A Performance Audit
An Audit Report on Selected Grants to Public Community Colleges at the Texas Workforce Commission
The Texas Workforce Commission (Commission) has sufficient controls in place to help ensure that it awards Skills Development Fund Program (Program) grants in accordance with certain state laws, rules, and Commission policies and procedures. However, the Commission should update its Program grant agreements to ensure that all requirements are consistent and clear to minimize the risk of an overpayment. The Commission also should ensure that all agreements are signed prior to their effective dates.
The Commission has implemented a monitoring framework to help ensure that Program grantees comply with requirements. However, the Commission should strengthen certain controls to reduce the risk of overpayments and ensure that all grants are monitored on a regular basis.
Auditors visited the Austin Community College and the Alamo Colleges District and reviewed two Regular Skills Development grants at each college. Auditors determined that the colleges (1) had sufficient documentation to support most of the training hours reported and (2) had not exceeded their administrative budget allowance for each grant. However, auditors identified instances of billing errors at both colleges.
The Commission Has Sufficient Controls to Award Grants in Accordance with Certain Requirements; However, It Should Update Its Grant Agreements
The Commission awarded grants in accordance with certain requirements tested. However, the Commission did not always ensure that language within grant agreements was consistent and clearly defined requirements. Specifically:
• Grant agreements reviewed did not clearly communicate how long participants trained should remain employed.
• The two grant agreements that auditors reviewed at the Alamo Colleges District did not clearly define what types of costs could be classified as program costs and what should be classified as administrative costs. As a result, auditors could not determine whether $126,384 of salaries and benefits associated with the executive positions for both grant agreements tested were correctly classified as program costs.
The Commission did not have an adequate process to ensure that both parties sign grant agreements prior to the grant agreement’s effective date.
The Commission Implemented Controls for Determining Participants’ Eligibility, Achievement of Grant Deliverables, and Final Payment; However, the Commission Should Improve Those Controls to Reduce the Risk of Inaccurate Payments
While the Participant Performance Report tool adequately calculates the total number of participants trained and training hours delivered, it does not identify participants who do not complete the number of required training hours.
The Final Payment Report tool, under most circumstances, accurately calculates the maximum reimbursable amount at closeout. However, the Commission should make improvements to the report to help ensure that the final payment is accurate under all circumstances.
The Commission Implemented a Comprehensive Monitoring Process; However, It Should Strengthen That Process to Ensure That It Identifies Certain Inconsistencies and Errors and Monitors All Grants
The Commission has a process in place to monitor its Program grants; however, it should strengthen that process to ensure that it regularly monitors all grants.
The Commission should strengthen its reviews of the monthly Trainee Information Forms to better identify potential errors that could lead to participant ineligibility.
The Commission’s Onsite Monitoring Visits Help Determine Grantees’ Compliance with Grant Agreement Requirements
The Commission conducts desk reviews and onsite visits to verify the accuracy of grantees’ self-reported information and determine grantees’ compliance with grant agreement requirements.
While Grantees Had Sufficient Documentation to Support Most Expenditures, Auditors Identified Instances of Billing Errors
Auditors conducted site visits at two grantees, Austin Community College and the Alamo Colleges District, and determined that both grantees had sufficient documentation to support most of the training hours reported to the Commission and had not exceeded their grant agreements’ administrative budget allowances as of January 2017. However, auditors identified billing errors at both grantees.
The Commission Issued Annual Reports for Its Program as Required by Statute; However, the Commission Should Strengthen Its Processes to Ensure That the Information Presented Is Complete and Accurate
The Commission notified the Office of the Governor and the Legislature of the status of the Program at the end of each fiscal year, as required by Texas Labor Code, Section 303.006(c). However, certain information was incomplete or inaccurate in the published annual Program reports for fiscal years 2015 and 2016.
The Commission Established Controls Over Its Information Systems; However, It Should Improve Certain Information Technology Controls
The Commission implemented adequate information technology controls for the key information systems that support the Program. However, the Commission should improve user access controls to minimize the risk of unauthorized access to its Contract Administration and Tracking System.
Graphics, Media, Supporting documents