Sacramento County -

SACRAMENTO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION Review Report AUDIT RESOLUTION PROCESS Fiscal Year 2018-19 and Fiscal Year 2019-20 M M. C ALIA OHEN California State Controller February 2023 M M. C ALIA OHEN California State Controller February 2, 2023 David Gordon, County Superintendent of Schools Sacramento County Office of Education P.O. Box 269003 Sacramento, CA 95826 Dear Mr. Gordon: The State Controller’s Office reviewed the Sacramento County Office of Education’s (COE) audit resolution process for local education agency exceptions noted in the annual audit reports. The review covered fiscal year (FY) 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. Our review found that the Sacramento COE followed its audit resolution process for FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. As a result, the Sacramento COE was in compliance with Education Code section 41020. If you have any questions, please contact Joel James, Chief, Financial Audits Bureau, by telephone at (916) 323-1573. Sincerely, Original signed by KIMBERLY TARVIN, CPA Chief, Division of Audits KT/ac cc: Nicolas Schweizer, Associate Superintendent Business Services Sacramento County Office of Education Sharmila LaPorte, Director District Fiscal Services Sacramento County Office of Education Elizabeth Dearstyne, Director School Fiscal Services Division California Department of Education Keith Smith, Administrator School Fiscal Services Division California Department of Education Christopher Ferguson, Program Budget Manager Education Systems Unit California Department of Finance Sacramento County Office of Education Audit Resolution Process Contents Review Report Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 1 Objective, Scope, and Methodology ................................................................................. 2 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 3 Views of Responsible Officials .......................................................................................... 3 Restricted Use .................................................................................................................... 3 Sacramento County Office of Education Audit Resolution Process Review Report Summary The State Controller’s Office (SCO) reviewed the Sacramento County Office of Education’s (COE) audit resolution process for local education agency (LEA) exceptions noted in the annual audit reports for fiscal year (FY) 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. Our review found that the Sacramento COE followed its audit resolution process for FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. Background Education Code section 41020(n) requires the SCO to annually select a sample of county superintendents of schools for which the SCO will perform a follow-up review of the audit resolution process. Results of these reviews will be reported to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SSPI) and the county superintendents of the schools that were reviewed. In addition, Education Code section 41020(n) states that the SCO shall require auditors to categorize audit exceptions in the audit report in such a manner that both the county superintendent of schools and the SSPI can discern the exceptions for which it is their responsibility to ensure that the LEAs take action to correct. The Sacramento COE provides coordination of educational programs and professional and financial supervision for 13 LEAs under its jurisdiction. In addition, the county superintendent of schools maintains special schools and programs countywide, independent of the LEAs. County superintendents of schools are required to do the following:  Review, for each of their school districts, audit exceptions relating to attendance, inventory of equipment, internal control, and any miscellaneous items, and determine whether the findings have been corrected or an acceptable plan of correction has been developed (Education Code section 41020[i][1]);  Review audit exceptions related to the use of program funds for instructional materials, teacher misassignments, and school accountability report cards. The county superintendents must also determine whether the exceptions have been corrected or an acceptable plan of correction has been developed (Education Code section 41020[i][2]);  Review audit exceptions related to attendance, inventory of equipment, internal control, and other miscellaneous exceptions. Attendance exceptions or issues must include those related to local control funding formula allocations pursuant to Education Code section 42238.02, as implemented by section 42238.03, and independent study (Education Code section 41020[j][1]);  Notify the LEA, and request that the governing board of the LEA provide to the county superintendent of schools a description of the -1- Sacramento County Office of Education Audit Resolution Process correction or plan of correction by March 15 of the subsequent year (Education Code section 41020[j][2]);  Review the description of the correction or plan of correction and determine its adequacy and, if the LEA’s response was not adequate, require the LEA to resubmit that portion of its response that is inadequate (Education Code section 41020[j][3]);  By July 15 of the subsequent year, certify to the SSPI and the SCO that the county has reviewed all applicable exceptions, and state that all exceptions have been corrected, or that an acceptable plan for correction has been submitted by the LEA to the county superintendent, except as noted in the certification. In addition, identify by LEA any attendance-related exceptions or exceptions involving state funds, and require the LEA to submit the appropriate reporting forms to the SSPI for processing (Education Code sections 41020.9[b] and 41020.9[c]);  Review LEAs’ unresolved prior-year audit exceptions when the California Department of Education defers to the county (Education Code section 41020[l]); and  Adjust subsequent local property tax requirements to correct audit exceptions relating to LEA tax rates and tax revenues (Education Code section 41020[o]). Objective, Scope, The objective of our review was limited to determining whether the Sacramento COE followed its audit resolution process for resolving LEA and Methodology audit exceptions in a manner consistent with Education Code section 41020. Our review did not include an evaluation of the sufficiency of the action taken by the LEA and the Sacramento COE to address each exception, nor did it assess the degree to which each exception was addressed. The review period was FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. To achieve our objective, we performed the following procedures:  We verified that the Sacramento COE addressed all attendance, inventory of equipment, internal control, and miscellaneous exceptions. In addition, we verified that the Sacramento COE addressed any findings on program funds for instructional materials, teacher misassignments, and school accountability report cards. However, with respect to exceptions based on sample items, our review did not include a determination of whether the exception results were properly quantified and addressed at a districtwide or countywide level.  We verified that the Sacramento COE notified LEAs that they must submit completed corrective action forms to the Sacramento COE by March 15, 2020, and March 15, 2021, for FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20, respectively. Our review did not include an assessment of the LEAs’ progress in taking corrective action. -2- Sacramento County Office of Education Audit Resolution Process  We verified that the Sacramento COE required the LEAs to submit the appropriate reporting forms to the SSPI for any attendance-related exceptions that affected state funding.  We reviewed the letters of certification due on July 15, 2020, and July 15, 2021, that the Sacramento COE sent to the SSPI and the SCO regarding any resolved and unresolved audit exceptions.  We verified that the Sacramento COE followed up with unresolved prior-year audit exceptions that the SSPI had required the Sacramento COE to conduct.  We verified that the Sacramento COE adjusted subsequent local property tax requirements to correct audit exceptions related to LEA tax rates and tax revenues. Our review was conducted under the authority of Education Code section 41020(n). Conclusion Our review found that the Sacramento COE followed its audit resolution process for FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. As a result, the Sacramento COE was in compliance with Education Code section 41020 for FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20. We made no additional determination regarding the Sacramento COE’s audit resolution process beyond the scope of the review outlined above. Views of We discussed our review results with Sacramento COE’s representative Responsible during an exit conference conducted on December 16, 2022. At the exit Officials conference, the Sacramento COE’s representative agreed with our review results. Restricted Use This review report is intended solely for the information and use of the Sacramento COE, the California Department of Education, the California Department of Finance, and the SCO; it is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties. This restriction is not meant to limit distribution of this review report, which is a matter of public record and is available on the SCO website at www.sco.ca.gov. Original signed by KIMBERLY TARVIN, CPA Chief, Division of Audits February 2, 2023 -3- State Controller’s Office Division of Audits Post Office Box 942850 Sacramento, CA 94250 http://www.sco.ca.gov S22-COE-9001