New for 2013 SF-SAC Items

Page 1 - Auditors Required to Report EIN Page 3 - Designation for Federal Loans and

Loan Guarantees Page 4 – Standardized Finding Reference

Number Format – Year hyphen and three digit finding number

Page 4 – Expanded Information to Allow for Three- way Link

PDF – Unlocked, Unencrypted, Text Searchable (new function to upload and text 85% encryption requirement July 2012)

Proposed Solution

Auditor complete Page 3 by CFDA lineFAC produce template to generate and pre-populated new Page 4 for CFDA lines based on indicated number of audit findingsAuditor complete Page 4 template to provide information by audit finding number.

Finding reference number (consistent format) Type of compliance requirement Type of finding (Modified Opinion, Other N/C, MW,

SD, Other) Questioned costs – Y or N

2013 Form SF-SAC Page 3Form SF-SAC Single Audit Data Collection Form REPORT ID:419455 VERSION:2Part III: FEDERAL PROGRAMS Continued9. FEDERAL AWARDS EXPENDED DURING FISCAL YEAR

Page 3 Row N

umber

Federal Agency Prefix (a)

Extension (b)

R&D(c)

Loan/Loan Guarantee (d)

ARRA(e)

Name of Federal program(f)

Amount expended (g)

Direct award (h)

Major program

(i)

If yes, type of audit report (j)

Num

ber of Findings (k)

1 93 001 N N N Example Program 1 $613,265 Y Y Q 12 93 002 N N N Example Program 2 $729,397 Y Y A 13 93 003 N N N Example Program 3 $450,516 Y Y Q 14 93 004 N N N Example Program 4 $422,922 Y Y U 25 93 005 N N N Example Program 5 $305,678 Y Y U 26 93 006 N N N Example Program 6 $1,206,013 N Y U 17 93 007 N N N Example Program 7 $3,198,818 Y Y U 18 93 008 N N N Example Program 8 $185,264 Y N U 0 Example of program with no findings - Not appear on Page 49 93 009 N N N Example Program 9 $988,176 Y Y U 110 93 010 N N N Example Program 10 $1,200,369 Y Y U 111 93 011 N N N Example Program 11 CFDA line a $435,982 Y Y U 112 93 011 N N N Example Program 11 CFDA line b $173,906 Y Y U 113 93 011 N N N Example Program 11 CFDA line c $729,881 Y Y U 1

14 93 012 N N N Example Program 12 Part of Cluster X $399,841 Y Y Q 115 93 013 N N N Example Program 13 Part of Cluster X $900,157 Y Y Q 116 93 014 N N N Example Program 14 Part of Cluster X $100,397 Y Y Q 0

$12,040,582

CFDA NumberMajor

program

Example of programs with multiple findings. Page 4 will have corresponding number of lines (in this case two)

Example of finding and multiple CFDA lines.

Example of cluster with qualified opinion and finding not affecting all CFDAs. Qualified opinion runs to cluster. FAC Edit will change to allow modified opinion and no finding.

TOTAL FEDERAL AWARDS EXPENDED ---------------->

NEW FIELD

NEW FIELD

2013 Page 4 Completed Example

Types of Finding

Page 3 Row N

umber (a)

CFDA Prefix

(b)

CFDA Extension (c)

Name of Federal program(f) Finding

Reference Number

(d)

Type(s) of Compliance

Requirement(s) (e)

Modified O

pinion (f)

Other N

onCompliance (g)

Material W

eakness (h)

Significant Defiency (i)

Other (j)

Questioned Costs? Y/N

(k)

1 93 001 Example Program 1 2013-001 E X N2 93 002 Example Program 2 2013-002 AB X X Y3 93 003 Example Program 3 2013-003 I X X Y4 93 004 Example Program 4 2013-004 J X N4 93 004 Example Program 4 2013-005 C X X N5 93 005 Example Program 5 2013-006 I X X N5 93 005 Example Program 5 2013-007 E X N6 93 006 Example Program 6 2013-008 F X N7 93 007 Example Program 7 2013-009 N X N9 93 009 Example Program 9 2013-002 AB X X Y10 93 010 Example Program 10 2013-003 I X N11 93 011 Example Program 11 CFDA line a 2013-010 G X N12 93 011 Example Program 11 CFDA line b 2013-010 G X N13 93 011 Example Program 11 CFDA line c 2013-010 G X N14 93 012 Example Program 12 Part of Cluster X 2013-011 E X X N15 93 013 Example Program 13 Part of Cluster X 2013-011 E X X N

Example of all 9 possible

combinations of types of findings.

Example of cluster with finding affecting only some of programs in cluster.

Example finding affecting multiple programs-same type of finding (93.002 & 93.009)

Example finding affecting multiple programs-different type of finding (93.003 & 93.010)

Example of finding and multiple CFDA lines

2013 Page 4 Completed Example

Types of Finding

Page 3 Row N

umber (a)

CFDA Prefix

(b)

CFDA Extension (c)

Name of Federal program(f) Finding

Reference Number

(d)

Type(s) of Compliance

Requirement(s) (e)

Modified O

pinion (f)

Other N

onCompliance (g)

Material W

eakness (h)

Significant Defiency (i)

Other (j)

Questioned Costs? Y/N

(k)

1 93 001 Example Program 1 2013-001 E X N2 93 002 Example Program 2 2013-002 AB X X Y3 93 003 Example Program 3 2013-003 I X X Y4 93 004 Example Program 4 2013-004 J X N4 93 004 Example Program 4 2013-005 C X X N5 93 005 Example Program 5 2013-006 I X X N5 93 005 Example Program 5 2013-007 E X N6 93 006 Example Program 6 2013-008 F X N7 93 007 Example Program 7 2013-009 N X N9 93 009 Example Program 9 2013-002 AB X X Y10 93 010 Example Program 10 2013-003 I X N11 93 011 Example Program 11 CFDA line a 2013-010 G X N12 93 011 Example Program 11 CFDA line b 2013-010 G X N13 93 011 Example Program 11 CFDA line c 2013-010 G X N14 93 012 Example Program 12 Part of Cluster X 2013-011 E X X N15 93 013 Example Program 13 Part of Cluster X 2013-011 E X X N

Example of all 9 possible

combinations of types of findings.

Example of cluster with finding affecting only some of programs in cluster.

Example finding affecting multiple programs-same type of finding (93.002 & 93.009)

Example finding affecting multiple programs-different type of finding (93.003 & 93.010)

Example of finding and multiple CFDA lines

OMB Update – Compliance Supplement

Final Issue Date?ARRA Type A Major Program

DeterminationLoans and Loan GuaranteesNo Extensions - Late Filings – Auditee

RiskFFATA Reporting

OMB Proposed Changes

Threshold Increase Pass Through Entities

Tiered Approach More Focused Requirements Type A Threshold Increase Type B Risk assessments and Selection Changes QC Threshold Replace SEFA and Auditors Summary with DCF in Audit

Package Enhanced resolution

Designated responsible program official Matrix Federal Agency Follow up for subawards

Potential Changes to Single Audit – Impact of Tiered Approach

39% 24%

1%2%

97%