? Who’s Responsibility?

How Often is the Manual Updated?

How is the Manual Made Available?


Comptroller Administrative Yes, state comptroller As needed; typically once or twice a year

Paper and Internet


The comptroller's office Administrative Yes, the Alaska Administrative Manual and Accounting Procedures Manual are the responsibility of the comptroller's office.

Alaska Administration Manual - quarterly; Alaska Procedures Manual - as needed

Internet





Colorado is required by statute to use GASB accounting standards except for June payroll costs and certain IT purchased service costs deferred in the general fund and June Medicaid costs deferred in the general fund.

Statutory Yes, the state controller is responsible for developing the fiscal procedures manual.

Annually Paper and Internet




Office of the Chief Financial Officer

Statutory No


State Accounting Officer Statutory Yes, SAO Each policy is updated as necessary and the entire manual approximately once every two years.

Internet


State comptroller Statutory Yes, the state comptroller Not very often; it is currently being updated.

Paper and Internet


Legislation, I.C. 67-1001 (2), requires GAAP financial statements. The state does not establish separate principles.

Statutory No


Comptroller Statutory Yes, the comptroller Semi-annually Internet




Statutory Yes, the Department of Administrative Services

Continuously Paper, intranet and Internet


(Chapter 12: Q1-5)


364


Type of Authority?






Office of the Controller Statutory Yes, Office of the Controller As needed Internet


Commissioner of Administration

Statutory Yes, DOA, Office of Statewide Reporting and Accounting Policy

Continuously Internet



Statutory Yes, the Office of the State Controller

Updated completely in 2005 and as needed since

Intranet and Internet


Comptroller of Maryland Statutory Yes, the comptroller of Maryland As required, which is generally annually

Paper, intranet and Internet


Comptroller pursuant to M.G.L.C.7A, S.7 and S.8

Statutory Yes, comptroller through its bureaus

Individual policies, procedures, forms, job aids, and fiscal year updates are updated as needed and published on the comptroller web portal and intranet.

Intranet and Internet. Any update is published through daily "e-Updates" as an email notice to key contacts in each department.


The state comptroller issues state accounting policies and procedures. By statute, accounting policies and procedures must be consistent with GAAP.

Statutory Yes, the state comptroller The manual is updated as needed on an ongoing basis.

Internet



Comptroller's Office, Office of Fiscal Management

Statutory Yes, the Comptroller's Office, Office of Fiscal Management, Bureau of Financial Reporting

As necessary and at least twice a year

Internet


Office of Administration, Accounting

Administrative Yes, Office of Administration, Accounting

As changes occur and time allows

Intranet


We follow GAAP under state law; as a result the accounting principles are established by GASB. The Controller's Office issues policy to follow GAAP.

Statutory Yes, the controller's office maintains a Montana Operations Manual section which includes policy and specific accounting guidance.

This policy is updated as new GASB pronouncements are issued and on an as needed basis to address other accounting issues as they arise.

Internet


State accounting administrator

Statutory Yes, the state accounting administrator

On an ongoing basis, as the need arises

Internet


State controller Statutory Yes, the state controller Annually Intranet




Administrative Yes, the Office of Management and Budget

When significant changes occur

Internet


(Chapter 12: Q1-5)


365


Type of Authority?





Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division

Statutory Yes, the Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division

Annually Internet


State comptroller Statutory Yes, the state comptroller Annually Paper and intranet


State controller Statutory Yes, state controller Updated on an ongoing basis

Internet


State comptroller Statutory Yes, state comptroller Internet


Office of Budget and Management

Administrative Yes, Office of Budget and Management

As needed Intranet


Office of State Finance, Division of Central Accounting and Reporting

Statutory Yes, the Office of State Finance, Division of Central Accounting and Reporting

As needed Internet


State Controller's Division Statutory Yes, the State Controller's Division Continually as needed

Internet


State comptroller Administrative Yes, the Office of the Budget, Bureau of Financial Management

Ongoing, as policies or processes change

Intranet


State controller Statutory No


The Comptroller General's Office

Statutory Yes, the Comptroller General's Office is in the process of updating for ERP relevant information.

The online version is projected to be updated quarterly.

Internet


Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM)

Administrative Yes, BFM As needed Intranet


Chief of Accounts Statutory No, the Division of Accounts in the Department of Finance and Administration

Internet


Comptroller's Office Statutory Yes, the Comptroller's Office Annually Intranet


The Division of Finance Statutory Yes, Division of Finance Quarterly Internet





State comptroller, state auditor, state treasurer and Budget Division

Statutory Yes, the Department of Administration, state comptroller

As needed. We are currently in the process of making it available on the website.

Paper, intranet and Internet


State controller Administrative Yes, the state controller When policy changes

Internet


State auditor’s office Administrative Yes, state auditor's office Paper


366


Table 46 TAX ACCRUAL AT FISCAL YEAR-END

(Chapter 12: Q6-7)


367

State and Office

Are Unemployment Compensation Taxes

Accrued? In the Governmental Fund Statements, What Is the Accrual Period for Taxes Accrued at Fiscal Year-End?

Y/N Accrual Period Personal Corporate Sales Use Alcoholic Beverages

Motor Fuel

Tobacco/ Cigarette Excise Property Other


Yes All collectible receivables are accrued.

60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days


Yes 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days Production taxes (oil & gas) - 60 days





Yes Availability period is one year, and unemployment insurance is reported in an enterprise fund.

One year availability period








N/A The one-year availability period is only relevant for the personal and corporate income because all other taxes related to the reporting year are due within the quarter following the fiscal year end.




Yes 90 days; estimated collection in July, August and September for receipts due by year-end

N/A 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days N/A


Yes 60 days 30 days 30 days 30 days


Yes 60 days 14 days 14 days 14 days 14 days 14 days 14 days 14 days 14 days


(Chapter 12: Q6-7)


368

State and Office




Motor Fuel



Yes 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days


Yes Amount estimated to be owed at June 30 as calculated with based on actual collections through August 31



Yes 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days N/A N/A Various other taxes - 60 days



Yes 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days


Yes 1 year 45 days 45 days 45 days 45 days 45 days 45 days 45 days 45 days


Yes Based on wages earned

60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days N/A 60 days 60 days N/A N/A


Yes Accrued as earned 60 days 60 days 60 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days N/A



No



Yes 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days N/A


(Chapter 12: Q6-7)


369

State and Office




Motor Fuel



Yes 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days


No Assuming this is asking about the balances owed on unemployment taxes by these funds, there is no balance to accrue because the amount due and payable is paid to the unemployment fund on a monthly basis. If there were an amount owed, it would be accrued.

60 days 60 days 60 days for lodging, no general sales tax

60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days In the period levied

Expenditure driven federal grants - revenue accrued regardless of timing of reimbursement (availability is not considered because the money has already been expended)


Yes Within 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days


Yes Unemployment compensation taxes are accrued for the pay period that includes June 30.

N/A N/A June taxes due the end of July

June taxes due the end of July

June taxes due July 20th

June taxes due July 25th; special fuel tax accrual

Estimated payments; 6 months, January through June

No accrual; due on last day of quarter

Only for delinquent payments

Gaming taxes - some monthly, some quarterly



Yes Within 1 year


Yes 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days


Yes March 31 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year 1 year N/A


Yes 45 days 12 months 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days 31 days N/A


(Chapter 12: Q6-7)


370

State and Office




Motor Fuel




Yes Varies by submission deadline until June 30

Varies by submission deadline until June 30









Yes


Yes Current accrual - due within one year; long-term accrual - due more than 12 months

We use a 90 day availability period.


Yes 2 weeks 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days Inheritance taxes: 60 days


Yes June and prior

June and prior

June and prior

June and prior

June and prior

June and prior

June and prior


No 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months None collected by state


Yes


No First 60 days of new fiscal year

First 60 days of new fiscal year







Yes N/A N/A 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days N/A


Yes 45 days after year end

45 days after year end









Federal grant revenues: within 12 months after year end


(Chapter 12: Q6-7)


371

State and Office




Motor Fuel






No 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days 45 days 45 days No Severance taxes:60 days; insurance taxes: 60 days; and Medicaid taxes: 60 days


Yes July 60 days 60 days 60 days 60 days


Yes N/A N/A N/A


372



373

Chapter 13. Internal Control Table 47. Use of Internal Auditors; Establishment and Review of Internal Control Internal auditors are used in the comptroller’s office in 17 of the 39 responding states. Internal auditors are used in the state agencies by 36 of the 38 states that responded. Systematic reviews of internal controls are regularly conducted in 30 states. The frequency with which the reviews are performed varies:

Biannually: 3 Annually: 21 Biennially: 1 Periodically, or as deemed necessary: 4 Other: 3

State auditors have the responsibility for conducting reviews of internal control in five of the 20 responding states and share the responsibility with state agencies in three states (Idaho, Michigan and Texas). State agencies have the responsibility for conducting reviews of internal control in four states. State comptrollers have this responsibility in Maine and Missouri and share the responsibility with the agencies in Tennessee. State employees are trained in self-assessment of internal control in 16 of the 38 responding states. Table 48. State Manuals on Internal Control Among the 38 responding states, 19 have manuals on internal control. Regarding the source of authority to develop the policies on internal control, the 23 states that responded stated:

Statutory: 14 Administrative: 5 Other: 4

The comptroller’s office maintains the manual on internal control in 18 states that have a centralized accounting system. The statewide manual on internal control is made available to state government personnel in the following forms (23 responses):

Paper: 7 Intranet: 8 Disk: 2 Internet: 16

Eleven states indicated that the agencies maintain their own manuals describing their policies on internal control. Table 49. Internal Control: Reports and Sanctions Five of the 38 responding states require by statute that reports on internal control be submitted to the legislature. Only one state has an administrative regulation requirement. Six of the 37 responding states report that state agencies are sanctioned for non-compliance with internal control statutes, regulations or policies. Thirteen of the 37 responding states require by law that agency heads review weaknesses in the agencies’ internal control structures. State comptrollers in 11 states report conducting periodic investigations to monitor and enforce the use of the states’ internal control structures.


374


Table 47 USE OF INTERNAL AUDITORS; ESTABLISHMENT AND REVIEW OF INTERNAL CONTROL

(Chapter 13: Q1-6)


375

State and Office

Use of Internal Auditors Responsibility for Establishing and

Maintaining Internal Control

Reviews of Internal Controls

Review Conducted By?

Employees Trained In Self-Assessment of Internal Control?

In Comptroller’s Office?

In State Agencies? Systematic? Frequency


No Yes No No


No Yes Agency management No No





Yes Yes The state controller has delegated this responsibility to state agencies along with pre-audit and contract signature authority.

No No



Yes


Yes Yes Each agency Yes 1 Agency inspectors general, the Florida auditor general, and CFO, (Division of Accounting and Auditing)

No


No Yes The State Accounting Office and the Department of Audits and Accounts (DOAA)

Yes Annually DOAA No


Yes Yes Department of Accounting and General Services (DAGS)

Yes Annually for most departments

DAGS internal auditors, department internal auditors, legislative auditor through external audit reports, and external auditors (CPAs)

Yes


No Yes The state controller sets the standards; the agencies are responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls.

Yes Annually Agencies and the legislative auditors No


Yes No Under the Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act, each state agency is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls for their agency.

Yes Annually Each state agency's management is required by statute to annually assess the controls within their agency and report to the state auditor general (a legislative agency).

No


(Chapter 13: Q1-6)


376

State and Office










No Yes Individual departments Yes Annually Auditor of state No



No Yes Office of the Controller Yes Annually Office of Internal Audit Yes


Yes Yes Management of each state entity No No


Yes Yes State controller Yes Annually Office of the State Controller, Internal Audit Division

Yes


Yes Yes Agency management Yes Biannually Internal control coordinators Yes


Yes Yes Comptroller, state auditor and management at each agency

Yes Annually.2 3 Yes


No Yes The Office of Internal Audit Services issues statewide guidance on internal control. Each agency's management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of internal control.

Yes Biennially Agency management conducts the review. Internal auditors review the process used by management to conduct the review.

Yes



No Yes Agencies are responsible for their internal controls. The Department of Finance and Administration (DFA) has a small internal control section that was assembled in FY 2009. The section provides guidance to agencies, and assists with any questions the agencies may have. Agencies are required to submit the assessments and a certification to DFA.

Yes Annually. Agencies are responsible for completing annual assessments and a certification to DFA.

Yes


(Chapter 13: Q1-6)


377

State and Office









No Yes Everyone Yes Annually Office of Administration, Accounting No


No Yes Management within each agency for the control structure within the specific agency, and controller's office for maintaining those contained within the statewide accounting system

Yes Annually Each agency is required to review their internal controls and update the related documentation annually.

No


No Yes Each agency. State accounting is charged with ensuring that adequate internal controls exist within each agency.

Yes Periodically, or as deemed necessary

Two staff in state accounting Yes


No Yes Department of Administration, Division of Internal Audits

Yes Annually Each agency performs a review of their own agency annually, and the Division of Internal Audits conducts a review periodically, or as deemed necessary.

No



Yes Yes All agency heads' annual reports to be submitted to the director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Yes Annually Each agency self assesses Yes


No Yes Department of Finance and Administration, Financial Control Division


CAFR unit No


Yes Yes Internal control staff at each agency Yes Annually Internal control officer and external internal control auditor

Yes


Yes No http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/Chp143D.pdf Chapter 143-D §143D-7 The management of each state agency bears full responsibility for establishing and maintaining a proper system of internal control within that agency. Each principal executive officer and each principal fiscal officer shall annually certify, in a manner prescribed by the state controller, that the agency has in place a proper system of internal control. The state controller shall develop policies and procedures to direct agencies in their evaluation.

Yes Annually http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/Chp143D.pdf NCGS Chapter 143D § 143D-7 Each principal executive officer and each principal fiscal officer shall annually certify, in a manner prescribed by the state controller, that the agency has in place a proper system of internal control. The state controller shall develop policies and procedures to direct agencies in their evaluation.

Yes


No Yes Each agency No Yes


(Chapter 13: Q1-6)


378

State and Office









Yes Yes Office of Budget and Management and Department of Administrative Services establish central controls; individual agencies establish decentralized controls.

Yes Annually Office of Internal Audit establishes an annual audit plan and results are reported quarterly to a State Audit Committee.

No


No Yes Management at each state agency No No


No Yes State agency heads Yes Annually Each agency does a self-review. Yes


Yes Yes Office of the Budget, Comptroller Operations Yes Annually Internal auditors and the state auditor general

Yes


No Yes State controller Yes Annually Chief financial officer of each state agency No


No Yes Agency directors No Rarely Independent contractor No


No Yes The individual state agencies are responsible for agency specific internal controls.


No


No Yes All agencies Yes Annually; Financial Integrity Act reviews by agencies – annually

Financial Integrity Act by state agencies No


Yes Yes Individual agencies. The State Auditor's Office (SAO) prescribes the form and content of annual reports which are submitted to SAO and other oversight agencies.

Yes Biannually Agencies with over 100 employees or operating budgets or cash revenues over $10 million per year are required to audit controls as part of their audit plan. The state auditor must include comments about internal controls in audit reports.

No


(Chapter 13: Q1-6)


379

State and Office









No Yes The Division of Finance has a policy on internal control that requires all state agencies to maintain sound internal controls and participate in the Internal Control Self-Assessment Program (ICSAP). ICSAP includes a series of internal control questionnaires (ICQs) to be completed by all state agencies and returned to the Division of Finance after the ICQs have been signed by the agency executive directors.

No Agencies participate in the ICSAP.

No





Yes Yes Our office, the legislative auditors, P-card auditors (located in the State Auditors Office), and inspector division (located in the purchasing division).

Yes Biannually Legislative auditors Yes


Yes Yes State controller Yes Annually Legislative Audit Bureau Yes


No Yes Department of Audit Yes Periodically, or as deemed necessary

Department of Audit No

Notes 1. Florida: One of the responsibilities of inspectors general is to review and evaluate internal controls necessary to ensure fiscal accountability of the agency. A

stated frequency is not specified.

2. Massachusetts: (1) Annual completion of the Internal Control Questionnaire by all state agencies (2) Monthly desk reviews of various internal control areas (3) monitoring of effectiveness of internal controls per ERM guidelines, periodic as necessary.

3. Massachusetts: Comptroller's Quality Assurance Bureau for (1) and (2); each state agency for (3).


380


Table 48 STATE MANUALS ON INTERNAL CONTROL

(Chapter 13: Q7-11)


381

State and Office

Is There a State Manual on Internal Control?

Source of Authority to Develop the Policies on

Internal Control and Link

If Accounting System is Centralized, Does

the Comptroller’s Office Maintain the Manual on IC?

How is the Internal Control Manual

Made Available to State Personnel?

If Accounting System is Decentralized, Do

Agencies Maintain the Manual on IC?


No No Yes, a few do.


Yes Administrative Yes, the Alaska Administrative Manual

Internet





Yes Administrative No The manual is in paper format, is very out of date and is not distributed.

No, not to our knowledge




No No


Yes Statutory, http://sao.georgia.gov/00/channel_createdate/0,2095,39779022_161308762,00.html

Yes Internet


Yes Statutory Yes Paper and Internet


No No


Yes Statutory Internet Yes



No No N/A



No Other Yes Intranet. No formal manual of internal controls has been adopted.

Yes


No No


Yes Statutory Yes Intranet, disk and Internet


(Chapter 13: Q7-11)


382

State and Office











Yes Administrative Yes Paper, intranet and Internet


Yes Statutory, www.mass.gov/sao/laws.htm; Internal Control Guide, www.mass.gov/osc/guidance_for_agencies/internal_controls/html

Yes Paper and intranet


Yes Statutory No Internet



Yes Statutory, Section 7-7-3(6) (d), Miss. Code Ann

Yes Internet Yes, some agencies maintain their own policy and procedures manuals and some on the Internet.


No No


Yes Statutory, http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/17/1/17-1-102.htm 17-1-102 MCA

Yes. We also have downloaded the related NASACT questionnaires.

Internet N//A - centralized


Yes Statutory, http://www.das.state.ne.us/accounting/

Yes Internet


Yes Statutory, NRS 353A.020

No Intranet Yes



No Other No N/A N/A


Yes Statutory, Chapter 6-5-2, NMSA 1978 http://search.nmcompcomm.us/nmsu/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&2.0

Yes Internet N/A


Yes Administrative Yes Paper and intranet Yes


Yes Statutory, http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/Chp143D.pdf 1

Yes http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/index.html

Internet http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/Eagle_Guidance_Manual.pdf


Yes Administrative, http://www.nd.gov/fiscal/policies/

No Internet Yes


No Office of Internal Audit conducts an annual risk assessment.

No No


No No


(Chapter 13: Q7-11)


383

State and Office











Yes Statutory Yes Internet N/A


No OMB's Compliance Supplement Yes


No No


Yes Statutory Yes Internet Yes, some not all, have formal written policies on internal control.


No Yes. For state-wide policies only. State agencies are responsible for agency specific internal controls.

Intranet


No No


No Paper, intranet, disk and Internet

Yes


No No. Utah will soon have an internal control manual and will soon conduct internal control training.





No No Yes


No No Yes


No Yes Paper

Notes 1. North Carolina: NCGS Chapter 143D. §143D-6. The state controller, in consultation with the state auditor, shall

establish comprehensive standards, policies and procedures to ensure a strong and effective system of internal control within state government. These standards, policies, and procedures shall be made readily available to all state agencies, and the state controller shall make appropriate education efforts to inform relevant state agency staffs of the standards, policies, procedures and internal control best practices. These efforts shall include the development of training courses, manuals and other information sources to promulgate internal control standards, policies, procedures and best practices throughout all state agencies.


384


Table 49 INTERNAL CONTROL: REPORTS AND SANCTIONS



385

State and Office

Required to Report on Internal Control to the Legislature by

Sanctions for Non-Compliance With Internal

Control Statutes, Regulations or Policies?

Agency Heads Bound by Law to Review Weaknesses in

Internal Control? Link

If Not Bound by Law, Are Agency Heads Bound by Administrative Policy? Link

State Comptroller Conducts Periodic Investigations to

Monitor and Enforce the Use of Internal Control? Statute?

Administrative Regulation?


No No No No No No


No No No No No





No No No Yes No




No No No Yes, Section 215.86, Florida Statutes, http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/215.86

No


No No No No No


No No No Yes Yes


No No No No No


Yes, annually to the legislative state auditor general

No Yes, each state agency may receive an audit finding during their review by the Auditor General's Office or compliance with the state Fiscal Control and Internal Auditing Act.

Yes No





386

State and Office











No No No No No



No No No No N/A No


No No No No No No


No No No Yes Yes


No No Yes, Joint Audit Committee makes recommendations to the governor and the comptroller that the agency take corrective action based on findings in the legislative auditor's report.

No No


No No No Yes, www.mass.gov/sao/laws.htm

Yes


Yes, biennially

Yes, biennially Yes, agencies are required to correct the deficiency.

Yes No



No No No No No


No No No No No


No No No No Yes, they are required to maintain adequate internal controls, document these and review and update related documentation annually, http://accounting.mt.gov/forms/chapters/default.mcpx. This is in Chapter 302, VIII

No




387

State and Office











No No No No State policy to have an internal control plan, http://www.das.state.ne.us/accounting/

Yes


No No No Yes, NRS 353A.025

N/A No



No No No No Circular letter, www.state.nj.us/infobank/circular/cir0308b.htm

Yes


No No No Yes, actually the CFO, which is the agency head or someone designated as CFO. 2.20.5.8 NMAC, http://www.nmcpr.state.nm.us/nmac/parts/title02/02.020.0005.htm

N/A No


Yes No Yes, various No Yes


No No Yes, http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/Chp143D.pdf, NCGS Chapter 143D § 143D-11: Violations1

Yes, http://www.osc.nc.gov/eagle/Chp143D.pdf, NCGS Chapter 143D § 143D-7: Agency management responsibilities2

Yes


No No No No No


Yes, annually

No No No No Yes


No No No No




388

State and Office











No No Yes, when internal control weaknesses are found by the auditors, they are communicated to the agencies and included in the statewide Single Audit report.

No Oregon Accounting Manual - Chapter 10 on Internal Controls, http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/SCD/SARS/Pages/oam_toc.aspx#Chapter_10___Internal_Control

Yes


No No No No Agency heads are required to maintain controls in their agency.

Yes


Yes, annually

No No Yes No


No No No No No


No No No No No


No No No Yes, http://www.tn.gov/finance/act/riskManagement.shtml

No


No3 No No Yes No


No No No No No





No No No No No


No No No No Yes Yes




389

State and Office











No No No No

Notes: 1. North Carolina: The state controller, in consultation with the state auditor, shall establish a mechanism to allow for the reporting and investigation of violations

of the provisions of this chapter. This mechanism shall encourage all state employees to become familiar with the provisions of this chapter and to report any known violations. § 143D-12. Penalties. A willful or continued failure of an employee paid from state funds or employed by a state agency to adhere to the requirements of this chapter is sufficient cause for disciplinary action, up to and including dismissal of the employee.

2. North Carolina: The management of each state agency bears full responsibility for establishing and maintaining a proper system of internal control within that agency. Each principal executive officer and each principal fiscal officer shall annually certify, in a manner prescribed by the state controller, that the agency has in place a proper system of internal control. The state controller shall develop policies and procedures to direct agencies in their evaluation. The management of each state agency also bears the responsibility periodically to submit accurate and complete financial information to the state controller for compilation into North Carolina state government's various financial reports and other related financial information disseminated to the public. With the submission of such periodic reports to the state controller, each agency's principal executive officer and each agency's principal fiscal officer shall certify, in a manner prescribed by the state controller, to the accuracy and completeness of the financial information submitted

3. Texas: The state auditor is required to prepare a written report, which must include comments about internal controls, for each audit conducted.


390



391

Chapter 14. Annual Financial Reports Table 50. Preparation and Publication of Annual Financial Reports Thirty-five of the 39 responding states use June 30 as their FYE. The size of states’ CAFR teams ranges from 2.3 team members in Nebraska to 18 in Michigan. The number of certified public accountants on states’ CAFR teams ranges from one (in four states) to 12 (in Tennessee). Other reports prepared by the comptroller’s office include:

Monthly and/or quarterly financial statements, budgetary basis: 18

Monthly and/or quarterly reports on receipts and disbursements: 25

Monthly and/or quarterly appropriation reports: 23

Monthly and/or quarterly revenue statements: 26

Monthly statewide payroll expense reports: 15

Other: 14 Table 51. Other Financial Reporting Performance reports are compiled by the comptroller’s offices in seven of the 38 offices that responded. Eleven of the 38 responding states prepare a popular report. The types of popular reports prepared include:

Government Finance Officers Association: 5

Citizen Centric: 4 Other: 1

The types of information presented include:

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source: 11

Graphic representation of general fund expenditures by function: 11

Changes in the state’s long-term debt outstanding: 6

Operating results compared to the previous year(s): 8

Financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s): 8

Demographic information: 9 Employment information: 10 Per capita income: 10 Enrollment in the state’s system of

higher education: 7 Population of the state’s corrections

system: 5 Three states reported that they provide other types of information, including selected revenue stream information, selected program expenditure drivers, employee FTE counts, economic growth, investment in capital assets, transportation, parks system and lottery information.


392


Table 50 PREPARATION AND PUBLICATION OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS

(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


393

State and Office When Does Your

State’s Fiscal Year End? When Are the

State’s Books Closed? Size of

CAFR team CPAs on

CAFR Team Any Other Financial

Reports Required by Statute Other Financial Reports

Prepared by the Comptroller's Office Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

September 30 November 30 6 2 None Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Numerous monthly management reports to meet budgetary and constitutional requirements.


June 30 December 15 11 2 Travel and Compensation Report

Variety of financial reports available from statewide accounting system upon request by agencies. Payroll Route Charge Report - runs every pay run and distributed to all departments.





June 30 The books are required to be closed by 35 days after the end of the fiscal year. The financial statements, complete with combining statements and notes, are required to be issued by statute by September 20 (82 days after fiscal year end). The MD&A and Statistical Sections are added after that date to complete the CAFR.

Four people currently work on the CAFR, but their responsibilities and tasks are not limited to the CAFR. It is probably the equivalent of 3 FTEs during the preparation season.

1 Major reports include Final Revenue Summary Report, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, Annual Lease Report, Statewide Cost Allocation Plan - Federal, Statewide Cost Allocation Plan - Cash Fees, Payroll Count Report, Cash Funds Uncommitted, Reserves Report, Taxpayers Bill of Rights - Schedule of Revenues, Taxpayers Bill of Rights - Schedule of Computations, Capital Construction Available, and Fund Balance Report.

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. Information technology expenditure reports, fund cash deficits reports, and in-state and out-of-state travel reports.



June 30 June 30 7


(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


394




CAFR team CPAs on



Prepared by the Comptroller's Office Florida Department of Financial Services

June 30 First two weeks of August

8 3 Annual Trust Fund Report, Schedule of Expenditures of Financial Assistance, Monthly Treasury Trial Balance Statement to Governor, and Annual Treasury Report

Monthly and/or quarterly reports on receipts and disbursements


June 30 August 3 14 8 Budgetary Compliance Report


June 30 End of July 5 1 Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


June 30 Mid July 7 1 Cash basis revenues and expenditures

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


June 30 August 31; however, lapse period was extended for FY10 and FY11 to December 31 to allow the state time to pay expenditures of those fiscal years and to allow interest on late payments to be included in the lapse period transactions.

5 5 Accounts Receivable Report, Locally Held Funds Report, Traditional Budgetary Report

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. Monthly bonded indebtedness reports.



June 30 August 31 4 4 Budget Report, State Salary Book

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.



(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


395




CAFR team CPAs on



Prepared by the Comptroller's Office Kentucky Office of the Controller

June 30 July 31 5 2 Supplementary Information to the CAFR, Aged Accounts Receivable Report, Annual Report of Appropriations and Detailed Expenditures, Statewide Single Audit, Statewide Cost Allocation Plan

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. CMIA report to the U.S. Treasury Statewide Single Audit.


June 30 Third week of September 15 7 Popular Report Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. These are standard computer-generated system-wide reports that are available to state entities online at the end of each month.


June 30 Approximately two weeks after June 30

4 4 Monthly revenue report Monthly and/or quarterly revenue statements


June 30 45 days after year-end 8 2 Report of estimated state revenues; report of investment activities; report on the fiscal operations of the state; report on the activities and operation of the Office of the Treasurer; compilation of reports of bonds anticipated to be issued by public bodies of the state

Monthly and/or quarterly revenue statements; biennial report of state fees imposed


June 30 August 30, 60 days after year-end

8 3 Statutory Basis Financial Report Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. System generated trial balance report.


September 30 December 18 4 Statement of Revenue, subject to constitutional limitation - legal basis; Statement of the Proportion of Total State Spending From State Sources Paid to Units of Local Government - legal basis; Payments to Local Units of Government - estimate to actual

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements


(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


396




CAFR team CPAs on



Prepared by the Comptroller's Office Minnesota Management and Budget


June 30 August 31 for transactions, December for financial reporting

8 5 Legislative Expenditure Report Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


June 30 July 31 9 2 Appropriation activity, SWCAP, CMIA, Census Bureau, and cash flow, state debt reports

Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports


June 30 Late July, generally around July 25; state statute provides until the end of July

6 4 Agency biennial financial schedules are prepared for each agency, biennial budget books are prepared by the Governor's Office and Legislative Fiscal Division. The Legislative Fiscal Division prepares many other financial reports. Department of Administration and specific agencies prepare financial reports associated with bond issues as needed.

Monthly general fund cash flow


June 30 June 30 or the next business day

2.3 2 Annual Budgetary Report Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Daily cash flow actual and projections for General Fund.


June 30 August 31 10 4 Distributive School Account statements



June 30 Preliminary closing July 31; final system closing upon issuance of annual audit report

11 full-time; 3 part-time

3 Annual Debt Report; Governor’s Budget Message; Annual Appropriations Act

Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; revenue statements. The statewide accounting system produces monthly reports on receipts and appropriation activity. In addition the state has a data warehouse that is used for ad-hoc reporting.


June 30 August 15 5 2 None Monthly and/or quarterly: appropriation reports; revenue statements


(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


397




CAFR team CPAs on



Prepared by the Comptroller's Office New York Office of the State Comptroller

March 31 May 31 11 5 Budgetary basis (cash) financial statements

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. Quarterly GAAP financial statements.


June 30 July 31 13 7 IT Expenditure Report, Accounts Receivable, Popular Report, Single Audit Schedule of Expenditures of Financial Awards

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements


June End of July 3 full-time and 2 part-time

2 Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


June 30 June 30 8 4 active; 1 inactive None Monthly and/or quarterly revenue statements.


June 30 June 30 4 4 Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


June 30 Mid-August, which is approximately six weeks following fiscal year end

9 3 "Statewide Property Tax Levy Determination," prepared by Department of Administrative Services: this financial report is an annual analysis of Sufficiency of General Fund Debt Service Appropriations required by ORS 291.445. The LFO-Liquidated and Delinquent Accounts report is also prepared by the Department of Administrative Services and submitted to the Legislative Fiscal Office in accordance with ORS Chapter 293.

Labor cost reports


(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


398




CAFR team CPAs on



Prepared by the Comptroller's Office Pennsylvania Office of the Budget/ Comptroller Operations

June 30 By July 4 with subsequent accruals, deferrals, and adjustment for CAFR reporting through November 30.

7 - centralized in the Bureau of Financial Management with assistance from several accountants and managers in the Comptroller's Office

3 Single Audit, Status of Appropriations, Special Fund Budgetary Financial Statements for selected funds; e.g., Lottery Fund, Tobacco Fund, and State Workers’ Insurance Fund

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements


June 30 August 25 4 1 Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements.


June 30 1 month and 10 business days after year-end

7 6 Annual Appropriation Act Report, Dual Employment Report, Travel Report

Monthly and/or quarterly revenue statements. Annual press release; statements for inclusion in governor's detailed budget statements; bond offering statements; Popular Annual Financial Report; Accountability Report; and Spending Transparency Report.


June 30 Shortly after June 30 9 2


June 30 September 8 15 12 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA)

Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


August 31 November 20 16 10 Annual Cash Report Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports.


June 30 Approximately August 15 13 staff who work on the CAFR in one way or another. These staff also have other duties so they do not work on the CAFR full-time.

7 Legislative Loan Report, Preliminary Surplus Report, Debt Collection Report

Monthly and/or quarterly: financial statements, budgetary basis; reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. The reports listed above are standard internal reports from the data warehouse.


(Chapter 14: Q1-6)


399




CAFR team CPAs on



Prepared by the Comptroller's Office Vermont Department of Finance and Management




June 30 July 31 7 full-time and 2 part-time

4 N/A Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports; revenue statements. Monthly statewide payroll expense reports. Only for agencies within Department of Administration.


June 30 September 6 5 Annual Fiscal Report Monthly and/or quarterly: reports on receipts and disbursements; appropriation reports


June 30 June 30 4 2 None


400


Table 51 OTHER FINANCIAL REPORTING

(Chapter 14: Q7-9)


401

State and Office

Performance Reports Annual Popular Report Compiled by

Comptroller’s Office? Activities and Analysis

Presented Is a Popular Report

Prepared? First Fiscal Year Prepared,

Type of Report & Link Types of Information Presented Alabama Office of the State Comptroller

No No


Yes Agency payments using electronic methods – semi-annual reporting to finance officers; zero balancing of appropriations – annually; credit card reconciliation – weekly

No





Yes The Office of the State Controller prepares an annual report on vendor performance from data gathered in our Contracts Management System.

Yes Fiscal year 1999-00, a 25-page report focusing on major financial measure

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding, operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education and the population of the state’s corrections system. Selected revenue stream information, selected program expenditure drivers, and employee FTE counts.




Yes 1 No


No No


(Chapter 14: Q7-9)


402

State and Office





Type of Report & Link Types of Information Presented Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services

No No


No Yes 1997, Citizen Centric: http://www.sco.idaho.gov/web/DSADoc.nsf/1A94EDB7C744216C872579750061593F/$FILE/SCO-2011_CCR.pdf We changed from GFOA to Citizen Centric several years ago.

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Data about the population of the state’s corrections system. The agencies and programs highlighted in the report vary from year to year.


Yes Performance indicators by major programs and agencies reported annually

Yes 1995, GFOA: http://www.ioc.state.il.us/index.cfm/resources/reports/executive-summary/

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding, operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education.



No No



No No


(Chapter 14: Q7-9)


403

State and Office





Type of Report & Link Types of Information Presented Louisiana Division of Administration

Yes Account Receivable by state entity prepared quarterly by the Division of Administration, Office of Statewide Reporting (DOA-OSRAP). Performance indicators and accomplishments available online (LaPAS); prepared by DOA, Office of Planning and Budget.

Yes 1999, Citizen Centric: www.doa.la.gov/OSRAP/library/Publications/PAFR2011.pdf

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding. Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education.2


No No


No No


No No


No No



No No


No No


No No


No No


No Yes 2001, GFOA: http://www.controller.nv.gov/FinancialReports/Other_Reports/ReporttoourcitizensFY11.pdf

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about operating results compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state.


(Chapter 14: Q7-9)


404

State and Office





Type of Report & Link Types of Information Presented New Hampshire Department of Administrative Services


No No


No No


No Yes 1994 Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding, operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education and the population of the state’s corrections system.


No Yes 1998, GFOA: http://www.osc.nc.gov/financial/11cafr/2011_NC_Popular_Report.pdf

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding, operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education and the population of the state’s corrections system.


No No


No No


No Yes 2008, Citizen Centric: http://ok.gov/OSF/documents/CitizenReport_062012.pdf

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education.


(Chapter 14: Q7-9)


405

State and Office





Type of Report & Link Types of Information Presented Oregon State Controller’s Division

Yes State Controller's Division compiles quarterly reports that evaluate the timeliness, accuracy, helpfulness, expertise, policy development and overall customer service provided by the State Controller's Division.

No


Yes Quarterly transaction based activity and performance measures

No


No No


No Yes June 30, 2007, GFOA: a GFOA compliant Popular Financial Report and a less formal Citizens Report have been prepared in the past.

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding, operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state. Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education and the population of the state’s corrections system. Economic growth, investment in capital assets, transportation, parks system, K-12 education and lottery.


No No


No No


No Yes 2008, Citizen Centric: http://www.window.state.tx.us/finances/pubs/citizens/

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.). Information about employment and per capita income in the state.


No No


(Chapter 14: Q7-9)


406

State and Office





Type of Report & Link Types of Information Presented Vermont Department of Finance and Management




No No


No No


No Yes 2004, GFOA: http://sao.state.wy.us/CAFR/2011_Report/PopularReportfy2011.pdf

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source and general fund expenditures by function. Information about operating results compared to the previous year(s) and the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s). Information about employment and per capita income in the state.

Notes 1. Florida: Performance reports on agency compliance with the Statewide Financial Statements Compliance Checklist are issued once a year. The checklist

includes selected items that agencies must complete for year-end financial reporting. The Agency Invoice Prompt Payment Report is sent to all agencies indicating which agencies are meeting the 95 percent of invoices submitted to CFO within 20 days of receipt of goods and services or invoice. The report is sent at mid-month and end of month. Quarterly, Voucher Error reports are sent to each agency describing the type and number of voucher errors submitted to the CFO.

2. Louisiana:

1) Funded Percentage of the Unfunded Accrued Liability for each of the four statewide retirement systems (five-year comparison). 2) OPEB four-year comparison of contributions vs. obligation balance. 3) Five-year comparison of high school graduation rates.

Appendix A: Survey of State Comptrollers’ Technical Activities and Functions, Short-Term Portion


Part 1 - Incumbent State Comptroller Total Questions: 8 1. Provide the name, title and email address of the state official

who holds the comptroller position.

Name

Title

Email address

2. In which month and year was the incumbent comptroller first appointed or sworn into office?

Month

Year

3. In which month and year does the present term expire?

Month

Year

4. How many years has the state comptroller been in office?

Years

5. Which professional certifications, if any, does the current state comptroller hold? Check all that apply.

None

Certified Public Accountant (CPA)

Certified Management Accountant (CMA)

Certified Internal Auditor (CIA)

Certified Government Financial Manager(CGFM)

Other

Describe other:

6. What is the educational background of the current state comptroller?

No college

Some college

College degree (s) (specify)

7. Provide the name, title and email address of the NASC member (primary contact).

Name

Title

Email address

8. Provide the name, title and email address of a secondary point of contact in your office.

Name Title

Email address

Part 2 - Annual Financial Reporting Total Questions: 18 1. Provide the name and email address of the person who is

responsible for preparing the CAFR for your state.

Name

Email address

2. Which basis of accounting does your state use for BUDGETING?

Cash

GAAP

Modified cash

Other

Other (describe):

3. Which basis of accounting does your state use for ACCOUNTING RECORDS?

Cash

GAAP

Other

Other (describe):

4. Which basis of accounting does your state use for the CAFR?

Cash

GAAP

Other

Other (describe):

Frequency of GAAP financial statements:

5. Is there a statutory requirement that your state prepare financial statements according to GAAP?

Yes

No

Provide a link to the statutory requirement:

6. For which fiscal year did your state issue its first annual financial report that was substantially in compliance with GAAP?

Year

7. Provide the following information about the audit of your most recent comprehensive annual financial report. Audit performed?

Yes

No If yes, who was it performed by?

8. What is the date of your most recent CAFR?

June 30, 2011

Other

Other (specify month, day, year):

Issue date of the CAFR:

9. Is the auditor's opinion on the financial statements included in your most recent CAFR?

Yes

No

10. Describe the opinion on your most recent CAFR.

Unqualified opinion (for all opinion units)

Combination opinion

Qualified opinion

Number of opinion units:

Opinion date:

Reason for qualified opinion:

Adverse opinion

Number of opinion units: Reason for adverse opinion:

Disclaimer of opinion

Number of opinion units:

Reason for disclaimer of opinion:

11. Has your state applied to the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting?

Yes

No

If yes, the most recent FY for which you received GFOA's

certificate?

12. In which forms is your CAFR distributed? Check all that apply.

Printed copy

CD

On the website

Other

Other (describe):

13. If you produced some printed copies of your CAFR, please answer the following:

How many did you have printed?

How many did you mail?

What was the cost per printed copy?

14. Provide the number of funds by fund type.

Number of funds:

15. If your state prepares a popular or citizen-centric report, how many months after fiscal year-end is your popular report issued?

Number of months:

16. In which forms is your popular or citizen-centric report distributed? Check all that apply.

Printed copy

On the website

CD

Other

Other, please describe:

Provide a link to your report:

17. Have you applied for the GFOA's Award for Outstanding Achievement in Popular Annual Financial Reporting?

Yes

No

18. What is the cost per printed copy of your popular or citizen-centric report?

Cost:

Number of copies printed:

Part 3 - Status of Internal Control Total Questions: 13 1. Is statewide assessment of internal control done centrally by

your office or another office, or is the assessment of internal control decentralized?

Assessment of internal control done centrally by comptroller's office

Assessment of internal control done centrally by another office

Name of other office:

Assessment of internal control is decentralized

Comments:

2. Is your office responsible for overseeing internal control assessments?

Yes

No

If yes, please elaborate:

3. Is compliance software used in the management and monitoring of internal control in your state?

Yes

No

If yes, please identify:

4. Which, if any, nationally-recognized internal control frameworks, standards or technologies (e.g., COSO or CobiT) do you use?

Standards or technologies used:

5. If you are not using any nationally-recognized internal control standards or technologies at the present time, do you have plans to adopt any?

Yes

No

If yes, please describe:

6. What documentation or sign-off, if any, do you require of state agencies regarding the financial information at fiscal-year end that they provide to the comptroller's office?

Describe:

7. Have you recently conducted risk assessments of your internal control?

Yes

No


8. If yes, have you scheduled specific reviews of internal control as a result of the assessments?

Yes

No


9. If the answer to question 8 was yes, please answer the following questions.

Has the entity established entity-wide control objectives as part of this process?

Has the entity established activity-level objectives as part of this process?

What methodology was used in the risk identification process?

What process was used to assess risk?

What process is being used to manage risk during change?

10. If you have NOT conducted risk assessments of your internal control, do you plan to do so?

Yes

No

If yes, specify time:

11. Does your state have mechanisms in place to identify weaknesses in internal control before new programs are developed or old programs are renewed?

Yes

No


12. What reforms of internal control have been initiated statewide in your state in the past 2 years (2010 and 2011)?

Describe:

13. List any statutes or other authority for internal control mandates.

If legally mandated, please provide the link or statutory reference:

Provide the link or statutory reference for internal control policies for the state:

Part 4 - Reimbursement for Business Travel Expenses Total Questions: 10 1. How are employees reimbursed for in-state meal expenses?

Actual

Meal maximums

Federal per diem schedule

Other

Other (describe):

Are receipts required?

Yes

No

If yes, which expenses require receipts?

2. If yes to meal maximums, please indicate maximum amounts and date implemented:

Breakfast: $

Lunch: $

Dinner: $

Daily rate: $

Effective date:

3. What are your in-state lodging reimbursement rates?

Actual

Lodging maximum

GSA rate

Other

Other (describe):

If yes to lodging maximum, maximum $:

$

Effective date:

4. How are employees reimbursed for out-of-state meal expenses?

Actual

Meal maximums

Federal per diem schedule

Other

Other (describe):

5. Are employees reimbursed for meals if not on overnight travel status?

Yes

No

Please describe:

6. What are your out-of state lodging reimbursement rates?

Actual

Lodging maximum

GSA rate

Other

Other (describe):

7. Is mileage reimbursed for use of a personal automobile?

Yes

No

Briefly describe any limitations on the use of a personal automobile:

Provide the link or statutory reference to the policy:

8. If yes, what rate do you use?

GSA rate

IRS rate

State rate

Other rate If other than the GSA rate, specify cents per mile:

9. In your state, are the policies, rates, etc. for reimbursement of business travel expenses of elected officials different from the policies, rates, etc. for other state employees?

Yes

No

If yes, please explain the differences:

10. Describe any new programs related to travel policies and administration which your state has adopted within the past 2 years (2010 and 2011).

Please describe:

Part 5 - Relations with the Federal Government Total Questions: 4 1. Who is/are the state official(s) responsible for preparing the

statewide cost allocation plan (SWCAP) for your state?

Responsible official:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Preparer:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Is the SWCAP prepared in house or by a consultant?

If software is used, what software?

Comments:

2. Who is/are the authorized state official(s) responsible for preparing the CMIA agreement (the Cash Management Improvement Act of 1990)?

Name 1:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Name 2:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Comments:

3. Who is/are the contact(s) for the ARRA (American Recovery and Investment Act of 2009) in the comptroller's office?

Name 1:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Name 2:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

How do you report - centralized or decentralized?

Comments:

4. Who is/are the contact(s) for the FFATA (Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act) reporting in the comptroller's office?

Name 1:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Name 2:

Title:

State agency:

Phone number:

Email address:

Comments:

Part 6 - Funding and Staffing the State Comptroller's Office Total Questions: 26 1. Please list the functions that encompass “comptroller

operations” in your state: check all that apply and add other functions for your state.

Disbursements

Payroll

Pre-audit

Post audit

Operating the financial management system

Financial reporting

Debt management

Investment management

Internal control oversight

Transparency

Quality assurance

ERP system responsibility

Other:

Other:

Other:

2. What is the source of funding for comptroller operations for FY12? If there is more than one source of funding, list the approximate percentage from each source.

% from the General Fund:

% from fees charged for services:

% from SWCAP:

Other 1 (specify):

% from other 1:

Other 2 (specify):

% from other 2:

3. What is the budget for comptroller operations from all sources for FY12 (budgetary basis)?

Amount $:

4. Does your FY12 budget include additional funding for new functions or special projects?

Yes

No

5. If yes, please indicate the amounts, sources, and purposes (e.g., new functions or special projects) of the additional funding:

Amount(s) $:

Source(s):

Purpose(s):

6. Please provide the number of FTEs who do ADMINISTRATION/MANAGEMENT (do not include supervisors included in the functional levels) for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

7. Please provide the number of FTEs who do ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

8. Please provide the number of FTEs who staff PAYROLL for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

9. Please provide the number of FTEs who staff PERSONNEL for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

10. Please provide the number of FTEs who do ACCOUNTING for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

11. Please provide the numbers of FTEs who do AUDITING for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

12. Please provide the number of FTEs who do FINANCIAL REPORTING for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

13. Please provide the number of FTEs who staff INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External: Does your state have a CIO?

Yes

No

14. Please provide the number of FTEs who do PRE-AUDIT/DISBURSEMENTS for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

15. Please provide the number of FTEs who do POST-AUDIT OF DISBURSEMENTS for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

16. Please provide the number of FTEs who do INVESTMENT for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

17. Please provide the number of FTEs who do OVERSIGHT OF STATEWIDE INTERNAL CONTROL for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

18. Please provide the number of FTEs who do TRAINING for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Internal:

External:

Description of training:

19. Please provide the number of FTEs who perform another function (list below) for comptroller operations as of January 31,

2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Name of function:

Internal:

External:

20. Please provide the number of FTEs who perform another function (describe below) for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Name of function:

Internal:

External:

21. Please provide the number of FTEs who perform another function (describe below) for comptroller operations as of January 31, 2012. Please note the number of authorized positions that (1) work on the function FOR YOUR OFFICE (internal) and (2) work on the function ON BEHALF OF OTHER AGENCIES in your state government (external).

Name of function:

Internal:

External:

22. What are the total FTEs for comptroller operations (currently filled)?

Total number:

23. How many CPAs are in comptroller operations?

Number:

24. What is the approximate percentage of annual staff turnover in comptroller operations?

Percentage:

25. Please indicate the ANNUAL salary information requested below as of January 31, 2012. Note that the specific annual salary of the comptroller’s position is being requested. For all other positions, the annual salary range is requested. If there are other positions for which you believe salary information would be pertinent, please list them in the space provided.

Comptroller's position (NASC member):

Chief deputy or assistant (annual salary range):

Other deputies or assistants (annual salary range):

Division head (annual salary range):

Other 1 (specify position):

Other 1 (salary range):







Comments:

26. To what extent are cost-of-living adjustments built into salary adjustments each year?

Describe:

Part 7 - Consultants, Legislation, and Demographics Total Questions: 11 1. Within the past two years (January 2010 - December 2011),

how much did your office spend for consulting services?

$:

2. Please provide the following information about the first of your top three projects (by priority).

1st project - description:

Expected total cost $:

Length of time:

Completed

Ongoing

3. Please provide the following information about the second of your top three projects (by priority).

2nd project - description:


Length of time:

Completed

Ongoing

4. Please provide the following information about the third of your top three projects (by priority).

3rd project - description:


Length of time:

Completed

Ongoing

5. Are there various initiatives your state is foregoing based on budget constraints?

Describe:

6. Describe any legislation that was enacted within the past two years (January 2010 - December 2011) that has affected or will significantly affect your role or the functions/operations of your office.

Describe:

7. If you anticipate any legislation already enacted or coming up in calendar year 2012 that will significantly affect your role or the functions/operations of your office, please describe.

Describe:

8. What is the population of your state? Please provide information for as close to December 31, 2011 as possible.

Population: 6,423,113

9. How many FTEs are employed by state government in your state, EXCLUDING personnel at the state's colleges and universities? Please provide information for as close to December 31, 2011 as possible.

Number of FTEs:

10. If personnel at your state's college and universities are considered state employees, how many FTEs are there (including student employees)? Please provide information for as close to December 31, 2011 as possible.

Number of FTEs at state colleges and universities:

11. IN THOUSANDS, what was your state's TOTAL REVENUE FOR ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS for FY11, as reported in your FY11 CAFR?

Total revenue $:

Appendix B: Survey of State Comptrollers’ Technical Activities and Functions, Long-Term Portion


Part 8 - State Comptrollers in State Government Total Questions: 11 1. Legal provisions. What is the legal basis for the office of state

comptroller?

Constitutional

Statutory

Combination of both

2. How is the state comptroller selected?

Elected

Appointed

Other (describe):

If appointed, please note by whom:

If approval is necessary, please note by whom:

3. To whom does the state comptroller report?

A department head

The governor

The public Other (describe):

4. What is the term of office of the state comptroller?

4 years

Other number of years (specify):

Indefinite

At the pleasure of?

Other (describe):

5. If elected, can the state comptroller be re-elected?

Yes

No

If yes, what is the maximum number of consecutive terms allowed?

6. If appointed for a specific term, can the state comptroller be reappointed?

Yes

No

If yes, what is the maximum number of consecutive terms?

7. Is the state comptroller a civil service or merit system employee?

Yes

No

8. Qualifications required for the comptroller position: please check all that apply and describe as requested.

Age?

If yes, specify minimum age required:

U.S. citizenship?

If yes, minimum number of years:

State resident?

If yes, minimum number of years:

Education?


Professional Experience

If yes, how many years:

Professional Certification

If yes, which ones: Other (please describe):

9. On which boards and commissions does the incumbent state comptroller presently serve?

Boards and commissions:

10. Is the state comptroller prohibited from working outside state government?

Yes

No If yes, what is the source of the prohibition?

Law

Custom

Departmental policy

11. Location of office:

What is the name of the department(s) or office(s) in which the functions of the state comptroller are performed?

If the comptroller's office is located in a division within a department, please give the name of the division.

Part 9 - State Comptrollers and the Financial Management of State Government Total Questions: 88 1. For the handling of APPROPRIATION CONTROL please

indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No

If yes, in which office(s) is the function performed?

Other/Comments:

2. For the preparation of the BUDGET please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

3. For the preparation of the BUDGETARY REPORT (legislative) please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

4. For the accounting for CAPITAL LEASES please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

5. For CASH FLOWS FORECASTING please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

6. For the management of the CASH MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT ACT please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

7. For preparation of the COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

8. For approval of CONTRACTS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

9. For COST ACCOUNTING please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

10. For responsibility of DEBT COLLECTION please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

11. For the DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

12. For the management of FEDERAL GRANTS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

13. For the accounting for FIXED ASSETS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

14. For maintenance of GENERAL LEDGER AND CHART OF ACCOUNTS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

15. For the preparation of the INDIRECT COST ALLOCATION PLAN please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

16. For INTERNAL CONTROL ASSESSMENT please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

17. For INVESTMENT FUNCTIONS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

18. For PAYROLL PREPARATION please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

19. For PAYROLL PROCESSING please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

20. For PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

21. For PRE-AUDITING OF PAYMENTS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

22. For POST-AUDITING OF PAYMENTS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

23. For PROCUREMENT please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

24. For the management of RETIREMENT SYSTEMS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

25. For the collection of REVENUES - NON TAX please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

26. For the collection of REVENUES - TAX please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

27. For the operation of RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

28. For the preparation of the SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES OF FEDERAL AWARDS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

29. For the management of TRAVEL POLICIES please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

30. For the preparation/processing of VOUCHERS/CLAIMS please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

31. For the preparation/processing of DATA SYSTEMS/IT please indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Yes

No


Other/Comments:

32. For any OTHER applicable function please describe the function and indicate if the function is centralized (by "centralized", we mean the inclusion of all financial software modules that are integrated together) in a single office (e.g., State Comptroller, State Treasurer, Budget Office, Department of Revenue, etc.):

Describe the function:

Is this function centralized?

Yes

No If yes, in which office(s) is the function performed?

Other/Comments:

33. What programs do you process outside of central accounting (examples: unemployment compensation and medical assistance)?

Programs:

34. Please describe the extent to which payroll is centralized or decentralized in your state.

Centralized or decentralized payroll:

35. Does your state use online time and attendance for payroll instead of paper-based data entry?

Yes

No Comments:

If no, do you have near-term plans to acquire a time and attendance system?

Yes

No

36. Who does the accounting and reporting of leave accrual?

Leave accruals:

37. Where in the organization are records kept for

Payroll:

Personnel:

38. Is direct deposit of payroll to state employees optional or mandatory?

Optional

Mandatory

N/A

39. What percentage of the state's total full-time work force is on direct deposit?

Direct deposit percentage:

40. For those employees on direct deposit, how is payroll information distributed? Check all that apply.

Paper remittance information delivered at work site

Paper remittance information sent through the mail

Dial in

Email

Website

Other

Other (describe):

41. For those employees not on direct deposit, how are checks distributed?

Hand-delivered at work site

Mailed to employee's home

N/A (all employees are on direct deposit)

Other

Other (describe):

42. Please check any areas in which you offer self-service to state employees:

Time and attendance

Changing payroll information

Benefits

Pay stubs

W-2

Other

Other (describe):

43. Who does the processing and filing of W-2s, 1099-MISCs and federal and state payroll taxes?

Processing and filing tax information:

44. Does your state accounting system maintain information and produce interim reports sufficient to meet the management needs of the comptroller's office?

Yes

No

45. Does your state accounting system maintain information and produce interim reports sufficient to meet the management needs of other agency heads?

Yes

No

46. Does the state comptroller's office provide any financial analysis

of interim information that is sent to state agencies?

Yes

No

47. If yes, what types of analysis are performed?

Types of analysis:

48. In which forms are interim financial data made available to state agencies? Check all that apply.

Paper

Online

Other

Other (describe):

49. Can state agencies use the state accounting system to perform ad hoc inquiries or generate reports from the data maintained in the system?

Yes

No If yes, do they generate:

Read only inquiries

Print reports

50. Does the state accounting system allow personnel in state agencies to download files to PC applications?

Yes

No

51. Does your state have a data warehouse from which state personnel can compile ad hoc, interim and other reports?

Yes

No

Comments:

52. For how many years are accounting records retained?

Years retained:

53. Is the pre-audit of expenditures and expenses performed centrally, or has the function been delegated to state agencies?

Performed centrally by

Name of office:


Other Other (specify):

54. Are there any types of claims or expenditures that are not pre-audited?

Yes

No

Explain:

55. Do your pre-audit procedures provide materiality levels for not looking at a claim?

Yes

No

If yes, the materiality level is: $

56. Do your pre-audit procedures provide materiality levels for not correcting an error?

Yes

No

If yes, the materiality level is: $

57. How are inter-agency payments handled? Check all that apply.

Warrants

Checks

Payment card


Other

Other (describe):

58. What are the methods of payment for goods and services in your state? Check all that apply.

Warrants

EFT/EDI/ACH

Checks

Procurement card

Other

Other (describe):

59. Who issues the warrants?

Warrants:

60. Who issues the checks?

Checks:

61. Who authorizes EFT/EDI/ACH transactions?

EFT/EDI/ACH transactions:

62. If checks are used, are warrants required for the issuance of the checks?

Yes

No

63. Who is responsible for authorizing the payment of vouchers?

Authorizing payment of vouchers:

64. Who is responsible for the signing of checks?

Signing checks:

65. Who is responsible for the signing of warrants?

Signing warrants:

66. Who is responsible for the distribution of payments?

Distribution of payments:

67. Does your state have a lapse period in which encumbrances and accounts payable, while paid in the new fiscal year, are charged to the old fiscal year?

Yes

No

If yes, what is the length of the lapse period?

68. Are all prior year invoices, received in the current year, paid out of the prior year budgeted funds?

Yes

No

Comments:

69. Does your state allow for any carry-forward of old year allotments to be added to the new year allotments?

Yes

No

70. If your state provides for carry-forward of any allotments, is this

procedure allowed for all types of allotments?

Yes

No

71. Please specify in which funds carry-forward is allowed.

Comments:

72. Does your state have a central vendor file?

Yes

No

If yes, who controls the file?

73. Where is debt collection managed in your state?

State agencies

Centralized debt collection office

Name of department and/or division the centralized office is located in:

74. Which office in your state promulgates policies and procedures for debt collection?

No policies and procedures

Comptroller's office


Individual agencies

Other office

Specify other office:

75. Which office in your state promulgates policies and procedures for writing off delinquent accounts?

No policies and procedures



Individual agencies

Other office

Other office (specify):

76. Which of the following is your state authorized to do in the pursuit of past-due receivables? Check all that apply.

Use collection agencies

Report to credit reporting agencies

Add the cost of collection to a bad debt

Revoke drivers' licenses

Place liens

Other Other (describe):

77. Does your state have a central program whereby debts to one state agency are offset against payments through the statewide accounting system by another state agency to the debtor?

Yes

No If yes, which state agency administers the debt offset program?


Other

Comments:

78. Does your state use a common identification (ID) number for the debtors on the centralized file?

Yes

No If yes, what common ID number is used?

FED ID number

Social Security number

Other

Other (specify):

79. Are the debtors notified before any offset of payments is made?

Yes

No

If yes, does the debt notification make reference that future payments from the state may be used to satisfy the debt?

Yes

No

80. When a debtor owes more than one state agency, do you have a priority system for determining which debt is satisfied first?

Yes

No If yes, how is the priority determined?

By law (statute)

Administrative rule

First in, first out

Central authority

Other

Other (describe):

81. Is some post-audit work among the functions of your office?

Yes

No If yes, please respond to the remaining questions.

82. What methodology was used for determining post-audit areas? Check all that apply.

Type of expenditure

Internal control

Dollar amount/threshold

Other

Other (describe):

83. Is there a materiality threshold for subjecting claims/expenditures to post-audit?

Yes

No


84. Which sampling method do you use to select transactions for post-audit?

Sampling method:

85. Which type of testing is performed as part of the post-audit? Check all that apply.

Compliance tests

Substantive tests

Internal control tests

86. How often are post-audits performed?

Monthly

Quarterly

Annually

Other

Other (describe):

87. Is follow-up conducted to ensure corrective action is taken?

Yes

No If yes, what type? Check all that apply.

Formal report

Verbal discussion

Management letter

Other

Other (describe):

88. Are claims/expenditures that are subject to post-audit also subject to pre-audit?

Yes

No

If yes, by whom?

Part 10 - Administrative Responsibilities Total Questions: 15 1. Please answer the following questions based on what's

happened in your state over the past two years.

2. Please list any areas in which your office has taken action to identify best practices or to develop benchmarks.

Best practices or benchmarks:

3. Please describe any guidance and tools which your state has developed with respect to ethics in government service.

Guidance and tools:

4. If relevant, please describe any guidance and tools related to ethical behavior in the accounting function.

Guidance and tools:

5. Is performance reporting done by your state? Comments:

6. What agency(ies) does the reporting?

Comments:

7. For what areas do you report?

Comments:

8. Where are the results reported?

Comments:

Please provide a link and/or contact information:

9. Is performance reporting done as required by mandate, policy or operational need?

Comments:

10. How are employee travel expenses paid? Check all that apply.

Paid by employee

State travel card

Billed directly to state/agency

State procurement card

11. How does your state handle the booking of airfare for employee travel?

Central (outside travel agency)

Decentralized to agencies

Central state travel office

Travel agency associated with corporate credit card

Other

Other (describe):

12. What is your state's policy on the use of frequent-flier miles?

Miles belong to the state

Miles belong to the employee

No policy

Other

13. Is direct deposit required for the reimbursement of travel

expenses?

Yes

No

14. Is there state regulation of local government accounting, auditing and financial reporting practices?

Yes

No

If yes, who is responsible for prescribing practices?

15. Is this requirement statutory or regulatory?

Statutory

Regulatory

Part 11 - Information Technology Total Questions: 42 1. Do you have an ERP system?

Yes

No

2. If you have an ERP system, is it:

Implemented

In process

Please provide the implementation date:

If you don't have an ERP system, are you planning one in the next 4 years?

3. If you have an ERP, how is it governed?

Who hosts the software?

Who hosts the hardware?

Who set the standards and maintains the hardware and software for the system?

Who provides application support for the software?

Who sits on the governance committee for the ERP system?

4. Please provide information for the following variables:

Date of implementation:

System name and version:

Software vendor:

Service vendor:

Integrator:

Cost:

5. Functionality (modules) implemented for budget development. Check all that apply.

Agency

Legislative

Executive

6. Functionality (modules) implemented for budgetary control. Check all that apply.

Agency

Legislative

Executive

7. Functionality (modules) implemented. Check all that apply.

General ledger

Accounts payable

Supplier management relations / vendor master data

Accounts receivable and billing

Customer relations management (i.e., social services, supplier and creditor relations, etc.)

Cost accounting / allocation

Project management

Grants management

Procurement - core system

E-procurement (paperless web-based portal)

Contract administration

Materials management

Warehouse inventory control and accounting

Asset management (including depreciation)

Linear assets (typically Department of Transportation only)

Cash management and forecasting

Treasury management / investments

Fleet management

Real estate management

Facilities management

8. Functionality (modules) implemented (continued). Check all that apply.

Risk management

Tax and revenue management (collections, disbursements and reporting)

Point of sale

Travel planning

Travel reimbursements

Human resources / personnel administration

Position control

Recruitment and applicant services

Training and employee development / learning management system

Classification and compensation

Time reporting and employee leave accounting

Benefits administration

Employee relations and performance management

Employee self-service

Payroll administration (i.e., payroll processing, payroll accounting, disbursements and tax reporting)

Pension management

Workflow functionality

Business intelligence / data warehouse

9. What is the degree of customization?

Comments:

10. Scope of the project - all agencies? (i.e., agencies under the governor and independent agencies, all agencies reported in the state CAFR)

Comments:

11. Duration of the project?

Comments:

12. Level of business process re-engineering used. Comments:

13. Was the project over or under budgeted amounts and timeframes?

Comments:

14. Cost reductions or avoidance as a result of the ERP implementation.

Comments:

15. Deployment strategy.

Comments:

16. What ERP enhancements have been implemented since initial implementation?

Comments

17. What proportion of your state's agencies maintains their own internal accounting systems in addition to submitting information to a centralized accounting system?

0%

1-5%

6-20%

21-50%

51-95%

96-100%

18. Are individual financial transactions primarily entered directly by the various departments and agencies of your state into the centrally supported financial system or does the comptroller's office primarily enter all data centrally?

Entered by departments

Entered centrally by comptroller

Other


19. How are payroll transactions primarily handled?

Entered by departments

Entered centrally by comptroller

Other


20. Which methods are allowed for the entry of data? Check all that apply.

Online

Batch mode

Electronic file transmissions/interfaces

Other


21. If your central system is primarily an ERP, has it been modified to fit your environment?

Yes

No

N/A

22. If your ERP has been customized, was it done by:

Your staff

Your implementation consultant/systems integrator

Combination of consulting and internal staff

23. If you have customized your ERP system, what areas did you customize and why?

Comments:

24. What is the primary database platform supporting your ERP?

Database platform:

25. What is the primary hardware platform in the system architecture and the operating system supporting it?

Hardware platform:

26. Please list any additional platforms that are used for secondary systems (e.g., a data warehouse or supplemental web applications that draw or feed data to the ERP).

Additional platforms:

27. If individual financial transactions are entered by various agencies into your system, are hard copy documents (e.g., contracts, purchase orders, vouchers) forwarded to your central agency for pre-auditing prior to payment?

Yes

No

Explanation:

28. Does your state make use of imaging in any of its central financial system functions?

Yes

No

If yes, imaging is used for the storage of (describe):

29. What media are you using to store current data?

Paper

Disk

PDF files

Film

Microfiche

Other

Other (describe):

30. Are client-server applications used in connection with your central financial system?

Yes

No

If yes, the client-server application is used for:

31. Are web-based applications used in connection with your central financial system?

Yes

No

If yes, web-based applications are used for:

32. Does your state have a centralized data warehouse?

Yes

No

If yes, when was it implemented and what types of data is included?

33. Do the current systems use any customer-focused web applications, such as vendor self-service or employee self-service?

Yes

No

Please describe:

34. If the state currently maintains a data warehouse or other business intelligence (BI) solution that is available statewide, is the BI solution a component of the state's ERP system or a stand-alone application?

Comments:

35. What technology has been used to support your BI solution (e.g., hardware platform, database, reporting tools)?

Comments:

36. Please describe the deployment process. Was deployment completed simultaneously for all agencies (i.e., "Big Bang") or phased by agency or functionality in multiple deployment "waves"?

Comments:

37. Describe briefly the time duration for deployment (e.g., how long did each phase take?).

Comments:

38. How many state staff were assigned to the implementation project? Were those staff 100% dedicated to the project or did they retain some operational responsibilities within their home agencies?

Comments:

39. Please list the significant lessons learned during the software implementation.

Comments:

40. What were the major challenges in stabilizing the system after "go live," and how were the challenges overcome?

Comments:

41. What were the major challenges associated with creating and maintaining the production (post-implementation) support organization, and how were the challenges met?

Comments:

42. Did you utilize any specific employee retention techniques during the course of the project (or thereafter) to prevent a loss of expertise gained during the project?

Comments:

Part 12 - Accounting Principles and Audits of State Financial Statements Total Questions: 7 1. Who establishes state accounting and financial policies?

Accounting and financial policies:

2. Is the authority that establishes state accounting policies:

Statutory

Administrative

3. Has a comprehensive accounting manual been developed for your state?

Yes

No

Who has the responsibility for developing the accounting manual?

4. How often is the manual updated?

Manual updated:

5. How is the manual made available? Check all that apply.

Paper

Intranet

Disk

Internet

Other

Other (describe):

6. For your proprietary fund statements, are unemployment compensation taxes accrued at fiscal year end?

Yes

No

If yes, what is the accrual period?

7. If taxes are accrued for the following in the governmental fund financial statements, please indicate the accrual period.

Personal income taxes:

Corporate income taxes:

Sales taxes:

Use taxes:

Alcoholic beverage taxes:

Motor fuel taxes:

Tobacco or cigarette taxes:

Excise taxes:

Property taxes:

Other taxes and accrual periods:

Part 13 - Internal Control Total Questions: 17 1. Does your office have internal auditors?

Yes

No

2. Are internal auditors used by some other state agencies?

Yes

No

3. Who in your state is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control?

Internal control:

4. Does your state regularly conduct systematic reviews of internal control?

Yes

No

5. If you do conduct regular reviews of internal control, how often is it performed?

Biannually

Annually

Biennially

Periodically, or as deemed necessary

Other Other (specify):

Who conducts the review?

6. Are employees trained in self-assessment of internal control?

Yes

No

7. Does your state have a manual on internal control?

Yes

No

8. If your state does have a manual, what is the source of the authority to develop the policies on internal control which are included in the manual?

Statutory

Administrative

Other

Please provide a link to the reference:

9. If your state accounting system is centralized, does the comptroller's office maintain the manual that describes state policies on internal control?

Yes

No

Comments:

10. In which forms is the statewide manual on internal control made available to state government personnel? Check all that apply.

Paper

Intranet

Disk

Internet

Other

Other (describe):

11. If your state accounting system is decentralized, do the agencies maintain their own manuals describing their policies on internal control?

Yes

No

Comments:

12. Are you required by statute to make a report to the legislature on internal control?

Yes

No

If yes, how often?

13. Are you required by administrative regulation to make a report to the legislature on internal control?

Yes

No

If yes, how often?

14. Are agencies sanctioned if they do not adhere to the internal control statutes, regulations or policies in your state?

Yes

No

If yes, what forms do the sanctions take?

15. Are agency heads bound by law to review weaknesses in their agencies' internal control structures?

Yes

No If yes, please provide a link to the reference:

16. If not bound by law, are agency heads bound by administrative policy?

Comments:

If yes, please provide a link to the reference:

17. Does the state comptroller conduct periodic investigations to monitor and enforce the use of the state's internal control?

Yes

No

Part 14 - Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports and Other Reporting Total Questions: 9 1. When does your state's fiscal year end?

Fiscal year end:

2. When are the state's books closed?

Books closed:

3. What is the size of your CAFR team?

CAFR team size:

4. How many CPAs are on the CAFR team?

CAFR team CPAs:

5. Please list any financial reports or statements, other than those required by GAAP, which your state is required by statute to prepare annually.

Other financial reports/statements:

6. Please check other financial reports prepared by the comptroller's office. Check all that apply.

Monthly and/or quarterly financial statements, budgetary basis

Monthly and/or quarterly reports on receipts and disbursements

Monthly and/or quarterly appropriation reports

Monthly and/or quarterly revenue statements

Monthly statewide payroll expense reports

Other

Other (describe):

7. Does the comptroller's office compile performance reports?

Yes

No

Please describe the types of activities and analysis presented in the performance reports, and tell how often they are issued.

8. Does your state prepare a popular report?

Yes

No

If yes, what was the first fiscal year for which it was prepared?

What type of report is it?

GFOA

Citizen Centric

Other

Please provide a link to your most recent report.

9. If your office prepares an annual popular report, please indicate which information it provides. Check all that apply.

Graphic representation of general fund revenues by source

Graphic representation of general fund expenditures by function

Information about changes in the state's long-term debt outstanding

Information about operating results compared to the previous year(s)

Information about the financial position of the state compared to the previous year(s)

Demographic information about the state's population (average age, trends, etc.)

Information about employment in the state

Information about per capita income in the state

Data about the enrollment in the state's system of higher education

Data about the population of the state's corrections system

Other

Other (describe):

Date post:	18-Mar-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	3 times
Download:	0 times