|For printer friendly version of Report Highlights|
|To view full report 12-6|
State of Wisconsin
FY 2010-11 Single Audit
In fiscal year (FY) 2010-11, state agencies administered nearly
This single audit report includes the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards, which provides an inventory of federal programs administered
by state agencies. Our audit focused on 31 federal programs that
Overall, state agencies have complied with federal grant requirements and
have taken steps to address our findings from previous years. However,
we identified both new and continuing internal control concerns and question
Wisconsin's federal financial
assistance, including ARRA
funding, consisted of
Six state agencies—the departments
of Health Services (DHS), Workforce
Development (DWD), Transportation
(DOT), Public Instruction (DPI), and
Children and Families (DCF), as
well as UW System—administered
94.3 percent of the State of Wisconsin's
federal assistance for
Federal assistance for DOT totaled
Most of the federal funding administered by UW System supported student financial aid or research and development grants. DPI provided the majority of its federal funding to local school districts and other entities that provide education and nutrition programs for children. DCF used its federal funding primarily to support adoption and foster care services, Wisconsin Shares, and Wisconsin Works.
Three programs accounted for
80.3 percent of the ARRA funds
expended by the State during
Federal Adoption Assistance funds
are used to provide a portion of
monthly maintenance payments to
adoptive parents of eligible children.
Although steps were taken to
address our concerns, including
providing training to staff and
automating the maintenance payment
rate-setting process, many
of these actions occurred after
We reviewed case files for 40 children
placed into adoption during
Because of the significance of this concern, we again qualify our opinion on the State's compliance with federal Adoption Assistance requirements. The federal government will determine whether the State will need to return additional funds to the federal government.
Transit Services Programs
However, DOT did not adequately monitor these entities to ensure these funds were used appropriately and in accordance with applicable federal requirements. DOT did not ensure entities had single audits performed, if required; conduct site visits; or review supporting documentation to ensure requests for reimbursement were for allowable costs. DOT also submitted inaccurate financial reports to the federal government, and we identified concerns with DOT's record-keeping for vehicles purchased through these programs.
Because of the significance and number of concerns, we qualify our opinion on the State's compliance with federal requirements for the Transit Services Programs Cluster.
Internal Service Funds
For several years, we have
raised concerns because DOA's
billing rates have resulted in the
accumulation of excess balances
for certain centralized services, such
as mainframe computer processing.
Although it reduced some billing
rates and provided user rebates
to reduce excess balances, DOA
We also report that some other centralized services had accumulated deficit balances, which occur when the costs of providing the service exceed the amounts received through established billing rates. We encourage DOA to work with the federal government to determine the extent to which federal programs may be charged as part of the billing rates to reduce deficit balances.
University of Wisconsin System
We provide 23 recommendations to
improve UW System's administration
of federal funds, including
15 recommendations regarding
campus-specific management of
federal student financial aid funds.
We also report noncompliance
with a cap on salaries funded by
grants from the National Institutes
of Health and question at least
Other Audit Concerns
We found other instances of noncompliance with federal requirements and the need for improved internal controls. For example, state agencies are to ensure that subrecipients of federal funds have single audits performed, if required, and to resolve findings identified in those audit reports. Because some agencies had not fully completed these responsibilities, the State could not be assured that its subrecipients had promptly addressed noncompliance and internal control issues.
In addition, we report concerns with DPI's efforts to ensure salaries and wages are accurately charged to federal grant programs, the adequacy of DOT's documentation for selecting certain vendors, and the follow-up performed by DHS and DCF on computer data matches used to verify income reported by program participants.
Our report contains 58 recommendations related to state agency administration of federal grant programs and 5 internal control concerns related to our audit of the State's financial statements. Agency responses and corrective action plans are also included in our report.