Southtowns Record

Hamburg Central School District - Continuing Education (2019M-11)

Government
Hamburg Central School District
Posted by publisher
Jul 3, 2019
Kind
State audit
Topics
Audits and oversight

Publisher's summary

We examined the continuing education department's cash receipts activity and found weaknesses in procedures. We found no significant discrepancies when comparing participant registration forms to cash receipts recorded in the Department's revenue ledger and to bank deposits. However, without duplicate press-numbered, itemized receipts, there is no assurance that all course registration fees paid to the Department were properly accounted for. Further, both the Coordinator and the clerk perform, or have access to perform, all of the same functions in the cash receipts process. As a result, incompatible duties (of receiving and having access to undeposited cash receipts and updating participant registrations and class rosters) were not properly segregated or mitigated by sufficient monitoring and oversight. These exceptions occurred because the Board did not establish a written policy and District officials did not develop detailed procedures to provide guidance for the Department on how to properly account for and handle cash receipts.

Original document

Text · page 5 of 15

for the Department on how to properly account for and handle cash receipts.
Because the Board has not clearly communicated appropriate methods for the
Department to collect, record and deposit cash receipts, the Department did
not have adequate internal controls to ensure that cash receipts were properly
accounted for.

While the Department did have press-numbered, duplicate, itemized cash receipts
books on hand that could have been used, the books generally were not used.
The Coordinator told us that the Department does not routinely use these receipt
books because they consider the participant registration forms that payers submit
to enroll in a course as a cash receipts record.1 However, this is an inadequate
cash receipts record because, for example, it does not contain a sequenced
numbering or provide for a duplicate copy to be retained by both the Department
and the payer. As a result, from September 9, 2016 through October 10, 2017,
a total of only 11 duplicate receipts were used in sequential order totaling $680.
However, during this same time period, the Department’s revenues totaled
approximately $56,000 as recorded by the Business Office in 22 bank deposits
and revenue entries. We compared this amount in total, to amounts indicated as
received on participant registration forms for the same time period and noted no
significant exceptions.2

Due to the noted weaknesses, we sought to determine whether the amount of
revenue reported in total for each course was reasonably similar to the actual
class rosters upon which certain instructors were paid. We examined the
Department’s registration records for all 34 courses offered in the spring 2017
semester for a fee and found that 14 courses were led by instructors who were
paid based on participant registrations as identified on the class roster. We found
that eight instructors were paid on vouchers which indicated approximately 140
participants attended those courses.3 We compared the enrollment headcount
on the vouchers to the headcount on the registration forms in the Department’s
records for each of those 14 courses and noted no exceptions.

We further examined eight of these 14 courses to determine whether participant
payments were deposited timely. There were 97 registration forms which indicated
that participants paid course fees totaling $4,820; 78 by checks totaling $4,525
and six in cash totaling $295.4 We compared the receipt date indicated on the
registration form by the Department to the date of deposit for the 78 checks and

1 The Department will use the press-numbered receipts when a payer requests them to do so.

2 We discussed certain minor exceptions with District officials.

3 Thirteen courses were led by Board-appointed instructors and paid by an hourly rate. Four courses were
subsequently canceled and two courses were conducted without an instructor. Certain instructors led more than
one course.

4 Certain participants paid for multiple courses using the same check, some of which were not courses we
selected in our sample. We excluded those amounts from our review.

  Of f ic e of t he New York State Comptroller  3