New Search
My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
New Search
98 Local Agency Audit of Hwy Trust Funds
COE
>
PW
>
Admin
>
Finance
>
Operating
>
2008
>
98 Local Agency Audit of Hwy Trust Funds
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2009 11:09:24 AM
Creation date
12/4/2008 1:35:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
PW_Operating
PW_Document_Type_ Operating
Reports
PW_Division
Administration
GL_Fund
131
GL_ORG
8990
Identification_Number
Local Agency Audit
External_View
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
84
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Local Agencies' Use of Highway Funds <br /> j Performance Audit <br /> SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY (Continued <br /> 6. Determining the portion of State Highway Fund monies used for <br /> administrative and indirect (overhead) expenses, as defined by the .Audits <br /> Divisio i <br /> n ncludin :See Administrative and 1 <br /> g ( ndirect Overhead <br /> ( ) Secfionj. <br /> . . <br /> b. Identifying the criteria for assessing the economy and reasonableness of <br /> administrative and indirect overhead ex enses. ~ ~ - <br /> ( ) p <br /> c. Reporting the proportion of administrative and _-indirect_ (overhead) <br /> <br /> ~ expenses charged against State Highway Fund monies. <br /> _ - _ _ . <br /> c. Providing a conclusion as ~,to -the :;economy and '-.reasonableness of <br /> administrative and indirect (overhead) expenditures charged against State <br /> Highway Fund monies. <br /> 7. Re <br /> ortin on the total amoun nd <br /> p g t a proportion of counties and cities .road fund <br /> fiscal 1996-97 n <br /> ex a drtures. See Summa a <br /> nd Re <br /> p ( commendati <br /> rY ons S <br /> ection). <br /> _ _ <br /> To accomplish these objectives we interviewed numerous individuals of the selected <br /> counties and cities responsible for establishing and maintaining internal control over the <br /> recording of revenues and expenditures, and reportin on the use of State Hi h <br /> 9 wa <br /> 9 Y <br /> Fund monies. We also interviewed individuals of the Secretary'of State Audits Division <br /> and the Oregon Department of Transportation. - <br /> Our audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted governmental <br /> performance auditing standards. <br /> DEFINIT{ONS <br /> Oregon Revised Statues 366.542 (counties) and 366.790 (cities) require the reporting <br /> of State Highway Fund expenditures to the legislature in three categories: (1) <br /> maintenance, (2) public improvement and (3) administration. This information is first <br /> provided, on an annual basis, to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). It <br /> is provided to ODOT on the Local Road and Street Questionnaire (Questionnaire) for all <br /> counties and cities with a population in excess of 5,000. Cities with populations less <br /> Talbot, Korvola 8 Warwick, t.~ ~ <br /> _ _ _ _ <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.