A Review of Reports Submitted by Regional Planning Commissions
October 2010
Report Number 11-009
Overall Conclusion
All of the 24 regional planning commissions (RPCs) in Texas submitted all statutorily required financial, productivity, performance, audit, and salary reports to the State Auditor's Office. Those reports were due to the State Auditor's Office between June 1, 2009, and June 30, 2010. Submitting those reports is important because, according to their most recent annual financial statements, the 24 RPCs:
- Received $812,472,401 in local, state, and federal funds.
- Spent $13,460,469 in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds.
While the 24 RPCs submitted all statutorily required reports, the Panhandle Regional Planning Commission was the only RPC that submitted all of the specific information required by statute and/or the Texas Administrative Code. For example, 2 (8.3 percent) of the 24 RPCs did not submit an explanation of any method the RPC used to compute an expense, including computation of any indirect cost of the RPC, as required by statute and the Texas Administrative Code. In addition, 13 (54.2 percent) of the 24 RPCs submitted productivity and performance reports that did not include a comparison of planned to actual performance for any programs, as required by the Texas Administrative Code.
Statute and the Texas Administrative Code do not provide specific guidance on the format that RPCs should use to report productivity and performance information. As a result, the RPCs used a variety of formats to prepare their productivity and performance reports. Auditors also observed that a given RPC could use different formats to report productivity and performance information for different programs at that RPC. In addition:
- The productivity and performance reports did not provide information that indicated whether the reported performance measures were organizational measures or output and outcome measures required to be reported to any entity sponsoring the programs, as required by the Texas Administrative Code.
- Some of the productivity and performance reports specifically identified and quantified performance measure information, but others summarized performance measure information and program information.
Certified public accountants (CPAs) issued unqualified opinions on the financial statements for all 24 RPCs. However, CPAs' audits of the most recent annual financial statements for 3 (12.5 percent) of the 24 RPCs identified material weaknesses in internal controls over financial reporting or compliance with major federal and state award programs. Those three RPCs were:
- The Alamo Area Council of Governments (see Chapter 1-A).
- The Central Texas Council of Governments (see Chapter 1-E).
- The Texoma Council of Governments (see Chapter 1-W).
According to their audited financial statements, those three RPCs are taking steps to address the material weaknesses identified.
The information the RPCs submitted indicated that RPCs have multiple programs and functions. According to the RPCs' audited financial statements, some of the programs on which the RPCs spent the largest amounts of funds included work force development, aging, and transportation. Appendix 4 includes general descriptions of some of the major programs that RPCs provide.
Contact the SAO about this report.
Download the Acrobat version of this report. (.pdf)
If you prefer an HTML version, follow this link to an Adobe site which converts PDF files to HTML.