|
|
 |
Certified
Approver Question & Answer Series
(EFS-related
questions)
|
| Date |
Change or Clarification |
7/3/08 |
CA
Question & Answer Series - Certified Approvers' roles moving
forward
Question: The
role of the CA changing as sponsored EFS is unfolding. What training
will be provided for CAs and when will it occur? Will there be a
forum where we can ask questions and get clarifications on the changing
policies?
Answer: OAR has been working
with the EFS team on a CA tutorial which should be released soon.
We'll be certain everyone gets notified. In the interim, please
visit the revised policies
page for additional information. |
| |
| 7/1/08 |
CA Question & Answer Series
- Maintaining paper copies in an electonic world
Question:
In the paperless world of EFS, what paper documentation of financial
transactions are units recommended or required to maintain on file
locally? Are there best practices for internal and external audit
purposes?
Answer:
Anything that cannot be maintained and accessed electronically to
provide validation for transactions will need to be maintained in
paper files. This will be the case for CA approved transactions
as well as audit purposes. |
Certified
Approver Question & Answer Series
(legacy
systems-related questions)
|
Date |
Change or Clarification |
10/14/05 |
Article
of Interest: Beyond the A-133 Audit: Expanding the Focus
Auditors are increasingly
reviewing the detail behind the institutional forms or signature
requirements and requesting proof of award-specific approvals and
procedures that show knowledge of and compliance with the grant
terms and condition. Auditors are going beyond the normal, general
financial system requirements and are wanting to validate in-depth
understanding and compliance with award terms, on a transaction-by-transaction
basis.
Read the complete article at this link: NCURA_Article |
03/24/04 |
CA
Question & Answer Series - Hints on answering the questions
on a CPS
Question:
When processing a Contract for Professional Service in Forms Nirvana,
how do I determine the answer to the following question relating
to sponsored projects:
"If sponsored funds will
be used to pay for this service, is the work to be performed a portion
of the programmatic activities for the sponsored project?"
Answer:
Examples of when
the question is answered
No.
- Is the CPS made out to an individual?
- Is the service being provided part of the vendors normal business
?
- Does the vendor provide these services or goods to many different
customers?
- Does the vendor have a price list, catalog, operates in a competitive
market?
- Is the service being provided a speaking fee, honorarium?
Examples of when
the question is answered Yes.
- In the proposal they provided a separate budget, budget justification
and agreed to comply with Sponsoring agencies terms and conditions.
If so, answer yes.
- The vendor is responsible for programmatic decision making relating
to their portion of the work. If so, answer yes.
- Does the vendor need to comply with sponsor requirements (IRB,
IACUC, rebudgeting, IP restrictions, etc..) If so, answer
yes.
In these instances establishing
a subcontract is the correct process for continuing with payment. |
| 03/17/04 |
CA Question & Answer Series
- Multi-line document approvals Question:
On a multi-line document including sponsored expenses for more than
one area, is it true that one CA can approve the entire document?
Answer: Yes, Financial
Forms Nirvana will allow this action, HOWEVER, approval of an unallowable
expense on a sponsored project is in violation of OMB Circular A-21.
CA approval of transactions where the CA has insufficient
knowledge of the project also violates U of M Approvals Policy 3.9
and the CA Roles & Responsibilities. When approving documents, Certified
Approvers are "attesting" that the individual transactions are allowable
on the project(s) and compliant with the relevant University policies
and external sponsor regulations.
To ensure each transaction
is allowable on the project and being approved appropriately, the
following best practices guidelines are suggested. The immediate
benefit of this best practice is assurance that charges are being
correctly applied and approved.
- Prepare document limiting the number of different AREAS to three
(3). This is necessary as FFN has an upper limit of three (3)
approvers. (This routing limitation is being addressed for
the new financial system.)
- In the FFN approver fields, enter the CAs for the appropriate
AREAs so the document is routed appropriately. A list of CAs by
AREA is found on the CA webpage (www.oar.umn.edu/CA/).
- When approving, each CA should add a statement identifying the
debit/credit lines being approved and, if needed, justification
as outlined in the Document Justification job aid.
LINKS: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a021/a021.html
http://www.fpd.finop.umn.edu/groups/ppd/documents/policy/ApprovalsRouting.cfm
http://www.research.umn.edu/spp/roles/ca.html |
| 09/17/03 |
CA Question & Answer Series:
Personal calls while traveling on sponsored projects Question:
If an employee is on travel status and traveling on sponsored funds,
is a personal phone call home an allowable expense?
Answer: It depends first
on allowability of travel by sponsor and then on the discretion
of the department/college.
In order to answer the
question, OAR, Audits, and SPA reviewed existing language in Federal
and University policy.
For Federal projects,
OMB Circular A-21, Section J48a states, "Travel costs are the expenses
for transportation, lodging, subsistence, and related items incurred
by employees who are in travel status on official business of the
institution. Such costs may be charged ...in accordance
with the institution's travel policy and practices consistently
applied to all institutional travel activities".
University policy 3.8.3
states, “An individual traveling on University business should neither
gain nor lose personal funds as a result of that travel. Employee
reimbursements must … clearly indicate prudent use of public funds”.
Telephone calls for University business are considered reimbursable
and other calls are at the department’s discretion.
Important Note: University
policy can be more restrictive (not less) than a sponsor. If a sponsor
does not allow travel, University policy cannot be less restrictive
by allowing such costs (phone calls, lodging, etc).
What is the proper
documentation for travel costs? Expense justification explaining
who is traveling, what is the purpose of the travel, where, when,
why travel is necessary and how the travel benefits/relate to the
CUFS account charged, must be included on the document.
Policy References:
Policy 3.8.3 -Traveling on University Business
http://www.fpd.finop.umn.edu/groups/ppd/documents/policy/Travel.cfm
Appendix I: Reimbursable/Non-reimbursable Expenses
http://www.fpd.finop.umn.edu/groups/ppd/documents/appendix/TravelAppI.cfm
OMB Circular A-21 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a021/a021.html |
| 03/20/03 |
CA Question & Answer Series:
Hiring a former employee on a CFPS Question:
How much time must lapse before a former University of Minnesota
employee can be paid as a contractor?
Answer: Karen Klein of
HRMS responded to this question by stating, "There is no set number
of months where a former employee could suddenly then be paid as
a contractor." The question posed on the CFPS worksheet reviewed
by payroll specifies the current calendar year. The reasoning for
this is based upon the IRS 20 common law factors and the potential
for an IRS audit. The IRS would view an individual who receives
a W-2 and a 1099-M from the University in the same calendar (tax)
year as a flag worthy of an audit.
The flow sheet on the
CFPS-Purchasing a Professional Service website was designed to be
a guideline for this process. It does not supercede the worksheet.
It is not meant to suggest that anyone who has not worked as an
employee at the University in the last 12 months should automatically
be hired as a contractor or that anyone who has worked at the University
in the last 12 months should automatically be placed on payroll.
It is meant as a reminder that the individual’s employment history
has bearing in the process.
Therefore both sources are accurate. While
the employment history of the individual should be considered as
the purchasing flow sheet instructs, the worksheet question should
be answered as literally as it is posed. The box should be checked
yes if the individual has worked at the University in the last calendar
year. Whenever you have any questions in regard to the status of
the individual, please contact payroll for further clarification.
For more information, see the Guide to the Worksheet for Consulting
and Professional Services at http://www1.umn.edu/ohr/payroll/CFPSworksheetguide.pdf |
| 01/27/03 |
CA Question Series: Indirect Cost Rate. The
following question was faxed from the University of M&
Answer innesota to NCURA during the 1/27/03 videoconference.
Question: From A-110, section 23, it is
clear that universities may claim as Cost Sharing/Match any "Unrecovered
Indirect Costs" resulting from cases in which federal sponsors award
Indirect Cost Rates at less than the institution's federally negotiated
rates, with prior sponsor approval. However, can institutions
also apply this "Unrecovered Indirect Cost" rule to direct costs
for Cost Share/Match from non-sponsored/institutional accounts?
Answer: The same indirect
cost rate should be applied to both the government-funded portion
of the project and the university-funded portion.
Most federal agencies
that place restrictions on indirect cost recovery do not permit
grantees to use the "unrecovered indirect costs" to meet cost sharing
requirements. You should be extremely careful about documenting
sponsor approval to do this. If you intend to use these types
of costs to meet a cost share/matching commitment, you should reflect
this in your proposal. A mini-budget showing the details of how
the cost share/match will be met should be provided along with the
verbal explanation.
Remember, the sponsor
must specifically give approval to do this.
Look here http://www.oar.umn.edu/CA/Unrecovered_Indirect_Costs.cfm
for three examples compiled by Steve Bradley and Chris Larson, SPA. |
| 11/06/01 |
CA Question & Answer Series:
Travel Question: Is approval/justification
required on a Travel Reimbursement form (ETR/TP) even though this
has already been documented and received previously on a CUFS TA
form?
Can we not use the same
process as we do with the PO/PV transactions where if approvals
are received on the PO, no additional approvals are needed on the
PV transaction?
Answer: No to the latter
question. Yes, you are required to receive approval and provide
justification both when arranging travel and at the time travel
is reimbursed.
Why is travel treated
different? IRS regulations require that "travel expenses must be
supported by adequate contemporaneous documentation". Essentially,
this means that travel expense documentation must be of the actual
expenses incurred (not projected). If our procedures do not comply
with the requirements, University travel reimbursements to employees
do not qualify as a legitimate University business expenses for
IRS purposes.
In summary, with both
arranging and reimbursing our travel, it is necessary to have more
stringent controls over our travel process.
Important policy references: Arranging
Travel 3.8.3.1 and Travel
Reimbursement 3.8.3.2 |
| 10/12/01 |
CA Question& Answer Series
- HSA Approvals Question:
During our 10/3/01 meeting with Mark Bohnhorst, concern was expressed
that HSAs were not receiving any approvals in Peoplesoft. This was
seen as a significant risk because HSAs adjust effort/payroll, the
largest expenditure on most sponsored projects. Should CAs be approving
these transactions?
Answer: The first
part of the answer addressing this issue comes directly from the
CA Approvals and Routing Grid:
"Approvals should follow
procedures outlined in Training Services materials. All salary cost
transfers attempting to post charges to sponsored accounts after
Effort Certification are systematically forwarded to SPA, which
approves only adjustments involving very extenuating circumstances
that are fully documented and justified. For details please refer
to Cost Transfer Policy."
That said, and after
discussions with Training Services, Internal Audit Managers, and
SPA/Effort, it was determined that adequate controls exist for HSA
transactions. The high risk HSA transactions are receiving an approval
by the most appropriate unit, the SPA/Effort unit. Adding approvals
will slow this process down and potentially create a situation where
we are in violation of our cost transfer policy. Therefore, it is
not recommended that additional CA approvals be added.
The critical control
point for departmental approvals on any sponsored project payroll
transaction (adjustment or direct charge) is our effort certification
statement signatures. Our effort statements should accurately reflect
the payroll charged and NOT be signed if errors exist.
If a situation exists where the payroll
individuals are making errors or are simply just new University
employees, we recommend that additional monitoring be put in place
to assure accuracy. This monitoring can be done though periodic
review of existing payroll reports or review of work before data
entry occurs. We hope that if errors continue, the individual is
either given additional training or the entry is assigned elsewhere.
Everyone agreed that these transactions are high priority and trust
that the entry is being done by individuals that understand the
importance of their responsibility. |
| Last updated:
01/16/2009 |
|