GAO has issued its Green Book Exposure Draft,
Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government: 2013 Exposure Draft,
GAO-13-830SP
Federal Managers' Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) requires that federal agency executives periodically review and annually report on the agency's internal control systems. FMFIA requires the Comptroller General to prescribe internal controls standards. These internal control standards, first issued in 1983, present the internal control standards for federal agencies for both program and financial management.
Green Book revisions undergo an extensive, deliberative process, including public comments and input from the Green Book Advisory Council. GAO considers all Green Book comments and input from the Green Book Advisory Council in finalizing revisions to the standards.
It is available for public comment until December 2nd.
Read more
Showing posts with label FMFIA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FMFIA. Show all posts
Monday, September 16, 2013
Monday, April 08, 2013
Timeline: The Evolution of Financial Management in the Federal Government
(This interactive timeline is part of Federal News Radio's special report, Rise of the Money People.)
-Michael O'Connell, FederalNewsRadio.com
VIEW THE TIMELINE AND READ MORE...
The roots of today's federal financial systems oversight can be traced back to the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950, which authorized the head of each federal agency to establish internal controls over its assets.
The act also tasked the Government Accountability Office with drawing up accounting standards for agencies and, through audits, ensuring that agency internal controls met those standards.
Over the last three decades, Congress has expanded the scope of financial oversight at agencies, and, with the help of new technology, provided for greater transparency in agencies' fiscal reporting.
This timeline provides an overview of the initiatives introduced by the White House and legislation enacted by Congress to establish greater oversight of government spending.
-Michael O'Connell, FederalNewsRadio.com
VIEW THE TIMELINE AND READ MORE...
Friday, October 01, 2010
DHS management improvements start with acquisition
The Homeland Security Department is tackling one of its biggest management problems first as part of its overall approach to complete its transformation and get off the government's high-risk list.
Janice Holl Lute, DHS deputy secretary, told Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs lawmakers Thursday that it was improving all stages of its acquisition process as part of its overall management integration effort.
One of the end results, Lute said, is to get off the Government Accountability Office's high-risk list, which is due out in January. DHS management has been on the list since Congress created the agency in 2003.
She added that DHS has reevaluated every performance measure - 180 in all. Lute said the agency has recast them in plain language so they provide indicators of the value the program brings to the mission.
Lute said DHS is focusing on seven initiatives that will contribute to the integration of the department's management. These include enterprise governance, balanced workforce strategy, headquarters consolidation and data center migration.
But it's coming up with a common language and business discipline across their acquisition, financial management and human capital management processes that will make the biggest difference.
She added that DHS is taking additional steps from integrating science and technology to a greater extent to instituting acquisition career development programs to strengthening their procurement staffing.
The department also is conducting regular reviews of project portfolios. Besides the acquisition processes and workforce, Lute said DHS is moving ahead with its financial systems consolidation project, known as TASC.
Industry sources expected DHS to make an award in August for the $400 million program. But the Office of Management and Budget slowed down all financial systems projects for review.
Lute said DHS is following OMB's requirements to focus on specific needs of the components based on risk.
She said once awarded TASC will focus on 18-24 month deployment schedule and a plan to minimize cost and risk.
-Jason Miller, FederalNewsRadio.com
READ MORE or LISTEN HERE...
Janice Holl Lute, DHS deputy secretary, told Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs lawmakers Thursday that it was improving all stages of its acquisition process as part of its overall management integration effort.
One of the end results, Lute said, is to get off the Government Accountability Office's high-risk list, which is due out in January. DHS management has been on the list since Congress created the agency in 2003.
She added that DHS has reevaluated every performance measure - 180 in all. Lute said the agency has recast them in plain language so they provide indicators of the value the program brings to the mission.
Lute said DHS is focusing on seven initiatives that will contribute to the integration of the department's management. These include enterprise governance, balanced workforce strategy, headquarters consolidation and data center migration.
But it's coming up with a common language and business discipline across their acquisition, financial management and human capital management processes that will make the biggest difference.
She added that DHS is taking additional steps from integrating science and technology to a greater extent to instituting acquisition career development programs to strengthening their procurement staffing.
The department also is conducting regular reviews of project portfolios. Besides the acquisition processes and workforce, Lute said DHS is moving ahead with its financial systems consolidation project, known as TASC.
Industry sources expected DHS to make an award in August for the $400 million program. But the Office of Management and Budget slowed down all financial systems projects for review.
Lute said DHS is following OMB's requirements to focus on specific needs of the components based on risk.
She said once awarded TASC will focus on 18-24 month deployment schedule and a plan to minimize cost and risk.
-Jason Miller, FederalNewsRadio.com
READ MORE or LISTEN HERE...
Friday, October 03, 2008
Many agencies unable to produce reliable financial data
Agencies need to be able to produce correct and timely financial information to make the most effective decisions about how to manage their daily operations, especially in the current difficult economic environment, the Government Accountability Office said.
To produce useful financial and performance data, agencies must comply with requirements for financial management systems and accounting standards under the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA) of 1996.
For fiscal 2007, 13 of 24 major agencies failed to meet requirements for their financial management systems, including their processes, procedures and internal controls, GAO said in a report released Oct. 2. The performance audit took place from December 2007 to September 2008.
Auditors reported problems, such as nonintegrated financial management systems, inadequate reconciliation procedures, lack of accurate and timely recording of data and weak security over information systems.
“Financial management systems are not providing reliable, useful and timely information to help manage agency programs more effectively,” said Kay Daly, acting director of GAO’s financial management and assurance. GAO is still concerned that the criteria for assessing substantial compliance with FFMIA are not well-defined or consistently implemented across agencies, the report said.
While the Office of Management and Budget is revising its financial management guidance, GAO re-emphasized the need for OMB to clarify what constitutes substantial compliance and to look at financial management systems’ capabilities beyond financial statement preparation, she said.
Agencies’ efforts to implement new systems far too often result in systems that do not meet cost, schedule and performance goals, Daly said. To avoid implementation problems, OMB continues to advance its Financial Management Line of Business to encourage use of common applications, business processes and accounting standards.
-Mary Mosquera, FCW.com
READ MORE...
To produce useful financial and performance data, agencies must comply with requirements for financial management systems and accounting standards under the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA) of 1996.
For fiscal 2007, 13 of 24 major agencies failed to meet requirements for their financial management systems, including their processes, procedures and internal controls, GAO said in a report released Oct. 2. The performance audit took place from December 2007 to September 2008.
Auditors reported problems, such as nonintegrated financial management systems, inadequate reconciliation procedures, lack of accurate and timely recording of data and weak security over information systems.
“Financial management systems are not providing reliable, useful and timely information to help manage agency programs more effectively,” said Kay Daly, acting director of GAO’s financial management and assurance. GAO is still concerned that the criteria for assessing substantial compliance with FFMIA are not well-defined or consistently implemented across agencies, the report said.
While the Office of Management and Budget is revising its financial management guidance, GAO re-emphasized the need for OMB to clarify what constitutes substantial compliance and to look at financial management systems’ capabilities beyond financial statement preparation, she said.
Agencies’ efforts to implement new systems far too often result in systems that do not meet cost, schedule and performance goals, Daly said. To avoid implementation problems, OMB continues to advance its Financial Management Line of Business to encourage use of common applications, business processes and accounting standards.
-Mary Mosquera, FCW.com
READ MORE...
Wednesday, October 01, 2008
Today's GAO Publication
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) today released the following report:
Financial Management: Persistent Financial Management Systems Issues Remain for Many CFO Act Agencies.
GAO-08-1018, September 30.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-1018
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d081018high.pdf
Financial Management: Persistent Financial Management Systems Issues Remain for Many CFO Act Agencies.
GAO-08-1018, September 30.
http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-08-1018
Highlights - http://www.gao.gov/highlights/d081018high.pdf
Monday, July 16, 2007
Commentary: Top-down review ensures internal controls are in place
The arrival of a new, far-reaching Office of Management and Budget circular in an agency’s inbox is usually a wake-up call. Such was the case in December 2004, when OMB released a revised Circular A-123. Since then, agencies have been hopping to meet new internal control requirements.
We know the alphabet soup of efforts that have come our way over the past 25 years related to financial management reform, from 1982’s Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) to 2002’s Improper Payments Act, and a host of others in between. OMB’s most recent revision to A-123 adds a requirement that agency heads provide a separate assurance on the effectiveness of the agency’s internal control over financial reporting — the so-called Appendix A.
Like many federal agencies, the National Science Foundation had in place a “bottoms-up” internal control review process and a Management Controls Committee to comply with FMFIA. Over time, the weaknesses of a bottoms-up approach became apparent: If scrupulously followed, virtually all internal controls will be identified, tested and evaluated regardless of their importance; and if not scrupulously followed, key internal controls can be overlooked or incorrectly assessed, leaving potentially serious risks unidentified or unmitigated. The bottoms-up approach resulted in reduced efficiency and the risk of diminished effectiveness.
Appendix A prescribes a “top-down” approach, starting with financial statements, for the evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting. The top-down approach allows an agency to focus only on those internal controls that satisfy the financial reporting assertions and to assure reliable financial reporting.
[In FY2006] NSF set a three-year course to identify and document business processes and the controls over those processes, assess their risk and test the key controls in those processes.
In fiscal 2008, NSF expects to have an internal control system that meets all the requirements of the revised A-123 guidance. But the task doesn’t end there. Agencies must continually examine their internal control structure to ensure they stay updated with changing conditions. So, in the end, while A-123 may have a familiar ring, we all need to see it as a wake-up call.
-Thomas N. Cooley, FederalTimes.com
Thomas N. Cooley is director of the Office of Budget, Finance and Award Management and the chief financial officer at the National Science Foundation. In March, he was awarded the Donald L. Scantlebury Memorial Award for distinguished leadership in federal financial management.
READ MORE...
We know the alphabet soup of efforts that have come our way over the past 25 years related to financial management reform, from 1982’s Federal Managers Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) to 2002’s Improper Payments Act, and a host of others in between. OMB’s most recent revision to A-123 adds a requirement that agency heads provide a separate assurance on the effectiveness of the agency’s internal control over financial reporting — the so-called Appendix A.
Like many federal agencies, the National Science Foundation had in place a “bottoms-up” internal control review process and a Management Controls Committee to comply with FMFIA. Over time, the weaknesses of a bottoms-up approach became apparent: If scrupulously followed, virtually all internal controls will be identified, tested and evaluated regardless of their importance; and if not scrupulously followed, key internal controls can be overlooked or incorrectly assessed, leaving potentially serious risks unidentified or unmitigated. The bottoms-up approach resulted in reduced efficiency and the risk of diminished effectiveness.
Appendix A prescribes a “top-down” approach, starting with financial statements, for the evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting. The top-down approach allows an agency to focus only on those internal controls that satisfy the financial reporting assertions and to assure reliable financial reporting.
[In FY2006] NSF set a three-year course to identify and document business processes and the controls over those processes, assess their risk and test the key controls in those processes.
In fiscal 2008, NSF expects to have an internal control system that meets all the requirements of the revised A-123 guidance. But the task doesn’t end there. Agencies must continually examine their internal control structure to ensure they stay updated with changing conditions. So, in the end, while A-123 may have a familiar ring, we all need to see it as a wake-up call.
-Thomas N. Cooley, FederalTimes.com
Thomas N. Cooley is director of the Office of Budget, Finance and Award Management and the chief financial officer at the National Science Foundation. In March, he was awarded the Donald L. Scantlebury Memorial Award for distinguished leadership in federal financial management.
READ MORE...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)