Audit 334723

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria Under the University’s Program Participation Agreement and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), schools must protect student financial aid information, with particular attention to information provided to institutions by the Department or otherwise obtained in support of the administration of the federal student financial aid. According to 16 CFR 314.4(b), a school must identify reasonably foreseeable internal and external risks to the security, confidentiality, and integrity of customer information that could result in the unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information, and assess the sufficiency of any safeguards in place to control these risks. At a minimum, such a risk assessment should include consideration of risks in each relevant area of your operations, including: Employee training and management; Information systems, including network and software design, as well as information processing, storage, transmission, and disposal; and Detecting, preventing, and responding to attacks, intrusions, or other systems failures. Condition Although the University has documented various IT policies around access, they are not comprehensive enough to cover the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requirements with respect to the process of identifying the internal and external risks to data security. Cause The University has not conducted a formal risk assessment since January 2021. Effect Student information may be at risk of unauthorized disclosure, misuse, alteration, destruction, or other compromise of such information. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Context During our review of the University’s Information Technology system, we noted through inquiry that a formal risk assessment of the University’s documented safeguards had not been performed since January 2021. Identification as a Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat of finding 2022-002 in the immediately prior audit. Recommendation We recommend that the University re-engage the outside resource to independently perform and develop a formal risk assessment, along with recommendations for remediation of any open items and/or deficiencies. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 668. 164(h)(2), A Title IV, HEA credit balance must be paid directly to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than- (i) Fourteen (14) days after the balance occurred if the credit balance occurred after the first day of class of a payment period; or (ii) Fourteen (14) days after the first day of class of a payment period if the credit balance occurred on or before the first day of class of that payment period. Condition The University's refunded credit balances later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. Cause Noncompliance was caused by an oversight by the responsible department and changes to the refund process. Effect Credit balances were refunded more than fourteen days after the credit balance occurred. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's refund of credit balances, we noted that 4 out of 40 students selected for testing had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date of the credit balance occurred. After further review by the University, it was identified that a total of 32 students had credit balances refunded later than fourteen days after the date the credit balance occurred. All late payments of credit balances identified by the University occurred within the same three week period as the 4 identified from the testing selection. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure all credit balances are refunded within the required fourteen days. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.

Criteria According to 34 CFR 673.3(a}, to participate in the Federal Perkins Loan, FWS, or FSEOG programs, an institution shall file an application before the deadline date established annually by the Secretary through publication of a notice in the Federal Register. Condition The University submitted the report after the reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Cause Noncompliance with the requirement occurred due to an oversight by the responsible department. Effect The Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report was submitted late. Questioned Cost There is no questioned cost related to this finding. Context During review of the University's Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report for the year ended June 30, 2023, we noted that the report was submitted after the required reporting deadline of October 1, 2023. Recommendation We recommend the University take appropriate steps to ensure the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate report is submitted in a timely manner prior to the reporting deadline. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with the recommendation. There is no questioned cost related to this finding.