INTER-INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEE ON FINANCE &
ACCOUNTING
Post Award Administration
Meeting Minutes
Embassy Altamonte Springs, FL
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
Post Award Administration Subcommittee (1:00 PM – 2:20PM)
Members:
Brenda Harrell, (UF), Chair
Angie Rowe, FSU
Jim Wilkie, FAU
Beth Dhondt, USF (phone)
Donna Frazee, UWF
Michelle Greco, UCF
Cheresa Boston, UNF
Rebecca Puig, USF
Kim Bendickson, NCF
Members Absent:
Wanda Ford, FAMU
Tracy Clark, UCF
Other Attendees:
Valerie Stevenson, UNF
Kate Hebert, ICOFA
Jennifer Condon, USF
Brad Bennett, UF
Alexander Mirabel, FIU (phone)
Glen Carson, UCF
Kelly D’Agostino, UCF
Alan West, UF
Nancy Viafora, UNF
Doyle Pitt, UWF (phone)
Jose Zubimendi, FIU (phone)
Brenda Johnson, UCF
Russ Nally, USF
Aida Reus, FIU
Bonnie Bair, FIU
Barbara Matthews, FIU
William Pollard, UWF
Andrea Bynum, FIU
Dan Mayo, UCF
Sheila Rojas, FPU
Michelle Chiu-Hung, FIU (phone)
Sherry Adams, UF
a) ONR visit, UF - Federal Property
Sherry Adams
UF is undergoing an ONR visit and have a scheduled desk review every year to look at selfassessment and the desk manual. They had a site visit last year and FSU is also undergoing a
site visit. At FSU they are looking for the self-assessment. As part of that assessment they
are looking for the 10 items for property management from acquisition all the way to
disposition and who is designated to handle those steps. They also reviewed the property
1|Page
manual and they were asked to add more detail to this manual. No one else had been
contacted for an audit.
FSU responded to their desk audit and is due tomorrow. They had not been doing a selfassessment but are now instituting a procedure. They do not have a separate manual for
federal property and are not aware of a threshold for the desk audit.
FAU was affected by the change in threshold for DO2.
ONR is the agency in charge of federal property. They are reviewing all property from a
federal acquisition regardless of if the grant is still open or not.
b) Review and Approval of Meeting Agenda
n) Use of lab equipment paid for from grant funds for other grants/purposes - Kim
Bendickson
c) Review and Approval of Meeting Minutes
Approved with no changes
d) Subcommittee Changes
Rebecca Puig is the new member for USF.
e) Action Items
a. State Agencies – Payment of Invoices issues
Attachments
DFS White paper
Survey – issues with state invoicing
Brenda Harrell
DFS white paper:
There were action items that were not followed-up on, including number 7, stating DFS will
review CFO memo for possible revisions. They had marked this as closed, and DFS says it
has been revised but no one has seen evidence of the revision. The agencies are requiring
detailed ledgers be maintained, but the 1997/98 memo recommends state agencies accept
detailed ledgers on a random basis. The memo does not contain the word “shall” and
therefore the agencies are requiring for all invoices instead of random samples.
Item #8 on the white paper is regarding the documentation requirements and sufficient
support. DFS is to draft language regarding sampling and quoted a 1996/97 CFO memo
that eliminates state universities from having to provide detailed ledgers and they
recommend each agency consult their legal office for sampling.
Item #15 is regarding invoice processing training. They replied that the invoice processing
requirements are discussed in both advance accountability training and the new Florida
certified contract manager course. This is a joint course provided by the Dept of
Management Services and Dept of Financial Services. There has not been a response to the
request to know if current staff were being required to attend training or just new employees.
A website is supposed to be developed, should have been available in June last year (item
#16). Brenda will inquire when this website will be made available.
2|Page
New CFO memo #02 in 2012/13 Contract and Grant Review and related payment
processing requirements, but it does not appear to supersede any of the memos as far back
as what has been discussed above.
The CFO memos are all available at myfloridaCFO.com; the links to the CFO memos are on
the left side on the website.
f) DFS Response
Brenda Harrell
We did collect new issues from the universities dealing with state agencies. They no longer
want to pay fringe benefits on old grants and are stating that it is due to DFS. DFS has yet
to respond to this issue. It was recommended to ask the agency to send the documentation
as to where DFS stated that fringe is no longer to be paid on research activities.
UF had to write a letter promising to run cost sharing 3 times per year. The agency again
stated that it was a DFS requirement. FAU also received a 37 page contract from the Dept
of Agriculture requesting a lot of documentation before they will make payments.
UF also received approval for their travel form approved by DFS. Some agencies were
aware of this approval, but we are unaware of how they were informed. FSU would like to
utilize the same process, as they also use PeopleSoft. UF travel form was approved by DFS
via e-mail.
Action Item: Kate or Brenda to send out the approved travel form.
It was requested that all issues be sent to Kate so she can consolidate and get them to
Brenda to send to DFS.
g) Problem Payer List
UF – Hearing health Science
USF – RFID Solutions
USF – Keilir Atlantic Center of Excellency
FIU – Pacific Consensus (had been previously added)
Brenda Harrell
h) Audit Updates
Brenda Harrell
FAU – They just had the exit interview for A-133. The Financial Aid office had some issues
regarding segregation of controls within the ERP system. They also have an old NSF audit
going on for about 2 ½ years, and just received notice that the audit is closed.
NCF – A-133 audit sited ERP access issues.
USF – Received 2 written findings for their A-133 audit, related to verification of the last
date of academic activity and R&D. Five purchasing cards were used for registration fees
and service center charges for telecommunication costs schedule rates.
FSU – Has several audits on-going, they had a visit for the MSF mag lab review, NSF review
and ONR desk review.
3|Page
UF – A-133 audit had no findings. They are in the final stages of NSF audit by an outside
firm, Williams, Smith, & Brown. The same firm is preforming the NSF audit for both FSU
and UF. The two month rule was the biggest concern and it is still unclear when the 2
month rule starts. UF determined they would use the calendar year. Some other universities
are using the academic year. The auditors said if the students were named in the grant they
are subject to 2 month rule and UF states they should not be included.
UF’s HHS audit is still going on; it has been going on for 4 or 5 years. They came back on
campus and are auditing the year UF converted to PeopleSoft. They are concentrating on
effort reporting, it has been a very time consuming audit. There was information posted
about project based effort reporting and the auditors determined that the California
Universities could not support the data. The project based reports do not always reconcile
to the financial statements. Brenda will keep the group updated.
UWF – DOL and A-133 with no findings.
i) NSF’s 2/9 Rule
Brenda Harrell
What are other universities using for the 2 month rule for year, calendar, academic or fiscal?
FSU, NCF, UWF and UNF all use academic, others were unsure.
FSU and UF will get together to discuss the 2 month rule and which year to use.
j) Maximus Call follow-up
Jim Wilkie
As a follow-up to yesterday's meeting with Maximus, Kris Rhodes mentioned that although CAS
502 items are now allowable on federal projects when they are appropriate, they may still need
prior approval from the sponsor. Can you check with your FDP colleagues to clarify whether prior
approvals to "rebudget between cost categories" and the "inclusion of costs requiring prior
approval" would continue to be waived for awards subject to FDP? The current FDP matrix
would waive acquiring prior approval for those costs which require prior approval under the Cost
Principles (UG).
FAU consulting group came in and they think there has to be prior approval for items that
are CAS 502. At FAU, some PIs thought because of uniform guidance, they did not have to
go through approval to buy attractive items. FAU is taking the stance that people still have
to have approval to buy such items. The approval occurs during the proposal process.
FAU is coming up on a base year and they just got 5 points, so not sure if they are going to
do another proposal.
UF did not change the practice of going through the approval process to buy attractive
items. The ERP system blocks users from using certain cost codes pertaining to buying
items such as computers. Even if the equipment is in the proposal, they still require separate
approval.
UFs base year is 2014, new UCA could increase rate by as much as 3 points in indirect cost
returns. UCA is a separate submission. Since most of the rest of the country is in the mid50s they are hoping to get an increase. They did not take an extension.
4|Page
k) Update on Omni Circular /2CFR200
Brenda Harrell
New circular was effective December 26, 2014.
UF created a website to provide guidance regarding the new procedures based on the new
circular. They had too many departments asking questions regarding putting the 1%
administration salaries on the grants and other questions regarding the new circular. In
order to stop that influx, they set up the website and stated that a minimum of 20% of the
faculty’s time must be spent on the award to ask for the 1% to be included on the grant
request.
UF has too many audits to not continue to do effort reporting and this is included in the
website they have created. During UF’s DHHS audit they are responding by asking DHHS
to look at what UF is doing now as far as effort reporting. UF is not getting rid of any of
the effort “internal controls”, payroll still needs to be reviewed and documented.
The part of the circular on the procurement threshold for anything on a grant over $3K
needs to go through the competitive bid process has been delayed 6 months. No one had
any updates on this topic. COGAR is involved and trying to get this changed.
l) Training Opportunities
Financial Research Administrators – March 5-7 in Orlando, FL
Brenda Harrell
m) Other comments questions
Brenda Harrell
Brenda made a request for topics for the agenda. This subcommittee is for sharing and
needs participation from all universities. Hoping more people will send in agenda items for
future meetings.
n) Use of lab equipment paid for from grant funds, for other grants
Kim Bendickson
Sarasota County wants to have one of New College’s employees complete experiments on a
piece of equipment that New College acquired through a grant. How do others allocate
costs out?
Other universities have an auxiliary committee, but New College does not. UF will share a
template that they use for a similar situation. It includes unit of cost, person’s time, a selfdeveloped administrative overhead rate, depreciation, university facilities, use of equipment,
use of materials, market comparison, UBIT, verification they are not taking business away
from the local community and cannot have excess income.
There needs to be a formal contract and every 2 years be reviewed as a recharge center. UF
will charge internal as well as external customers. UF and FAU recharge policy limits,
university mission.
The biggest question is “Does it support the university’s mission?”
5|Page
UF also has animal services tracking, for all aspects of the service. FAU allows outside
agencies to rent/lease space for their animals.
o) Charge grant for use of university vehicles
Donna Frazee
DFS has told UF to charge mileage for state grants but all others are charged actual mileage
as long as the employees are not being reimbursed from travel.
6|Page