Augusta Technical College, Augusta, Georgia, independent accountant's report on applying agreed-upon procedures for the fiscal year ended 2018 June 30

AUGUSTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE AUGUSTA,GEORGIA
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT ON APPLYING AGREEDUPON PROCEDURES FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2018
A Member Institution of the Technical College System of Georgia}

AUGUSTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE - TABLE OF CONTENTS -
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS

Page 1 3

GREG S. GRIFFIN
STATE AUDITOR
(404) 656-2174

DEPARTMENT OF AUDITS AND ACCOUNTS
270 Washington Street, S.W., Suite 1-156 Atlanta, Georgia 30334-8400
March 1, 2019

Members of the State Board of the Technical College System of Georgia Members of the Local Board of Directors of Augusta Technical College
and Mr. Terry D. Elam, President Augusta Technical College
Independent Accountant's Report on Applying Agreed-Upon Procedures
Ladies and Gentlemen:
We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by Augusta Technical College and the Technical College System of Georgia, solely to assist you in evaluating compliance with federal student financial assistance regulations and meeting the requirements of COC Comprehensive Standard 13.6 for the year ended June 30, 2018. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of the parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose. Also included in this report is a section on findings and other matters that came to our attention during our engagement.
The procedures for each Student Financial Assistance Cluster compliance requirement and the associated findings are as follows:
1. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Activities Allowed or Unallowed compliance requirement.
We did not note any exceptions as a result of our procedures.
2. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Cash Management compliance requirement.
We did not note any exceptions as a result of our procedures.
3. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Eligibility compliance requirement.
See FA-2018-001 in the Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for a detail of exceptions noted.
4. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking compliance requirement.
We did not note any exceptions as a result of our procedures. - 1 -

5. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Period of Performance compliance requirement.
We did not note any exceptions as a result of our procedures.
6. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Program Income compliance requirement.
We did not note any exceptions as a result of our procedures.
7. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Reporting compliance requirement.
We did not note any exceptions as a result of our procedures.
8. Complete applicable procedures reflected in the 2018 and/or 2017 OMB Compliance Supplement for the Special Tests and Provisions compliance requirement.
Our review of a sample of 21 students to test the Institution's compliance with 34 CFR 668.22, which is related to the return of Title IV funds, revealed that refunds were not calculated for three students who unofficially withdrew. Based upon last date of attendance documentation, Title IV aid totaling $2,297.20 should have been returned to the U.S Department of Education.
This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. We were not engaged to and did not conduct an examination or review, the objective of which is to express an opinion or conclusion, respectively, on the Federal Student Aid compliance requirements. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion or conclusion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you.
The Georgia Department of Audits and Accounts utilized the assistance of an external specialist in the performance of this engagement. The specialist possesses extensive knowledge and experience in reviewing institutional compliance with requirements related to federal student financial assistance programs.
This report is intended solely for the information and use of Augusta Technical College, the Technical College System of Georgia and the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.
Respectfully,
Greg S. Griffin State Auditor
- 2 -

AUGUSTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2018

FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS

FA-2018-001

Strengthen Controls over the Student Financial Aid Awarding Process

Compliance Requirement: Internal Control Impact: Compliance Impact: Federal Awarding Agency: Pass-Through Entity: CFDA Number and Title:
Federal Award Number(s):
Questioned Costs:

Eligibility Significant Deficiency Nonmaterial Noncompliance U. S. Department of Education None 84.007 Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants 84.033 Federal Work Study Program 84.063 Federal Pell Grant Program P007A170966 (Year: 2018), P033A170966 (Year: 2018), P063P172746 (Year: 2018) $2,220.00

Description: The Institution's Student Financial Assistance Office improperly determined the financial need of eligible students.

Criteria: Provisions included in 34 CFR 668 provide general provisions for administering Student Financial Assistance (SFA) programs and 34 CFR 675, 676, and 690 provide eligibility and other related program requirements that are specific to the Federal Work-Study Program, Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (FSEOG) Program, and Federal Pell Grant Program, respectively.

Condition: A sample of 40 financial assistance files was selected to determine if financial assistance was properly calculated and disbursed to eligible students. The following deficiencies were noted:

1. One student in the sample was qualified to receive an additional $740.00 in Federal Pell Grant Program funds that were not disbursed.

2. One student in the sample was not in compliance with the Institution's published satisfactory academic progress (SAP) policies. Federal regulations (34 CFR 668.32 and 668.34) state that a student is eligible to receive financial assistance under Title IV programs if satisfactory academic progress is maintained. One student should have been placed on financial aid suspension as they did not meet the quantitative requirement of SAP and did not submit an acceptable appeal form, which resulted in SFA over disbursements totaling $2,220.00.

In addition, per Federal regulations, a student's SAP appeal must provide information regarding what has changed in the student's situation that will allow the student to demonstrate SAP at the next evaluation. However, the Institution's SAP policy did not include this element associated with the appeal process.

Questioned Cost: Questioned costs of $2,220.00, with likely questioned costs of $224,781.74, were identified for the students who received student financial assistance in excess of their eligibility. The following CFDA number is affected by the known and likely questioned costs: 84.063.

- 3 -

AUGUSTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2018
Cause: In discussing these deficiencies with management, they stated that Pell amounts were not disbursed properly due to adjustments made to the student's enrollment that were not captured appropriately in the student information system. In addition, SAP appeals were reviewed by one individual rather than a committee, which led to the approval of an unacceptable SAP appeal form. Furthermore, the SAP policy did not include all appropriate components due to an oversight that occurred in the creation and approval of the policy. Effect or Potential Effect: The Institution was not in compliance with Federal regulations concerning awarding of SFA funds to students. In addition, the Institution approved inappropriate satisfactory academic progress appeals and awarded a student funds in excess of eligibility. Recommendation: The Institution should review its processes and procedures for determining each student's financial aid eligibility. Where vulnerable, the Institution should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures, including the Institution's satisfactory academic progress policy, to ensure that correct amounts will be awarded to students in conformity with financial need requirements. Additionally, the Institution should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are properly implemented. The Institution should also contact the U.S. Department of Education regarding resolution of this finding. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plans: We concur with this finding. To ensure that student financial assistance is disbursed appropriately after student enrollment adjustments occur, the Institution will modify rules within the student information system to allow batch processing of aid to be performed throughout the term rather than only at the beginning of the term. In addition, the SAP appeal process will be improved to include a committee review. Furthermore, the SAP policy will be revised to reflect all required components. Estimated Completion Date: March 1, 2019 Contact Person: Beverly Smyre Hines, Financial Aid Director Telephone: (706) 771-4156 Email: bsmyre@augustatech.edu
- 4 -