University of North Florida
Board of Trustees
Finance and Audit Committee

  • Meeting
December 10, 2002
University Center at 12:00 noon

Minutes

Members Present 

Mr. T. O’Neal Douglas, Ms. Joan Wellhouse Newton

Members Absent 

Mr. Steve Halverson, Ms. Donna Harper Gibbs, Mr. Wilfredo J. Gonzalez, and Mr. James Stalling

Item 1 Call to Order 

In the absence of Chair Halverson, Trustee Douglas convened the meeting at 12:00 p.m.

Item 2 Approval of Minutes 

The minutes of September 27 were approved as circulated.

 

Trustee Douglas expressed his appreciation for Dr. Tom Serwatka, Dr. Gonzalez, and other staff for meeting with him on December 9 to discuss the current agenda items.

 

Dr. Serwatka asked that the agenda items be reordered to allow Mr. Jim Lewis, KPMG Senior Manager to address the Direct Support Organizations’ (DSO) audits at the beginning of the meeting.

Item 3 DSO Audits 

Each year, one of the responsibilities of the Board of Trustees is the review of the University’s Direct Support Organizations. KPMG has performed preliminary audits on the Training & Services Institute (TSI) and the UNF Foundation. The preliminary audit findings have been reported to and approved by the TSI Board and the UNF Foundation Board respectively. Trustee Halverson attended the exit audit held on November 14 on behalf of the BOT. The BOT will review the audits during their next meeting on December 19.

 

Mr. Lewis, Senior Manager of KPMG, presented a summary of the findings to the Finance and Audit Committee.

Foundation Audit – KPMG issued a clean opinion on the Foundation audit. The primary changes in the financial statements were presentational. The DSOs are governmental entities and follow the Government Auditing Standards. There were four Governmental Auditing Standards Board pronouncements implemented during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002:

  • GASB 34 related to a change in the basic financial statement format and to the inclusion of a Management’s Discussion and Analysis;
  • GASB 35 essentially applied GASB 34 to colleges and universities;
  • GASB 37 provided a clarification of GASB 34 due to some additional issues that arose when after GASB 34 was issued; and
  • GASB 38 related to certain note disclosures that must be included in the basic financial statements. 

The Management’s Discussion and Analysis, similar to a public company’s executive summary disclosure, was added to the financial statements.

 

The Foundation audit went extremely well and KPMG issued an unqualified opinion, which is their highest level of assurance on financial statements. No difficulties with management were encountered in the performance of the audits.

 

TSI Audit – TSI implemented the same governmental statements as the UNF Foundation, so their statements will look different from those of the previous year. Again, a clean opinion was issued and there were no audit adjustments.

 

Mr. Lewis complimented the University’s accounting operations, specifically mentioning Dr. Allaire, Ms. Anderson, and Ms. Evans, and remarked that it was always a pleasure working with the University.

 

One additional item on the TSI financial statement was pointed out on pages 12-18. As part of KPMG’s engagement, they also tested compliance and control related to the Federal Grants received by TSI. The tests performed on this section of the report did not indicate any findings or weaknesses that would be of concern to the BOT.

 

Trustee Douglas inquired about a broadcasting expense and statement changes of $1.8 million. Mr. Lewis responded that TSI received a significant grant for the “Buckle Up For Safety” program implemented by the state. There were also considerable expenditures throughout the year for that program.  The financial statements indicated a grants receivable at the end of the year of $2.2 million. When entering into a grant with the Department of Transportation, the budget must be approved prior to the distribution of reimbursements to IPTM. This was the first year IPTM received the “Buckle Up For Safety” grant and IPTM hopes to receive it again in the future.

 

The preliminary audits were reviewed by the UNF Finance Committee, Foundation Executive Committee, and the Foundation Board.

 

Trustee Douglas thanked Mr. Lewis for his presentation.

 

As a quorum for the FAC had not been met, Ms. Karen Stone asked if the trustees present had any concerns about recommending the preliminary audits to the BOT for approval. Trustees Douglas and Newton replied that they had no concerns about the reports.

Item 4 Activity and Service Fees, Athletic Fees, Health Fees 

UNF’s Student Fee Assessment Committee (composed of faculty, staff, and students) reviewed the student fees and held an open forum. Currently, the fee schedules are as follows: Activity and Service Fee - $10.28; Health Fee - $5.48; and Athletic Fee - $10.00 for a total of $25.76. No increase in fees was requested. Trustee Douglas asked Vice President Mauricio Gonzales to explain why the University was not requesting an increase in fees. Dr. Gonzalez responded that as the University was currently over the 40% fee cap set by the state, an increase could not be requested at this time. Should the fee cap be lifted by the Florida Legislature during the 2003 session, the Student Fee Assessment Committee would reconvene to determine if an increase in the fees would be appropriate.

 

Trustee Douglas asked who was responsible for the review of committee recommendations. Dr. Gonzalez replied that recommendations were forwarded to his office for consideration. If recommendations were not approved, they were returned to the committee or to the University president for further review.

Item 5 Child-care Fees 

Trustee Douglas requested that Dr. Gonzalez address the item on child-care fees. Dr. Gonzalez introduced Mr. Everett Malcolm (Associate Vice President), Ms. Pam Bell (Director, Child Development Research Center), and Ms. Dee Carter (Coordinator of Budgets for Student Affairs). Fees associated with the Child Development Resource Center (CDRC) are reassessed each year.

 

The child-care facility is available to students, faculty, staff, and the general public. Students are offered first priority for child-care services, faculty second, and the general public third priority. The CDRC is open year round with the exception of two weeks during the summer and two weeks for the winter holiday season. The child-care center was relocated from the campus core to an area near the University Police Department. The size of the facility increased, as did the operating expenses. The facility now incurs expenses for heating and cooling, custodial services, and building maintenance. Currently, students pay $80.00 per week (Monday – Friday) for child-care services.

 

The University has recommended an increase in the fees. The CDRC Board, comprised of two student government representatives, a minimum of four parents, a center staff member and one representative from each department using the center (about three or four faculty members), agreed with the recommendation.

 

Trustees Douglas and Newton were in agreement with the fee increases. Since the FAC did not have a quorum, it was the group consensus to recommend the fee increases to the BOT. Trustee Douglas will relay this information to Trustee Halverson.

Item 6 Rule on Direct Support Organizations (DSOs) 

Mr. Crosby addressed the proposed rule on DSOs. The School Code Rewrite, Florida Statutes 1001.74, Powers and Duties of the University Board of Trustees, Item No. 37, states that each board of trustees shall prescribe conditions for direct support organizations and university health services support organizations to be certified and for use of university property and services.  Also, conditions relating to certification must provide for audit review and oversight by the Board of Trustees. Therefore, the University has revised the DSO rule to establish authority for certifications and audit reviews of DSOs under the BOT. The new rule will replace the rule in the current Florida Administrative Code. The revised rule was vetted by UNF’s legal counsel and those administrators involved with the DSOs. An open forum was held to garner input from the University community.

 

The rule provides the following provisions:

  • The University president may recommend to the University of North Florida Board of Trustees that an organization meeting the requirements of Section 1004.28(1)(a), F.S., become a direct support organization. Upon approval by the board, a direct support organization shall be considered to be certified and authorized to use the property, facilities and personal services of the University to the extent to be set forth in an agreement between the board and the organization.
  • Operating budgets of direct support organizations shall be prepared at least annually, approved by the organization’s governing board of directors and recommended by the University president to the University board for review.
  • Proposed changes to the approved budget which would require a commitment of University resources shall be reviewed and approved quarterly by the president or designee, who shall be a vice president of the University or other senior officer of the University reporting directly to the president.
  • Direct support organizations shall provide for an annual audit and management letter, as prescribed by applicable law and rules, which shall be forwarded to the University board for review and oversight.
  • The University president may request that the board decertify a direct support organization if the president determines that the organization is no longer serving the best interest of the university. The request for desertification shall include a plan for disposition of the direct support organization’s assets and liabilities. 

UNF will develop internal procedures for this rule. Dr. Allaire, Ms. Stone, and Mr. Crosby are scheduled to provide a more detailed review of DSOs and the legal ramifications at the BOT’s January meeting.

 

Trustee Douglas noted that the BOT has some responsibility for the oversight for this rule. He asked Dr. Kline to explain where the oversight takes place and how is it reported to the BOT. Dr. Kline explained that the University president is responsible for recommending the rule to the BOT. Although the rule gives a lot of authority to the president, this authority is always through the BOT. The board would be aware of permissive use of the rule as it reviews the annual budget and the audit for each DSO. Ms. Stone added that under the law, the chair of the BOT has the right to appoint one of the trustees to the Executive Committee and the Foundation Board as an oversight mechanism. The board will prescribe terms and conditions for operation of the DSOs. The DSOs are separate 501(c)3 corporations.

 

Trustee Newton suggested that Chair Thompson appoint members of the BOT to the TSI and Foundation boards. Trustee Douglas asked Ms. Stone to report the suggestion to Chair Thompson.

 

Again, Trustee Douglas stated that he FAC could not take action, but would accept a recommendation and refer it to the BOT with a consensus.

Item 7 Pre-Tax Benefits Plan 

Ms. Mary O’Neal (Director, Human Resources) presented the State of Florida Salary Reduction Cafeteria Plan. Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code allows employees to opt for health benefits and medical reimbursement plans on a pre-tax basis. In order to offer UNF employees these benefits in January, the University must have an approved plan. Thus the University is recommending adoption of the proposed plan.

 

Trustee Douglas asked if UNF would be able to negotiate its own benefits package when it becomes the employer. Janet Owen reported that the State of Florida would continue to require that UNF participate with other universities in certain benefits including health insurance.

 

The committee members agreed to recommend the pre-tax plan to the BOT at its December meeting.

 

Trustee Douglas said the committee would make the four recommendations to the BOT in the form of a consensus from the FAC as the committee had been unable to establish quorum. As there was no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 1:05 pm.