Audit 14816

FY End
2023-06-30
Total Expended
$37.58M
Findings
24
Programs
30
Organization: Western Oregon University (OR)
Year: 2023 Accepted: 2024-01-31
Auditor: Eide Bailly LLP

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
10974 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
10975 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
10976 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
10977 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
10978 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
10979 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
10980 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
10981 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
10982 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
10983 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
10984 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
10985 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
587416 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
587417 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
587418 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
587419 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
587420 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
587421 2023-001 Material Weakness - N
587422 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
587423 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
587424 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
587425 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
587426 2023-002 Material Weakness - N
587427 2023-002 Material Weakness - N

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
84.268 Federal Direct Student Loans $14.78M Yes 2
84.063 Federal Pell Grant Program $6.58M Yes 2
84.038 Archived $1.51M Yes 2
84.042 Trio Student Support Services $674,034 - 0
84.160 Training Interpreters for Individuals Who Are Deaf and Individuals Who Are Deaf-Blind $575,491 - 0
84.129 Rehabilitation Long-Term Training $386,935 - 0
93.434 Every Student Succeeds Act/preschool Development Grants $346,987 Yes 0
84.365 English Language Acquisition State Grants $322,418 - 0
84.047 Trio Upward Bound $305,965 - 0
84.007 Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants $289,265 Yes 2
84.033 Federal Work Study Program $253,023 Yes 2
84.425 Education Stabilization Fund $248,951 - 0
84.325 Special Education-Personnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities $215,386 - 0
84.325 Special Education - Personnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities $174,447 - 0
16.710 Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Grants $140,450 - 0
84.326 Special Education Technical Assistance with Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities $118,174 - 0
84.379 Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education Grants $117,211 Yes 2
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $98,679 - 0
16.608 Tribal Justice Systems $94,106 - 0
16.575 Crime Victim Assistance $82,726 - 0
84.126 Rehabilitation Services Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States $50,400 - 0
93.575 Child Care and Development Block Grant $33,267 - 0
97.036 Disaster Grants - Public Assistance $28,079 - 0
93.323 Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases $24,692 - 0
10.558 Child and Adult Care Food Program $15,525 - 0
84.326 Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities $14,333 - 0
47.076 Stem Education $11,826 - 0
84.367 Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants $7,985 - 0
45.164 Promotion of the Humanities Public Programs $4,550 - 0
45.310 Grants to States $949 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
NLY9PML2VVB3 Shadron Lehman Auditee
5038389472 Kristin Diggs Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: NOTE 1 - BASIS OF PRESENTATION Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the schedule are recognized on the accrual basis of accounting. When applicable, such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. No federal financial assistance has been provided to a subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has not elected to use the 10% de minimis cost rate. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the schedule) includes the federal award activity of Western Oregon University (the University) under programs of the federal government for the year ended June 30, 2023. The information is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of the University, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net position, or cash flows of the University.
Title: NOTE 2 - SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the schedule are recognized on the accrual basis of accounting. When applicable, such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. No federal financial assistance has been provided to a subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has not elected to use the 10% de minimis cost rate. Expenditures reported in the schedule are recognized on the accrual basis of accounting. When applicable, such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. No federal financial assistance has been provided to a subrecipient.
Title: NOTE 3 - INDIRECT COST RATE Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the schedule are recognized on the accrual basis of accounting. When applicable, such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. No federal financial assistance has been provided to a subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has not elected to use the 10% de minimis cost rate. The University has not elected to use the 10% de minimis cost rate.
Title: NOTE 4 - FEDERAL STUDENT LOAN PROGRAMS Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the schedule are recognized on the accrual basis of accounting. When applicable, such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. No federal financial assistance has been provided to a subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has not elected to use the 10% de minimis cost rate. The federal student loan programs listed subsequently are administered directly by the University and balances and transactions relating to these programs are included in the University's basic financial statements. Loans made during the year are included in the federal expenditures presented in the schedule. The balance of loans outstanding at June 30, 2023, consists of: FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE LISTING 84.038 - PROGRAM NAME - FEDERAL PERKINS LOAN PROGRAM - OUTSTANDING BALANCE AT JUNE 30, 2023 - $937,063

Finding Details

U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Enrollment Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 34 CFR 685.309 states that Institutions are responsible for timely and accurate reporting of a student’s enrollment status and changes in those enrollment statuses, whether they report directly or via a third‐party servicer. When an Institution is made aware of a change in a student’s enrollment status, the Institution has 60 days to update the change in enrollment status via NSLDS. Condition: During our testing of compliance for Enrollment Reporting, there were 16 instances out of 21 where NLSDS did not reflect accurate or timely reporting of a student's change in enrollment status. While records were submitted accurately and timely to the Clearinghouse, those records were not reflected in NSLDS. Cause: The University pushed through the changes in enrollment status to the Clearinghouse timely and accurately based upon the student’s enrollment status; however, the change in enrollment status was not pushed through all the way to NSLDS resulting in inaccurate and untimely records within NSLDS. Effect: The student’s change in enrollment status was not accurately reported in NSLDS and/or was not reported timely. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 21 participants out of 111 students who had a change in enrollment status were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should implement controls to ensure that enrollment records for students are being updated every 60 days, and that those records being submitted to NSLDS are accurate. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Education Student Financial Assistance Cluster Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number(s): 84.063, 84.007, 84.268, 84.033, 84.038, 84.379 Compliance Requirement: Special Tests & Provisions – Gramm‐Leach‐Bliley Act (GLBA) – Student Information Security Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Under 16 CFR Part 314, Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require that the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers. Condition: During our testing over GLBA compliance, we noted that the University had not updated their information security program since 2018 and that it was missing aspects of the required nine elements. Cause: The University has not updated their written information security program since 2018. Effect: The University did not have a system in place to ensure the required elements under GLBA were included in the comprehensive information security program and that the program was reviewed periodically. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The University should have a system in place to ensure that their comprehensive security program includes the required aspects under GLBA and that they are in documented in writing. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.