Audit 336746

FY End
2024-05-31
Total Expended
$12.23M
Findings
6
Programs
6
Organization: King University (TN)
Year: 2024 Accepted: 2025-01-09

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
518362 2024-001 Significant Deficiency - N
518363 2024-001 Significant Deficiency - N
518364 2024-001 Significant Deficiency - N
1094804 2024-001 Significant Deficiency - N
1094805 2024-001 Significant Deficiency - N
1094806 2024-001 Significant Deficiency - N

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
84.268 Federal Direct Student Loans $8.63M Yes 1
84.063 Federal Pell Grant Program $2.91M Yes 1
84.038 Federal Perkins Loan Program $367,651 Yes 0
84.007 Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants $180,250 Yes 1
84.033 Federal Work-Study Program $89,883 Yes 0
84.425 Covid-19 Education Stabilization Fund $55,101 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
RCWNUH9DNQE4 Lettie Jackson Auditee
4236524719 Chad Kisner Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: Note A: Federal Loan Programs Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. 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. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. During the year ended May 31, 2024, the University processed the following amount of new loans under the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program (which includes Graduate Plus Loans and Parent Plus Loans for Undergraduate Students). See the Notes to the SEFA for chart/table.
Title: Note B: Basis of Presentation Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. 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. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the Schedule) includes the federal award activity of King University under programs of the federal government for the year ended May 31, 2024. The information in this Schedule 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 King University, it is not intended to, and does not present, the financial position, changes in net assets or cash flows of King University.
Title: Note D: Federal Perkins Loan Program Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. 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. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The University has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The University administers the Perkins Loan Program. For purposes of the Schedule, the amount reported includes the outstanding loan balance at the beginning of the fiscal year. Due to regulation changes, no further loans can be made from the program and no administrative cost allowance can be taken from the loan fund. See the Notes to the SEFA for chart/table. Schools have the option of continuing to collect on outstanding loan balances or can voluntarily liquidate the program. The University has no current plans to begin the Perkins liquidation process, however, is required to periodically return excess cash on hand from the program to the Department of Education.

Finding Details

2024‐001 Significant Deficiency: Return to Title IV Funds (U.S. Department of Education, William D. Ford Direct Loan Program, ALN #84.268; Federal Pell Grant Program, ALN #84.063; and Federal Supplemental Opportunity Grant Program, ALN #84.007) Criteria: In accordance with 34 CFR 668.22(f), in the calculation of the percentage of payment period and/or period of enrollment completed, the total number of calendar days in a payment and/or enrollment period includes all days within the period, except that institutionally scheduled breaks of at least 5 consecutive calendar days and days in which the student was on an approved leave of absence are excluded from the total number of calendar days in a payment period and/or period of enrollment. Statement of Condition: During the audit, it was noted that the University used the incorrect number of completed days in the payment period or period of enrollment in calculating the percentage of aid earned of withdrawn students. This issue appears to be isolated to Return to Title IV Funds forms completed for students enrolled and withdrawn during the Spring semester, specifically related to miscalculation involving spring break. For certain students, this causes a variance in the percentage of completion as completing over 60% of the term and having earned all awarded aid versus completing under 60% of the term and requiring a partial return of aid. Questioned Costs: The known monetary error is an over-award of $1,029. Extrapolation of the error across all students who may have been affected estimates total possible monetary error of $9,089. Therefore, the monetary impact of this deficiency does not exceed the reporting threshold of $25,000. Perspective Information: The audit included a detailed testing of 13 files for students who withdrew during the spring term, of which this miscalculation applies to 6; of these, 1 student crossed the 60% completion threshold with the correction and should have had aid returned. Based upon withdrawal dates of the full listing of students who withdrew during the Spring, 4 additional students could have been affected similarly with this miscalculation. Therefore, we consider the error rate as 5 out of the 31 total students who withdrew in the Spring, which is 16.13%. Cause and Effect: For noted withdrawal calculations, the completed day count was not performed per the instructions described in the handbook. Completed day count for the identified students was not reduced by the period related to spring break, which should have reduced the completed day count by nine days. This results in a miscalculation of percentage of Title IV aid earned and could result in monetary error. Recommendation: The University should ensure that the completed number of calendar days in the payment period or period of enrollment is counted correctly utilizing the guidance provided by the Compliance Supplement and the Student Financial Aid Handbook, accounting for scheduled breaks appropriately. View of Responsible Officials: We agree with this finding. After review of this student’s Return to Title IV calculation, it was determined that upon beginning the calculation in the PowerFAIDS system, the Refresh button was not used which would have recalculated the completed days to include the 9-day Spring Break. After reviewing this procedure with PowerFAIDS, it was recommended that we also enter the withdrawal date on the R2T4 tab of the POE screen which forces the system to recalculate the completed days prior to beginning the R2T4 calculation. We have added this step to our Return to Title IV procedures. The corrected Return to Title IV calculation was completed, which resulted in an Unsubsidized loan return of $1,029. The loan funds were returned via the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) system.
2024‐001 Significant Deficiency: Return to Title IV Funds (U.S. Department of Education, William D. Ford Direct Loan Program, ALN #84.268; Federal Pell Grant Program, ALN #84.063; and Federal Supplemental Opportunity Grant Program, ALN #84.007) Criteria: In accordance with 34 CFR 668.22(f), in the calculation of the percentage of payment period and/or period of enrollment completed, the total number of calendar days in a payment and/or enrollment period includes all days within the period, except that institutionally scheduled breaks of at least 5 consecutive calendar days and days in which the student was on an approved leave of absence are excluded from the total number of calendar days in a payment period and/or period of enrollment. Statement of Condition: During the audit, it was noted that the University used the incorrect number of completed days in the payment period or period of enrollment in calculating the percentage of aid earned of withdrawn students. This issue appears to be isolated to Return to Title IV Funds forms completed for students enrolled and withdrawn during the Spring semester, specifically related to miscalculation involving spring break. For certain students, this causes a variance in the percentage of completion as completing over 60% of the term and having earned all awarded aid versus completing under 60% of the term and requiring a partial return of aid. Questioned Costs: The known monetary error is an over-award of $1,029. Extrapolation of the error across all students who may have been affected estimates total possible monetary error of $9,089. Therefore, the monetary impact of this deficiency does not exceed the reporting threshold of $25,000. Perspective Information: The audit included a detailed testing of 13 files for students who withdrew during the spring term, of which this miscalculation applies to 6; of these, 1 student crossed the 60% completion threshold with the correction and should have had aid returned. Based upon withdrawal dates of the full listing of students who withdrew during the Spring, 4 additional students could have been affected similarly with this miscalculation. Therefore, we consider the error rate as 5 out of the 31 total students who withdrew in the Spring, which is 16.13%. Cause and Effect: For noted withdrawal calculations, the completed day count was not performed per the instructions described in the handbook. Completed day count for the identified students was not reduced by the period related to spring break, which should have reduced the completed day count by nine days. This results in a miscalculation of percentage of Title IV aid earned and could result in monetary error. Recommendation: The University should ensure that the completed number of calendar days in the payment period or period of enrollment is counted correctly utilizing the guidance provided by the Compliance Supplement and the Student Financial Aid Handbook, accounting for scheduled breaks appropriately. View of Responsible Officials: We agree with this finding. After review of this student’s Return to Title IV calculation, it was determined that upon beginning the calculation in the PowerFAIDS system, the Refresh button was not used which would have recalculated the completed days to include the 9-day Spring Break. After reviewing this procedure with PowerFAIDS, it was recommended that we also enter the withdrawal date on the R2T4 tab of the POE screen which forces the system to recalculate the completed days prior to beginning the R2T4 calculation. We have added this step to our Return to Title IV procedures. The corrected Return to Title IV calculation was completed, which resulted in an Unsubsidized loan return of $1,029. The loan funds were returned via the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) system.
2024‐001 Significant Deficiency: Return to Title IV Funds (U.S. Department of Education, William D. Ford Direct Loan Program, ALN #84.268; Federal Pell Grant Program, ALN #84.063; and Federal Supplemental Opportunity Grant Program, ALN #84.007) Criteria: In accordance with 34 CFR 668.22(f), in the calculation of the percentage of payment period and/or period of enrollment completed, the total number of calendar days in a payment and/or enrollment period includes all days within the period, except that institutionally scheduled breaks of at least 5 consecutive calendar days and days in which the student was on an approved leave of absence are excluded from the total number of calendar days in a payment period and/or period of enrollment. Statement of Condition: During the audit, it was noted that the University used the incorrect number of completed days in the payment period or period of enrollment in calculating the percentage of aid earned of withdrawn students. This issue appears to be isolated to Return to Title IV Funds forms completed for students enrolled and withdrawn during the Spring semester, specifically related to miscalculation involving spring break. For certain students, this causes a variance in the percentage of completion as completing over 60% of the term and having earned all awarded aid versus completing under 60% of the term and requiring a partial return of aid. Questioned Costs: The known monetary error is an over-award of $1,029. Extrapolation of the error across all students who may have been affected estimates total possible monetary error of $9,089. Therefore, the monetary impact of this deficiency does not exceed the reporting threshold of $25,000. Perspective Information: The audit included a detailed testing of 13 files for students who withdrew during the spring term, of which this miscalculation applies to 6; of these, 1 student crossed the 60% completion threshold with the correction and should have had aid returned. Based upon withdrawal dates of the full listing of students who withdrew during the Spring, 4 additional students could have been affected similarly with this miscalculation. Therefore, we consider the error rate as 5 out of the 31 total students who withdrew in the Spring, which is 16.13%. Cause and Effect: For noted withdrawal calculations, the completed day count was not performed per the instructions described in the handbook. Completed day count for the identified students was not reduced by the period related to spring break, which should have reduced the completed day count by nine days. This results in a miscalculation of percentage of Title IV aid earned and could result in monetary error. Recommendation: The University should ensure that the completed number of calendar days in the payment period or period of enrollment is counted correctly utilizing the guidance provided by the Compliance Supplement and the Student Financial Aid Handbook, accounting for scheduled breaks appropriately. View of Responsible Officials: We agree with this finding. After review of this student’s Return to Title IV calculation, it was determined that upon beginning the calculation in the PowerFAIDS system, the Refresh button was not used which would have recalculated the completed days to include the 9-day Spring Break. After reviewing this procedure with PowerFAIDS, it was recommended that we also enter the withdrawal date on the R2T4 tab of the POE screen which forces the system to recalculate the completed days prior to beginning the R2T4 calculation. We have added this step to our Return to Title IV procedures. The corrected Return to Title IV calculation was completed, which resulted in an Unsubsidized loan return of $1,029. The loan funds were returned via the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) system.
2024‐001 Significant Deficiency: Return to Title IV Funds (U.S. Department of Education, William D. Ford Direct Loan Program, ALN #84.268; Federal Pell Grant Program, ALN #84.063; and Federal Supplemental Opportunity Grant Program, ALN #84.007) Criteria: In accordance with 34 CFR 668.22(f), in the calculation of the percentage of payment period and/or period of enrollment completed, the total number of calendar days in a payment and/or enrollment period includes all days within the period, except that institutionally scheduled breaks of at least 5 consecutive calendar days and days in which the student was on an approved leave of absence are excluded from the total number of calendar days in a payment period and/or period of enrollment. Statement of Condition: During the audit, it was noted that the University used the incorrect number of completed days in the payment period or period of enrollment in calculating the percentage of aid earned of withdrawn students. This issue appears to be isolated to Return to Title IV Funds forms completed for students enrolled and withdrawn during the Spring semester, specifically related to miscalculation involving spring break. For certain students, this causes a variance in the percentage of completion as completing over 60% of the term and having earned all awarded aid versus completing under 60% of the term and requiring a partial return of aid. Questioned Costs: The known monetary error is an over-award of $1,029. Extrapolation of the error across all students who may have been affected estimates total possible monetary error of $9,089. Therefore, the monetary impact of this deficiency does not exceed the reporting threshold of $25,000. Perspective Information: The audit included a detailed testing of 13 files for students who withdrew during the spring term, of which this miscalculation applies to 6; of these, 1 student crossed the 60% completion threshold with the correction and should have had aid returned. Based upon withdrawal dates of the full listing of students who withdrew during the Spring, 4 additional students could have been affected similarly with this miscalculation. Therefore, we consider the error rate as 5 out of the 31 total students who withdrew in the Spring, which is 16.13%. Cause and Effect: For noted withdrawal calculations, the completed day count was not performed per the instructions described in the handbook. Completed day count for the identified students was not reduced by the period related to spring break, which should have reduced the completed day count by nine days. This results in a miscalculation of percentage of Title IV aid earned and could result in monetary error. Recommendation: The University should ensure that the completed number of calendar days in the payment period or period of enrollment is counted correctly utilizing the guidance provided by the Compliance Supplement and the Student Financial Aid Handbook, accounting for scheduled breaks appropriately. View of Responsible Officials: We agree with this finding. After review of this student’s Return to Title IV calculation, it was determined that upon beginning the calculation in the PowerFAIDS system, the Refresh button was not used which would have recalculated the completed days to include the 9-day Spring Break. After reviewing this procedure with PowerFAIDS, it was recommended that we also enter the withdrawal date on the R2T4 tab of the POE screen which forces the system to recalculate the completed days prior to beginning the R2T4 calculation. We have added this step to our Return to Title IV procedures. The corrected Return to Title IV calculation was completed, which resulted in an Unsubsidized loan return of $1,029. The loan funds were returned via the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) system.
2024‐001 Significant Deficiency: Return to Title IV Funds (U.S. Department of Education, William D. Ford Direct Loan Program, ALN #84.268; Federal Pell Grant Program, ALN #84.063; and Federal Supplemental Opportunity Grant Program, ALN #84.007) Criteria: In accordance with 34 CFR 668.22(f), in the calculation of the percentage of payment period and/or period of enrollment completed, the total number of calendar days in a payment and/or enrollment period includes all days within the period, except that institutionally scheduled breaks of at least 5 consecutive calendar days and days in which the student was on an approved leave of absence are excluded from the total number of calendar days in a payment period and/or period of enrollment. Statement of Condition: During the audit, it was noted that the University used the incorrect number of completed days in the payment period or period of enrollment in calculating the percentage of aid earned of withdrawn students. This issue appears to be isolated to Return to Title IV Funds forms completed for students enrolled and withdrawn during the Spring semester, specifically related to miscalculation involving spring break. For certain students, this causes a variance in the percentage of completion as completing over 60% of the term and having earned all awarded aid versus completing under 60% of the term and requiring a partial return of aid. Questioned Costs: The known monetary error is an over-award of $1,029. Extrapolation of the error across all students who may have been affected estimates total possible monetary error of $9,089. Therefore, the monetary impact of this deficiency does not exceed the reporting threshold of $25,000. Perspective Information: The audit included a detailed testing of 13 files for students who withdrew during the spring term, of which this miscalculation applies to 6; of these, 1 student crossed the 60% completion threshold with the correction and should have had aid returned. Based upon withdrawal dates of the full listing of students who withdrew during the Spring, 4 additional students could have been affected similarly with this miscalculation. Therefore, we consider the error rate as 5 out of the 31 total students who withdrew in the Spring, which is 16.13%. Cause and Effect: For noted withdrawal calculations, the completed day count was not performed per the instructions described in the handbook. Completed day count for the identified students was not reduced by the period related to spring break, which should have reduced the completed day count by nine days. This results in a miscalculation of percentage of Title IV aid earned and could result in monetary error. Recommendation: The University should ensure that the completed number of calendar days in the payment period or period of enrollment is counted correctly utilizing the guidance provided by the Compliance Supplement and the Student Financial Aid Handbook, accounting for scheduled breaks appropriately. View of Responsible Officials: We agree with this finding. After review of this student’s Return to Title IV calculation, it was determined that upon beginning the calculation in the PowerFAIDS system, the Refresh button was not used which would have recalculated the completed days to include the 9-day Spring Break. After reviewing this procedure with PowerFAIDS, it was recommended that we also enter the withdrawal date on the R2T4 tab of the POE screen which forces the system to recalculate the completed days prior to beginning the R2T4 calculation. We have added this step to our Return to Title IV procedures. The corrected Return to Title IV calculation was completed, which resulted in an Unsubsidized loan return of $1,029. The loan funds were returned via the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) system.
2024‐001 Significant Deficiency: Return to Title IV Funds (U.S. Department of Education, William D. Ford Direct Loan Program, ALN #84.268; Federal Pell Grant Program, ALN #84.063; and Federal Supplemental Opportunity Grant Program, ALN #84.007) Criteria: In accordance with 34 CFR 668.22(f), in the calculation of the percentage of payment period and/or period of enrollment completed, the total number of calendar days in a payment and/or enrollment period includes all days within the period, except that institutionally scheduled breaks of at least 5 consecutive calendar days and days in which the student was on an approved leave of absence are excluded from the total number of calendar days in a payment period and/or period of enrollment. Statement of Condition: During the audit, it was noted that the University used the incorrect number of completed days in the payment period or period of enrollment in calculating the percentage of aid earned of withdrawn students. This issue appears to be isolated to Return to Title IV Funds forms completed for students enrolled and withdrawn during the Spring semester, specifically related to miscalculation involving spring break. For certain students, this causes a variance in the percentage of completion as completing over 60% of the term and having earned all awarded aid versus completing under 60% of the term and requiring a partial return of aid. Questioned Costs: The known monetary error is an over-award of $1,029. Extrapolation of the error across all students who may have been affected estimates total possible monetary error of $9,089. Therefore, the monetary impact of this deficiency does not exceed the reporting threshold of $25,000. Perspective Information: The audit included a detailed testing of 13 files for students who withdrew during the spring term, of which this miscalculation applies to 6; of these, 1 student crossed the 60% completion threshold with the correction and should have had aid returned. Based upon withdrawal dates of the full listing of students who withdrew during the Spring, 4 additional students could have been affected similarly with this miscalculation. Therefore, we consider the error rate as 5 out of the 31 total students who withdrew in the Spring, which is 16.13%. Cause and Effect: For noted withdrawal calculations, the completed day count was not performed per the instructions described in the handbook. Completed day count for the identified students was not reduced by the period related to spring break, which should have reduced the completed day count by nine days. This results in a miscalculation of percentage of Title IV aid earned and could result in monetary error. Recommendation: The University should ensure that the completed number of calendar days in the payment period or period of enrollment is counted correctly utilizing the guidance provided by the Compliance Supplement and the Student Financial Aid Handbook, accounting for scheduled breaks appropriately. View of Responsible Officials: We agree with this finding. After review of this student’s Return to Title IV calculation, it was determined that upon beginning the calculation in the PowerFAIDS system, the Refresh button was not used which would have recalculated the completed days to include the 9-day Spring Break. After reviewing this procedure with PowerFAIDS, it was recommended that we also enter the withdrawal date on the R2T4 tab of the POE screen which forces the system to recalculate the completed days prior to beginning the R2T4 calculation. We have added this step to our Return to Title IV procedures. The corrected Return to Title IV calculation was completed, which resulted in an Unsubsidized loan return of $1,029. The loan funds were returned via the Common Origination and Disbursement (COD) system.