Summary
| Report Number: | 2008-030 |
| Report Title: | New College of Florida - Operational Audit |
| Report Period: | FYE 06/30/2007 |
| Release Date: | 10/31/2007 |
Our operational audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2007, disclosed the following:
Finding No. 1: Controls over journal entries recorded in the College’s accounting system needed improvement.
Finding No. 2: The College did not provide for adequate controls over electronic transfers of funds.
Finding No. 3: The College did not always retain documentation required by State Board of Education Rule 6A-10.044, Florida Administrative Code, to evidence student residency status.
Finding No. 4: The College did not require background checks and fingerprinting for certain employees in positions of special trust or responsibility, or of a sensitive nature.
Finding No. 5: The College’s competitive procurement threshold exceeded the limit established by the Board of Governors.
Finding No. 6: College personnel did not compare each purchasing card cardholder’s usage to credit limits to ensure that limits were reasonable.
Finding No. 7: The College did not adequately monitor cellular telephone (cell phone) usage, and did not report to the Internal Revenue Service the value of cell phone services as income for employees who did not make an adequate accounting of the business use of their assigned cell phones. In addition, the College paid certain taxes for which it was exempt.
Finding No. 8: Travel expenses were not always adequately supported.
Finding No. 9: Insured values for several of the College’s buildings were significantly more than the insurable value as determined using the methodology established by the Florida Department of Financial Services, Division of Risk Management. It was unclear if the level of coverage for these buildings was consistent with the College’s insurance philosophy, as there were no written policies and procedures addressing the level of insurance coverage to be maintained or the method to be used to determine insurable values.
Finding No. 10: The College’s information technology disaster recovery plan had not been tested.
The College’s response is included as Appendix B of this report.