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 /> Performance Audit ~ - <br /> APPENDIX A (Continued) ~ .u <br /> ~ B. Compliance with Laws and Regulations (Continued) ~ ' <br /> 2. The Local Road & Street Questionnaire was not completed on a timely basis. <br /> Both cities -indicated that it was an"oversight on ~ their "part and that future <br /> Questionnaires will be prepared on a timely basis. <br /> 3. Budgeted, rather than actual amounts for indirect costs were~used to prepare <br /> the Local Road & Street Questionnaire. Entity personnel indicated in the <br /> - - <br /> <br /> i - ~ -future,'-actual rather than budgeted indirect costs will be used to complete the <br /> .1 _ ~ ~ <br /> Questionnaire. - . ~ , ~ ~ ~ _ <br /> C. Administrative and Indirect (Overhead) Expense- - - r - ~ <br /> 1. Cost accounting by individual projects did not always include an allocation of all <br /> . , , . <br /> equipment usage'~or: administrative., and., indirect..{overhead) costs recorded in the <br /> cost accounting system. Iri .general the cities and counties believe that detailed <br /> accounting for allocation to the individual projects exceeds the benefits to be <br /> derived. We believe that all costs, including equipment usage and administrative <br /> and indirect (overhead) costs, should be allocated to the individual project cost <br /> records. - <br /> " - <br /> 2. Administrative and indirect (overhead) costs are not allocated to the local road <br /> fund. These two small cities have elected to absorb all these costs within their <br /> eneral fund. <br /> 9 <br /> 3. Indirect (overhead) and administrative expense rates are not revised on a timely <br /> basis. The cities and counties involved will consider revising the rates on a more <br /> time! basis in the future. <br /> Y - <br /> 4. Administrative and indirect (ovefiead) expenses are allocated to State Highway <br /> _ Fund monies based upon estimates. In most instances the cities and counties <br /> using estimates believe they "accurately reflect administrative and indirect <br /> overhead ex enses attributable to State Hi hwa Fund monies. We believe <br /> ( ) p 9 Y <br /> administrative and indirect (ovefiead) expenses should be allocated based on <br /> actual data rather estimates. <br /> Talbot, Korvola & Warwick, u~ 31 <br /> _ _ _ _ _ _ <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.