►
From YouTube: 1/12/2023 - Legislative Commission's Audit Subcommittee
Description
This is the third meeting of the 2021-2022 Interim. **ROOM CHANGED** Please see agenda for details.
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
Good
afternoon,
well,
if
you'll
all
find
a
seat,
we
will
begin.
Thank
you
welcome
to
the
third
meeting
of
the
audit
subcommittee.
This
interim
and
please
excuse
chair
hadigee
she'll,
be
joining
us
late
this
morning.
So
we'll
mark
her
present
as
she
arrives,
Ms
Lisa
Kramer.
Will
you
please
call
the
roll.
C
A
Please
mark
her
present
as
she
arrives.
Thank
you
very
much,
a
special
thanks
to
all
of
those
who
are
participating
in
the
meeting.
Today
we
have
representatives
from
various
state
agencies
and
the
Nevada
system
of
higher
education
and
the
County
Child
Welfare
agencies
with
us
today.
A
couple
of
important
housekeeping
items
for
those
individuals
on
Zoom.
The
chat
feature
is
only
to
be
used
for
communication
with
BPS
for
technical
assistance.
It
is
not
to
be
used
for
any
communication
between
members
or
by
presenters
unless
you
are
requesting
technical
assistance
with
BPS.
A
Before
we
begin
for
the
benefit
of
the
audience
and
those
wishing
to
speak,
we
will
have
two
periods
of
public
comment
today.
One
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
and
one
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
public
comment
is
limited
to
three
minutes
per
speaker.
There
are
five
ways
to
prevent
to
provide
public
comment
and
those
are
in
person
in
Las,
Vegas
or
Carson
City.
You
can
call.
A
A
So,
thank
you
all
for
being
here
today
and
we'll
start
with
our
first
public
comment
and
is
there
anyone
here
in
person
who
would
like
to
make
public
comment
in
Las
Vegas.
D
D
A
A
Seeing
none
I'll
take
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes
motion
from
assemblywoman
Brittany
Miller,
a
second
from
Senator
Hammond,
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye,
I
I.
Thank
you
all.
Those
opposed
motion
passes.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Okay,
we
will
start
with
agenda
item
number
four.
The
first
agenda
item
is
from
Mr
Crossman
and
when
you're
ready,
please
go
ahead.
E
Thank
you,
Vice
chair
for
the
record,
Dan
Crossman
legislative
auditor
under
agenda
item
four
today,
you'll
see
we
have
five
performance
performance
audit
reports
to
present
these
reports
have
been
maintained
confidential
until
they
are
being
presented
today.
Copies
of
those
reports
will
be
made
available
on
our
website,
following
the
meeting
I'd
like
to
just
take
a
quick
moment
to
express
my
appreciation
to
my
staff.
E
E
E
A
Very
much
and
I
also
appreciate
you
and
your
staff
all
right,
so
we'll
go
to
item
number
four,
which
is
the
Nevada
system
of
higher
ed
self-supporting
and
Reserve
accounts,
and
we
have
got
Sharon,
Rydell
and
Damian
Meeks
here
and
I'll
start
with
any
questions
from
the.
A
F
Good
morning
go
ahead
when
you're
ready
good
morning,
Vice
chairwoman,
Don,
Darrow,
Loop
and
members
of
the
audit
subcommittee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
Shannon
Riedel
and
I'm.
The
chief
Deputy
legislative
auditor,
we'll
start
today
with
the
Nevada
system
of
higher
education,
self-supporting
and
Reserve
accounts
performance
audit.
If
we
can
start
with
some
background
information
on
page
one
Nishi
is
a
state-supported
land-grant
institution
established
by
the
Constitution
of
the
state
of
Nevada
in
1864..
F
The
Nevada
constitution
requires
the
legislature
to
appropriate
funding
from
the
state's
general
fund
to
support
Nishi
activities.
Now
she
also
receives
student
tuition
and
fees,
grants
and
contracts,
sales
and
services
contributions,
gifts
and
investment
income.
On
page
six,
we
provide
more
detail
regarding
self-supporting
programs
and
activities.
Nishi
institutions,
utilize
self-supporting
revenues
to
help
pay
for
institution
activities.
F
Revenues
consist
mainly
of
student
fees,
investment,
income,
indirect
cost,
recoveries
and
sales
and
service
income.
Student
registration
fees
are
allocated
between
State
supported
and
self-supporting
accounts.
Student
registration
fees
and
self-supporting
accounts
can
be
used
for
student
access
or
student
financial
assistance.
General
Improvement
fees
are
to
be
used
on
services
that
enhance
the
educational
experience,
Capital
Improvement
fees
are
for
buildings
and
infrastructure
activities
and
programs
fees
are
for
Student,
Activities
and
fees
also
support
the
student
associations
at
the
end
of
2022
about
629
million
dollars
remained
in
self-supporting
program
accounts.
F
F
Significant
financial
transactions
at
or
near
your
end
moved
expenditures
between
state-supported
and
self-supporting
accounts
to
utilize
All-State
funding.
Additionally,
few
controls
exist
over
these
transactions,
so
expenditures
did
not
always
align
with
the
appropriate
category.
If
you
turn
to
page
10,
we
have
exhibit
4..
This
exhibit
shows
total
State,
Appropriations
and
related
expenditures
for
fiscal
years,
2018
to
2022,
as
you
can
see,
less
than
one
percent
of
State
Appropriations
have
have
been
reverted
over
these
years.
F
This
has
occurred
because
institutions
can
revise
approved
budgets
and
also
initiate
accounting
transactions
that
move
expenditures
between
accounts
each
fiscal
year
with
limited
board
or
legislative
oversight,
as
we
continue
to
discuss
on
page
11.
Nishi's
budget
was
at
one
time
more,
detailed
and
subject
to
legislative
scrutiny,
but
after
1991,
State
Appropriations
were
provided
in
a
lump
sum
allocation.
F
A
legal
opinion
received
for
our
audit
in
1996
discusses
some
of
the
limitations
the
legislature
has
on
monitoring
the
activities
of
Nishi
per
the
Nevada
constitution,
management
and
control
of
system
activities,
including
the
expenditure
of
money
appropriated,
is
the
responsibility
of
the
Board
of
Regents
at
the
bottom
of
page
11.
We
discuss
a
policy
consideration
for
the
legislature.
F
F
We'll
continue
with
our
findings
and
recommendations,
starting
on
page
13..
Here
we
also
found
some
activities
from
self-supporting
accounts
bypassed
state
law.
We
discussed
that
270
thousand
dollars
in
state
Appropriations
were
not
reviewed,
were
not
reverted
when
used
to
offset
centralized
services
in
a
self-supporting
account.
Additionally,
as
noted
on
page
14,
reallocations
of
about
2.4
million
dollars
in
general
fund
Appropriations
were
not
approved
by
the
interim
finance
committee,
as
required
by
the
Appropriations
Act
continuing
on
pages
15
and
16..
We
discussed
that
some
student
fees
were
not
used
appropriately.
F
F
Additionally,
we
found
one
institution
use,
differential
and
Technology
fees
for
centralized
administrative
services
during
fiscal
years,
2018
to
2022
nearly
1.5
million
dollars
in
differential
and
Technology
fees
were
used
to
pay
for
centralized
services
and
institutional
priorities
board
policy
states.
These
fees
should
directly
support
the
high
cost
or
volume
of
the
program
for
which
they
are
approved.
F
On
pages
18
and
19,
we
discuss
issues
with
reporting.
Certain
reports
regarding
student
fees
lacked
sufficient
detail
to
adequately
monitor
this
issue.
The
board
requires
each
institution
to
report
the
amount
of
student
fees
remaining
unexpended
each
year.
However,
reports
provided
information
for
each
fee
overall,
without
the
detail
needed
to
monitor
individual
programs
or
specific
student
fee.
Reserves
exhibit
5
on
page
19
shows
an
example
of
the
reports
provided
because
reports
provide
general
information
and
include
other
sources
of
funding
individual
program.
F
Our
next
chapter
deals
with
reserves
not
being
adequately
managed
by
Nishi
and
begins
on
page
23..
The
use
of
reserve
and
contingency
accounts
varied
widely
among
institutions.
Some
institutions
established
multiple
Reserve
accounts
and
others
had
won,
exhibit
6
on
page
24
shows
the
variation
in
the
number
of
accounts.
An
activity
related
to
reserve
accounts
for
fiscal
years,
2018
to
2021
board
policy
addresses
one
contingency
reserve
account
for
system
administration,
indicating
a
target
of
30
percent
of
the
prior
Year's.
Annual
income
should
be
established
for
shortfalls
in
revenue
or
unbudgeted
expenditures.
F
However,
board
policy
does
not
address
sufficient
Reserve
levels
at
institutions
or
provide
guidance
for
establishing
reasonable
limits
on
balances.
As
we
note
on
page
25
While,
most
Reserve
accounts
were
funded
with
unrestricted
Revenue
sources.
We
found
about
10
percent
of
funding
transactions
tested
for
two
million
dollars
were
funded
from
sources
that
included
student
fees.
F
Board
policies
are
vague
on
whether
these
student
fees
can
be
used
to
fund
Reserve
accounts.
Also,
we
found
about
20
percent
of
expenditures.
Transactions
tested
were
for
normal
operating
costs
that
included
payroll
printing
computer
and
office
equipment.
These
do
not
align
with
best
practices
regarding
Reserve
accounts.
F
Continuing
on
pages
26
to
29
we
discussed
that
student
fees
and
other
funds
were
not
utilized
timely.
We
found
44
of
189
programs
with
student
fees
retained
more
than
one
year
of
revenue
for
at
least
three
consecutive
years.
On
average,
these
programs
retained
about
two
times
average
annual
revenues
and
amounted
to
about
20.7
million
dollars
at
the
end
of
fiscal
year,
2021.
F
Other
self-supporting
programs,
funded
with
investment,
income
sales
and
service
and
other
operating
revenues,
also
retain
significant
funds
over
the
four-year
period
of
999
programs,
reviewed
147
carried
balances
that
exceeded
75
percent
of
annual
uses.
These
147
programs
retained
about
179.4
million
dollars
in
funds
at
the
end
of
fiscal
year,
2021.
F
exhibit
8
on
page
29
shows
the
number
of
programs
and
the
related
cumulative
average
balance
over
our
audit
scope
period
in
certain
instances.
Retaining
a
high
balance
in
the
program
from
one
year
to
the
next
may
be
appropriate.
However,
little
system-wide
monitoring
of
self-supporting
program
balances
exist
and
the
board
has
not
developed
policies
over
non-student
fee
self-supporting
programs.
F
We
found
these
practices
were
reasonable
and
Nishi
was
able
to
offset
most
of
the
mandatory
budget
reductions
related
to
the
pandemic
from
reserves
and
gains
on
the
investment
account
exhibit
9
on
page
32
shows
those
budget
reductions
and
the
related
investment
distributions
meant
to
offset
some
or
all
of
the
reduction
of
the
reductions
additionally
exhibit
10.
On
page
33
shows
the
various
types
of
relief
Nishi
had
available
for
use
related
to
the
pandemic.
F
F
A
C
You,
madam
chair,
the
question
I,
have
going
back
to
I
think
it
was
your
exhibit
10..
We
were
talking
about
the
money
that
the
that
NC
used
to
try
and
supplement
the
or
try
to
fill
the
whole
of
that
covid
created
I.
You
know,
I'm,
not
an
account,
so
I,
don't
know
how
this
all
happens,
and
maybe
it's
not
you
that
I
need
to
talk
to,
and
maybe
it's
a
folks
from
NC,
but
there
was
a
hole
they
took
money
that
they
had
put
in
and
I'm
going
to
get
this
wrong.
C
I
know,
but
they
have
Investments.
They
take
some
of
the
money
from
those
Investments
plug
that
hole,
and
then
you
have
money
coming
in
from
the
federal
government,
ARP
money
and
other
money
that
comes
in
then.
At
that
point,
that's
where
it
gets
murky
for
me,
how
do
they
fill
that
whole
back
up
after
that?
Is
it
you
know?
Did
they
did
they
take?
They
cure
those
Investments.
They
put
the
money
back
into
the
investments,
just
kind
of
curious
at
that
point.
C
What
happened
with
the
money
because
it
looks
like
they
got
money
from
the
federal
government
to
help
supplement
that
loss.
F
Vice
chairwoman,
dondero
Loop
through
you
to
Senator
Hammond
I,
don't
have
all
of
the
specific
details
regarding
how
all
of
this
money
was
used,
but
on
a
brief
overall
level,
the
investment
income
distribution
was
made
specifically
to
cover
the
gap
on
the
budget,
reductions
that
were
required
from
governor
sisilak
and
then
through
the
legislature
in
the
special
session.
F
However,
that
the
second
distribution
was
made
in
August
of
2021
I,
believe
and
then
right
after
that
in
December,
the
coronavirus
response
and
relief
supplemental
appropriation
act
kicked
in
so
they
didn't.
So
all
of
the
institutions
didn't
necessarily
need
to
use
all
of
that
investment
distribution,
partly
because
they'd
already
covered
some
of
those
budget
reductions
because
they
had
to
be
done
earlier
in
fiscal
year
2020
and
partly
because
the
2021
reductions
hadn't
taken
full
effect
yet
because
they
were
only
in
the
beginning
of
that
fiscal
year.
F
C
A
So
I
just
have
one,
and
that
is
my
I-
have
concern
over
the
use
of
student
fees
and
so
as
we
look
at
recommendations
that
this
doesn't
happen
because
it
seems
like
just
thinking
back
across
many
years,
it
seems
like
we
kept
raising
student
fees,
but
they
weren't
being
used
necessarily
for
direct
student.
We
just
raised
student
fees,
I
think
at
UNLV
for
something
so
I
I
guess.
My
question
is:
is
moving
forward.
A
How
are
we
going
to
spot
check
or
make
sure
that
that
isn't
done
so
that
we
don't
keep
raising
fees
on
the
students
and
I?
Don't
know
if
that's
a
you
or
the
chancellor.
F
Vice
chairman
dondara
Loop
for
the
record
Shannon
Riddell.
That
might
be
a
better
question
for
Nishi
Personnel
I,
don't
necessarily
I
mean
they
have
several
different
kinds
of
student
visa
but
I
don't
know
what
their
intention
is,
how
they
intend
to
implement
the
recommendations
to
make
sure
student
fees
are
adequate
and
not
too
high.
G
If
I
may
Madam
by
shared
first
I'd
like
to
thank
your
staff
and
Mr
Crossman
for
his
work
on
this
as
I
think
the
subcommittee
is
aware,
I
became
Chancellor
in
July,
so
this
audit
was
underway
and
the
audit
scope
period
is
a
time
that
I
was
not
Chancellor
but
Mr
Klinger,
who
was
here
with
me,
has
been
with
the
system
through
this
scope
period.
G
So
I
just
want
to
acknowledge
your
staff
they've
been
very
thorough
and
very
helpful
to
me,
as
we
sort
through
these
recommendations
specific
to
the
question
about
what
will
we
do
you'll
see
in
our
acceptance
of
all
the
recommendations
we've
already
begun
working
on
policy
changes
in
she
is,
as
the
committee
is
no
doubt
aware,
really.
Eight
agencies
within
an
agency
and
the
board
has
at
differing
times
sort
of
a
loose
tight
arrangement
of
Delegation
of
authority
to
the
institutional
presidents,
and
that
sometimes
we
are
tighter.
G
Sometimes
we
are
looser
and
what
I
see
here
particular
to
student
fees.
This
came
up
at
our
December
meeting
and
this
is
of
I
think
primary
concern
to
the
Board
of
Regents
that
we
not
overcharge
students
and
that
if
we
are
charging
students
that
we
are
certain
that
those
monies
are
spent
on
the
function
that
we
said
it
would
be
spent
on.
G
So
I
find
in
this
audit
a
good
deal
of
advice
for
us
to
improve
board
policy
about
how
student
fees
are
allocated
and
spent
and
board
policy
about
what
to
do
if
there
are
reserves,
if
more
monies
are
collected
in
one
year
and
how
they
might
be
carried
into
the
next
year.
I
also
find
recommendations
here
for
an
increased
monitoring
role.
G
We
are
very
grateful
that
your
Auditors
were
able
to
go
through
our
books
in
this
depth.
Mr
Cleaner
is
the
Chief
Financial
Officer
does
not
have
a
monitoring
Department.
We
have
an
internal
audit
Department,
which,
incidentally,
reports
directly
to
the
Board
of
Regents,
does
not
report
to
me
as
Chancellor,
but
we
see
here
some
need
for
us
to
change
our
monitoring
role
on
an
ongoing
basis.
H
Madam
Vice
chair
for
the
record
Andrew,
cleaner,
Chief,
Financial,
Officer
Chancellor
got
everything
correct,
I,
think
the
only
thing
I
would
point
out
when
it
comes
to
student
fees
is
that
current
board
policy
does
require
that
student
fees
be
that
we
that
we
carry
forward
no
more
than
one
year
essentially
of
student
fees,
exhibit
five
in
your
audit,
which
is
on
my
page
19..
That
is
the
report
that
we
typically
send
to
the
board
and
what
your
staff
found
and
were
appreciative
of
your
staff.
H
Is
that
within
that,
so
we
roll
that
up
at
a
very
high
level,
as
you
can
see
on
page
on
that
exhibit
five,
and
so
what
your
staff
has
identified
is
that,
within
that
there
are
many
programs
that
individually
had
funds
in
excess.
But
when
you
roll
them
all
up,
you
don't
see
it.
So
part
of
part
of
what
we
need
to
do
is
provide
more
detailed
and
better
reports
for
the
board
so
that
they
can
see
where
we
do
have
excess
student
fees.
Because
in
this
this
report
you
just
you
won't
see
them.
A
For
both
of
you,
because
I
think
that's
always
an
important
piece
when
we
keep,
you
know
adding
student
fees,
whether
it's
20
cents
or
a
dollar,
you
know
those
start
to
add
up
to
the
cost
of
higher
education.
So
thank
you
very
much
for
the
clarification
and
putting
that
on
the
record.
I
appreciate
that
any
additional
questions
from
the
committee
seen
none
I'll.
Take
a
motion
to
approve
the
audit
report
so
moved.
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
Miller,
second,
from
Senator
Hammond,
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
all
those
opposed.
I
Thank
you
Vice,
chair
and
committee
members
for
the
record.
I
am
James
Thorne,
Deputy
legislative
auditor,
beginning
on
page
one
and
continuing
through
page
five.
We
provide
background
information
on
an
invited
system
of
higher
education
and
Qi,
including
the
agency's
mission,
and,
more
specifically,
the
funding
management
procurement
of
capital
construction
projects.
I
This
section
includes
two
exhibits
which
highlight
Capital,
Construction
spending
and
state
approved
funding.
On
page
six,
we
State
our
audit
of
scope
and
objective
the
objective.
This
audit
was
to
determine
if
the
University
of
Nevada
Las
Vegas
UNLV
and
the
University
of
Nevada
Reno
UNR,
managed
Capital
construction
projects
in
accordance
with
laws,
policies
and
appropriate
management
standards.
I
The
audit
findings
began
on
page
seven,
where
we
note
that
NG
needs
to
enhance
its
policies
and
procedures
to
ensure
institutions.
Capital
Construction,
Project
funding
and
management
practices
comply
with
state
law
and
entry
policy,
specifically
UNLV
and
UNR
used
almost
5
million
in
state
appropriate
operating
funds
to
help
pay
for
Capital
construction
projects.
We
tested
these
State
operating
funds
were
not
approved
by
the
legislature
for
the
use
in
Capital,
Construction,
10
of
27
or
37
percent
of
projects
tested
at
both
institution
use.
I
On
page
10,
we
note
the
practice
of
using
State
operating
funds
for
Capital
Construction
was
so
these
funds
would
not
revert
to
the
state.
For
example,
one
project
showed
institutional
staff
issued
a
change
order
to
use
State
operating
funds
that
otherwise
should
have
been
reverted
to
the
state
at
the
end
of
fiscal
year
2019..
I
This
was
done
through
a
change
order
that
increased
the
project-
scope
to
add
floor
insulation
material
at
the
cost
of
over
190
thousand
dollars
through
the
Appropriations
act.
Unused
State
operating
funds
provided
to
enchi
must
be
reverted
to
the
state.
Furthermore,
Board
of
regent
policy
states
that
funding
derived
through
State
funds
must
be
used
to
the
greatest
extent
possible
and
supportive
student
credit-based
instruction
on
page
11.
The
report
discusses
how
state
law
requires
entry
projects
funded
with
at
least
25
percent
of
State
Appropriations
use
the
construction
Management
Services
of
the
state
public
works
division.
I
On
page
13,
we
know
completed
construction
projects,
exceeded
funding
and
project
accounts,
carried
a
deficit
for
four
of
24
or
17
percent
of
completed
projects
tested
the
expenditures
exceeded
the
budget
and
Project
funding.
For
example,
one
Project's
expenditures
were
32
million,
which
exceeded
the
available
funding
and
budget
by
6.6
million.
In
addition,
we
observed
the
accounts
for
these
projects
had
deficit
balances
from
1.5
to
3.5
years
after
payment
of
the
final
Construction
contract
amounts.
I
Pages
15
and
16
contain
four
recommendations
to
improve
compliance
with
state
laws
and
sound
budgeting
practices
regarding
Capital
Construction,
financing
and
management,
beginning
on
page
17,
and
continue
on
page
18.
We
discussed
institutions
being
stronger
oversight
of
capital,
construction
project
management
to
improve
the
accountability
of
contractors
and
project
managers.
We
observe
change
order.
Documentation
at
both
institutions
was
often
not
sufficient
to
determine
compliance
with
contract
terms
and
to
ensure
proper
amounts
were
paid.
I
We
tested
49
change
orders
with
8.3
million
from
27
capital
projects
for
almost
3.1
million
or
37
percent
of
supporting
documentation
that
did
not
include
detailed
labor
material
equipment
or
overhead
and
profit
markup
fee
amounts.
In
addition,
12
of
49
or
25
percent
of
change,
orders
tested
lack,
detailed,
supporting
documentation
for
70
or
more
of
the
project
amount.
Build
exhibit
5
on
page
18
shows
the
unsupported
change
order,
number
and
amounts
for
projects
tested
at
UNLV
and
UNR.
I
For
change
order
items
with
adequate
documentation,
we
observe
38
of
49
or
78
percent
of
change,
orders
tested
had
unallowed
cost
or
incorrect
markup
fees.
This
resulted
in
over
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
inappropriate
payments
to
contractors.
On
page
19,
we
give
some
examples
of
unallowed
change
order
costs,
for
example,
a
general
contractor
charged
fourteen
thousand
dollars
for
supervision
and
project
Administration
on
top
of
a
sixteen
thousand
or
six
thousand
dollar
overhead
and
profit
markup
fee.
Despite
supervision
and
project
management
being
included
in
10
being
included
in
the
10
Market
fee
per
the
contract.
I
On
pages
22
to
24,
we
discuss
how
scope
modifications
through
change,
orders,
increase
project
costs
by
5.5
million
and
result
in
additional
overhead
and
markup
fees
of
more
than
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars.
At
UNLV
we
tested
3.7
million
in
change
orders
and
found
2.5
million.
69
percent
were
the
result
of
scope,
modifications
that
were
not
due
to
unforeseen
circumstances.
I
Unforeseen
circumstances
are
issues
that
were
not
known
when
planning
the
project
like
hazardous
materials
found
on
the
construction
site
UNLV,
for
example,
spent
441
thousand
dollars
to
upgrade
paint
for
a
parking
garage
after
a
department
requested.
It
despite
the
original
project
scope,
including
High
Performance
Paint
at
UNR,
we
tested
5.7
million
in
change,
orders
and
observed
scope,
modifications,
increased
project
cost
by
3
million
or
53
percent
scope.
I
Modifications
also
include
additional
costs
as
overhead
and
profit
fees
of
10
to
15
percent
are
added
to
the
non-competitive
pricing
and
also
compound
as
each
subcontractor
charges
their
Market
fee
and
the
Gen
general
contractor
adds
their
fee
for
the
overall
change
order.
Cost
Pages
25
to
27
discusses
the
need
for
institutions
to
improve
their
project
closeout
process
to
ensure
compliance
with
state
law
guaranteed.
Appropriate
documentation
is
collected
prior
to
final
payment
and
Safeguard
Project
funding.
I
For
example,
the
Labor
Commissioner
was
not
always
notified
of
project
completion
and
eight
of
22
or
36
percent
of
projects
were
not
reported
to
Labor
Commissioner
until
after
final
contractor
payment
was
made.
Nrs
338.013
requires
the
public
body
to
report
the
completion
of
all
work
performed
under
the
contract
of
the
Labor
Commissioner
before
the
final
payment
is
made.
In
addition,
critical
project
documentation
either
either
was
never
obtained
issued
or
received
in
a
timely
manner,
specifically
required
project.
I
I
When
institutions
do
not
comply
with
law
relating
to
timely
notification
to
the
Labor
Commissioner,
there
is
a
risk
of
prevailing.
Wage
laws
will
not
be
properly
enforced.
Workers
might
experience
difficulty
recovering
wages.
Additionally,
when
contracts
or
contractors
are
paid
before
important
project
closeout
is
received.
Institutions
are
at
a
higher
risk
of
not
receiving
these
critical
documents
or
not
being
able
to
enforce
critical
contract
Provisions,
like
liquidated
damages
and
warranties.
I
Pages
27
and
28
contain
nine
recommendations
to
help
control
change
orders
and
strengthen
project
closeout
practices,
starting
on
page
29
and
continuing
on
page
30.
We
discussed
the
need
for
NC
to
enhance
its
policies
and
procedures
relating
to
procuring
construction
projects,
as
non-traditional
procurement
methods
were
utilized
in
the
form
of
a
public-private
partnership
and
lease
purchase
agreements
under
a
public-private
partnership.
I
In
addition,
it
is
unclear
under
state
law
whether
institutions
have
authority
to
use
this
method
when
procuring
Capital
construction
projects.
Likewise,
under
the
lease
purchase
agreement
method,
a
developer
was
allowed
to
select
the
general
contractor,
manage
project
construction
and
collect
construction
payments,
leaving
the
institution
with
limited
authority
over
project
construction
and
oversight.
I
Furthermore,
during
the
2005
legislative
session,
Senate
Bill
426
created
an
Advisory
Group
to
conduct
an
interim
study
concerning
lease
purchase
agreements
by
public
entities
based
on
the
findings
and
she
required
institutions
to
adopt
specific
procedural
language
for
these
agreements
on
or
before
December
31st
2007.
However,
both
institutions
failed
to
comply
with
this
mandate
and
then
she
did
not
enforce
this
policy.
I
On
page
31,
we
discussed
State
funding
being
appropriated
for
unlv's
medical
education
building
under
a
public-private
partnership.
Specifically
25
million
was
requested
for
furnishings
and
Equipment.
Despite
the
development
agreement
stating
the
furniture
and
equipment
was
the
responsibility
of
the
non-profit.
I
In
addition,
when
UNLV
requested
the
funds
to
be
transferred
to
the
nonprofit,
they
did
so
without
supporting
documentation
to
ensure
to
ensure
funds
were
spent
in
accordance
with
legislative
intent.
While
the
non-profit
indicated
indicated
that
final
project
expenses
would
be
about,
125
million
total
funding
for
the
project
included
the
25,
including
the
25
Main
State
appropriation,
was
143.7
Million,
the
nonprofit
indicated
excess
funding
will
be
used
for
additional
projects
at
UNLV
legislative
committee
meetings.
Regarding
the
appropriation
indicated,
the
funding
should
be
the
last
dollar
spent
and
the
bill
included
a
reversion
clause
for
unspent
funds.
I
In
addition,
one
of
20
or
five
percent
of
design
solicitations
was
missing
an
executed
agreement
and
instead
utilized
the
solicitation
itself
as
the
agreement.
Lastly,
the
cost
of
the
project,
the
cost
for
a
project
solicited
through
the
design,
build
method,
increased
the
Construction
contract
by
1.8
million
or
almost
10
percent
to
the
total
construction
cost.
When
the
120-day
project
solicitation
deadline
was
delayed.
Five
months,
the
Review
Committee
had
taken
almost
three
months
to
evaluate
bid
proposals
and
another
two
months
lapse
before
institutions.
Legal
counsel,
completed
the
review
of
the
contract.
I
Page
33
contains
five
recommendations
to
strengthen
procurement
practices
and
Chi,
including
seeking
clarification
on
public-private
Partnerships
and
developing,
and
revising
policies
and
procedures
related
to
project
solicitations
appendix
a
on
page.
34
shows
assembly
Bill,
416,
chapter
467
from
the
2021
legislative
session.
That
requires
the
legislative
auditor
to
conduct
an
audit
of
the
Nevada
system
of
higher
education.
I
Appendix
B
on
page
36,
illustrates
Project
funding
sources
at
both
institutions
and
on
page
37,
appendix
C
shows
project
instruction
costs
due
to
change
orders
at
each
Institution
foreign,
appendix
D.
On
pages
38
and
39
show
project
project,
unsupported
and
unallow
change
order
amounts
at
both
institutions.
I
Appendix
e
on
page
40
demonstrates
project
increases
due
to
scope,
modifications
at
UNLV
and
UNR
on
page
41
through
45
we
describe
our
audit
methodology
and
she
respond
and
she's
response
to.
The
audit
report
begins
on
page
46.,
then
on
page
48
we
list
the
audit
recommendations
and
show
the
system
accepted
all
18
recommendations.
A
Thank
you
very
much,
I,
don't
see
any
questions
from
the
committee.
I
will
take
a
motion
for
the
audit
report
so
moved
by
assemblywoman
Miller
second
from
Senator
Hammond
any
discussion
on
the
motion.
A
J
Vice,
chair
and
subcommittee
members,
my
name
is
Zach
forges,
Deputy
legislative
auditor
and
we
will
be
presenting
the
institution
foundations
report
beginning
on
page
one
and
continuing
through
Page
Six.
We
provide
background
information
on
the
Nevada
system
of
higher
education,
including
institution
foundations
and
Association
Associated
foundations.
Private
donations
and
administrative
fees.
Exhibits
two
through
five
also
provide
general
information
on
the
financial
growth
of
Foundations
cash,
Investments
and
other
assets
and
the
availability
of
foundation
assets.
J
J
The
audit
findings
begin
on
page
eight,
where
we
found
that
almost
all
gift
donations
were
assigned
to
the
appropriate
Foundation
gift
account
in
accordance
with
donor's
intent.
Our
testing
found
763
out
of
774
or
99
percent
of
sample
donations
at
seven
institutions
were
properly
recorded
by
the
foundations,
the
sample
included,
116
million
dollars
and
donations
received
between
July,
1st
2017
and
June
30th
2021..
J
However,
for
65
out
of
774
or
8
percent
of
sampled
donations
tested
acknowledgment,
letters
and
donation
receipts
were
not
available
at
five
of
the
seven
foundations.
It
is
possible.
These
letters
may
have
been
sent
to
donors,
but
some
of
the
foundations
just
did
not
retain
a
copy,
exhibit
6.
On
page
10
displays
this
information
for
federal
tax
income
purposes.
J
Donors
should
have
donation,
acknowledgment,
letters
or
gift
receipts
as
backup
for
their
tax
deductible
donations.
These
letters
and
receipts
also
provide
the
donor
reassurance.
Their
donation
was
appropriately
allocated
as
they
intended.
Ncaa
Board
of
Regents
policies
indicate
foundations
are
to
send
donors.
Timely
acknowledgment
of
donations,
policies
at
the
foundation
level
did
not
consistently
address
the
nature
and
timing
or
retention
of
these
acknowledgments.
J
J
These
errors
were
not
seen
at
other
institutions,
foundations,
CSN,
Foundation
staff,
provided
a
Reconciliation
of
the
data
from
the
two
systems
and
were
able
to
match
the
total
donation
dollar
amounts
over
the
four-year
audit
scope.
However,
we
found
discrepancies
related
to
donor
information
between
the
two
systems.
J
Furthermore,
CSN
Foundation
staff
could
not
provide
support
of
donor
intent
and
10
out
of
the
110
or
6
or
9
percent
of
samples.
Excuse
me,
because
we
could
not
establish
donor,
intend
we
cannot
verify.
The
donation
was
allocated
to
the
correct
gift
fund
at
the
bottom
of
page
11
and
continuing
on
to
page
12.
J
Page
12
also
contains
two
recommendations
to
ensure
the
foundations,
have
adequate
policies
related
to
acknowledgment
or
receipts
for
donors
and
to
encourage
institutions,
foundations
boards
to
verify
key
control
processes
are
occurring.
This
includes
reconciliation
of
donor
software
to
financial
software
and
retention
of
supporting
documentation.
Establishing
donor's
intent.
Chapter
2
begins
on
page
13..
J
We
found
institutions
generally
expended
donated
funds
consistently
with
donor
intent.
Our
testing
found
686
out
of
690
or
99
percent
of
gift
fund
expenditures
tested
were
appropriately
spent.
The
sample
included
expenditures,
totaling
23
million
dollars
spent
between
July
1st
2017
and
June
30th
2021..
J
J
Some
expenditures
did
not
have
sufficient
supporting
documentation.
These
were
not
egregious
deviations
but
warranted
the
attention
of
the
institutions.
Examples
include
scholarship
expenditures
where
a
small
number
of
students
at
four
different
institutions
did
not
meet
scholarship
criteria
specified
by
the
donor.
We
also
found
instances
related
to
documentation
of
a
purchase
order
or
contract
for
the
expenditure
was
not
finalized.
J
Prior
to
Services
occurring
on
page
17,
we
found
four
instances
where
Athletics
seat
premium
donations
for
one
sport
were
used
to
pay
game
guarantees
for
a
different
sport
at
UNR
UE,
due
to
an
IRS
rule,
change
in
2018
Foundation
staff
reported
that
this
type
of
donation
is
no
longer
accepted,
and
such
funds
are
now
donated
to
a
general
Athletics
gift
fund.
We
also
found
a
small
number
of
transactions
in
our
sample
being
processed
without
adequate,
supporting
documentation.
J
This
related
to
meal
expenditures
that
did
not
list
the
specific
team
members
or
coaching
staff
that
the
meal
was
and
that
the
meal
was
used
for
its
intended
purpose.
As
a
result
of
a
UNR
Foundation
internal
audit
in
February
of
2022
or
2020.
Excuse
me,
unr's
Intercollegiate
athletics
department
is
now
required
to
provide
the
purpose
of
the
meals
and
names
of
individuals.
We
tested
an
additional
sample
of
UNR
ICA
expenditures
in
fiscal
year
2022
and
found
that
all
expenditures
had
sufficient
supporting
documentation.
J
Appendix
a
beginning,
on
page
19
shows
assembly,
Bill
416
chapter
467
from
the
2021
legislative
session
that
requires
legislative
auditor
to
conduct
an
audit
of
the
Nevada
system
of
higher
education
appendix
B.
On
pages
21-26,
we
describe
our
audit
methodology
appendix
C.
On
pages
27
and
28
contain
entry's
response
to
the
audit
report.
J
K
A
question,
but
just
a
comment,
really
appreciate
how
detailed
you
went
in
this
audit
and
still
didn't
really
find
much
wrong,
so
it
was
kind
of
refreshing
to
see
a
positive
outcome.
One
of
your
audits,
so
thank
you
for
the
hard
work.
Thank.
A
A
L
Good
morning,
chair
dondera
Loop
and
members
of
the
vice
chair,
dondera
Loop
and
members
of
the
audit
subcommittee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Amanda
Barlow
Deputy
legislative
auditor
I
will
start
with
some
background
information
which
begins
on
page
one.
The
division's
mission
is
to
provide
barrier-free
communities
in
which
individuals
with
disabilities
have
access
to
opportunities
for
competitive
integrative
employment
and
self-sufficiency.
L
L
On
page
three,
we
share
additional
information
about
Vocational,
Rehabilitation
or
VR
programming,
VR
Services
help
people
with
mental
or
physical
disabilities
obtain
or
maintain
employment
through
training,
counseling
and
other
support
methods.
The
division
also
coordinates
with
school
districts
to
provide
pre-employment
transition,
services
or
pre-eds.
L
L
Our
audit
objectives
were
to
one
analyze
whether
the
division
is
performing
sufficient
Outreach
for
pre-employment
transition,
Services
youth
programming
and
two
determine
if
certain
activities
related
to
the
approval
and
oversight
of
the
adult.
Vocational
Rehabilitation
programs
are
adequately
monitored
and
approved.
L
Our
findings
begin
on
page
seven.
The
division
lacks
the
necessary
processes
to
adequately
implement
priets.
The
division
fell
short
of
meeting
youth
spending
requirements
by
an
average
of
five
percent.
Since
2018.
the
grant
requires
the
division
to
expend
at
least
15
percent
of
the
Grant
on
qualifying
priet
services
to
comply
with
Grant
requirements.
L
As
stated
on
page
8,
we
found
that
the
division
has
not
adequately
developed
a
service
plan
for
preet's
program
delivery
to
ensure
Services,
Program
and
financial
requirements
are
met
to
meet
Federal,
grant
spending
and
match
requirements.
The
division
should
engage
in
a
thorough
program
planning
process.
A
tool
such
as
a
logic
model,
would
help
staff
with
planning
implementation
management
and
evaluation
of
activities.
L
We
demonstrate,
on
page
nine,
that
some
rural
school
districts
have
limited
if
any
services
for
youth,
While
others
have
more
established
programs.
Three
rural
counties
did
not
receive
any
Youth
Services
in
either
fiscal
year,
2020
or
2021.
The
primary
services
offered
in
the
remaining
rural
school
districts
was
a
virtual
job.
Shadow
online
education
may
not
always
be
the
most
effective
tool
considering
the
population
served.
However,
in
some
instances
the
only
option
available
in
many
rural
counties
is
are
is
the
online
services
federal
guidelines
for
transition.
L
L
On
the
bottom
of
page
12,
we
state
that
the
division
can
increase
Services
through
enhanced
collaboration
and
communication
staff
at
seven
school
districts
interviewed
indicated
that,
although
communication
recently
improved,
there
are
significant
ongoing
challenges.
For
example,
staff
did
not
always
respond
to
meeting
requests
or
attend
scheduled
meetings.
One
school
district
was
not
aware
of
in-classroom
opportunities,
and
several
districts
indicated
they
learned
about
Services
through
discussions
with
other
school
districts.
Additionally,
school
districts
were
told
that
certain
Services
were
not
available
to
rural
school
districts.
L
Most
school
districts
contacted
indicated
a
desire
to
increase
collaboration
with
the
division.
The
successful
delivery
of
priets
relies
on
both
entities
being
cooperative
partners
on
page
13.
We
indicate
that
the
division
did
not
adequately
track
program
data,
for
example,
invoices
submitted
by
school
districts
totaling
approximately
104
104
000
for
in
fiscal
year,
2021
comparable
reports
in
the
division's
data
management
system
totaled
less
than
thirty
seven
thousand
dollars.
Additionally,
internal
reports,
demonstrating
participant
totals,
did
not
match
participant
rosters
without
controls
over
Data
Tracking.
L
On
page
15,
We
Begin
our
findings
regarding
controls
for
the
adult
vocational
rehabilitation
services,
the
division
lacks
sufficient
controls
to
ensure
counselors
perform
annual
reviews.
41
of
client
cases
tested
did
not
contain
documentation
that
the
client's
employment
plan
was
reviewed
or
updated
annually.
L
On
page
16,
we
indicate
that
counselors
approved
spending
outside
authorized
limits.
Nine
of
the
16
cases
reviewed
exceeded,
planned
spending
amounts
and
cases
reviewed.
It
did
not
obtained
obtain
the
required
supervisory
approval.
These
nine
cases
totaled
a
hundred
and
four
thousand
dollars
in
additional
spending
over
the
level
of
supervisory
approved
amount.
With
some
plans
reviewed
to
the
original
plan,
costs
did
not
require
supervisory
approval,
but
the
final
cost
exceeded
approved
amounts.
The
division
does
not
have
a
process
to
ensure
that
costs
remain
within
authorized.
Spending
amounts.
L
On
page
17,
we
state
that
division
practices
allow
for
the
potential
misuse
of
services.
15
elderly
clients
obtained
hearing
aids
from
the
division,
while
only
three
clients
provided
evidence
of
employment.
Many
clients
closed
their
cases
without
employment
as
an
outcome.
After
receiving
hearing
aids
Additionally,
the
division
does
not
monitor
vendors
to
prevent
them
from
over
refer
over
referring
clients
to
the
division
solely
to
receive
services
not
covered
by
other
means.
L
For
example,
33
percent
of
the
money
spent
on
hearing
aids
in
our
testing
sample
came
from
one
provider
in
Washoe
County,
which
is
disproportionate
for
the
state.
Although
the
division
appropriately
serves
elderly
clients,
stronger
controls
can
ensure
that
clients
and
vendors
use
division
services
to
attain
and
retain
employment
at
the
bottom
of
page
17.
We
indicate
that
additional
efforts
are
required
to
improve
the
equitability
of
services,
fewer
Asian
and
Hispanic,
or
Latino
individuals
obtain
Services
when
compared
to
the
Nevada
population
Additionally.
L
The
average
cost
per
client
is
more
than
seven
hundred
dollars
less
than
the
average
for
Asian
clients
and
about
500
less
for
black
or
African-American
clients.
The
division
recently
began
Outreach
for
Hispanic
or
Latino
individuals.
However,
the
division's
efforts
do
not
address
all
inequities
noted
on
page
18.
We
list
five
recommendations
to
enhance
managerial
oversight
of
the
adult
programming
for
a
vocational
rehabilitation.
L
Appendix
a
on
page
19
provides
details
regarding
the
program's
location
and
descriptions
of
pre-employment
transition
services
appendix
B
on
page
20
is
our
audit
methodology
and
the
division's
response
begins
on
page
25..
The
division
accepted
all
eight
of
our
audit
recommendations.
This
concludes
my
presentation
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
additional
questions.
C
Thank
you,
madam
Vice,
chair,
actually
for
the
Department
Dieter,
if
they're
in
the
audience,
I
think
they're
up
in
Carson,
City
I'm
more
concerned
about
the
the
priets
information
that
was
given
to
us
and
I
was
wondering.
Having
received
some
of
this
information
now,
what
your
plans
are
to
try
and
spend
the
money
that
is
in
those
those
funds.
M
Good
morning
my
name
is
I'm:
the
administrator
of
The
Rehabilitation
division
with
Dieter
Vice,
chair
and
Daryl
Luke
to
Mr
Senator
Hammond.
So
we
in
in
the
past
year
we've
kind
of
I
guess.
Let
me
start
off
that
to
say
that
one
of
one
of
the
challenges
that
we
had
in
spending
prietz
funds
is
in
building
out
the
vendor
pool
that
exists
in
the
state
to
able
to
be
able
to
serve
these
these
students,
the
Prius
funds
were
provided,
or
they
were
passed
through
the
VR
act
in
2014.
M
So
that
was
the
the
initial
notice
that
we
had
in
having
these
additional
funds
or
not
additional
funds,
but
percentage
of
our
funds
that
need
to
be
allocated
to
serving
this
particular
population.
M
And
over
the
past
few
years,
we've
been
trying
to
build
out
that
pool
and
create
relationships
with
the
various
school
districts
to
be
able
to
serve
the
students.
One
of
the
struggles
that
we
had
is
during
the
covet
as
a
lot
of
the
students
started
kind
of
receiving
education
from
home.
That
kind
of
impacted
some
of
the
spending
that
we
had
as
we
were
not
able
to
properly
appropriately
reach
them
or
reach
them
in
a
safe
manner.
M
So,
as
the
pandemic
has
kind
of
veined
down,
we
started
continuing
to
improve
our
relationship
with
the
school
with
various
school
districts
throughout
the
state.
We've
set
up
these
face
Labs
at
various
school
districts
that
provide
in-classroom
training
on
various
types
of
a
vocational
training
such
as
training
on
how
to
be
an
electrician
or
not
necessarily,
training,
more
exploratory
training
on
how
to
be
an
electrician
or
a
plumber
or
accountant
or
marketing
jobs,
and
such
like
that.
C
Thank
you,
and
so,
if
I
understand
you
correctly,
it
was
basically
building
out
the
vendor
list,
building
out
the
vendor
relationships
and
then
and
then
having
more
of
a
relationship
with
the
school
districts
find
out
what
programs
they
have
and
then
adding
to
those
programs
as
well.
But
you
feel
like
those
vendor
relationships
are
in
a
position
where
you
are
able
to
now
spend
a
little
bit
more
money,
develop
programs
where
they're
not
and
expand
programs
where
they
do
exist.
So
you
guys
are
positioned
to
do
that
right
now,.
M
Georgian
Ellis
for
the
record,
Mr
Senator
Hammond.
Yes,
we
are
in
a
position
definitely
to
start
spending
more
more
funds
in
this
year
of
additionally
you're
going
to
spend
more
than
we
have
in
the
previous
years.
We
also
what
I
didn't
mention
have
in
the
last
year,
restructured
our
periods
agency
to
kind
of
elevate
it
within
the
department.
So
that
way,
they
have
a
more
of
a
support
from
from
upper
management
as
well,
so
that
they're
able
to
kind
of
create
the
better
relationship
with
the
school
districts
as
well.
M
K
Thank
you
so
much
Madame,
boister
I
just
have
a
quick
question
about
the
fact
that
some
of
the
minority
populations
are
underrepresented
and
and
I
understand.
That
could
possibly
be
due
to
outreach
issues,
but
I
just
wondered
why
the
average
cost
per
client
is
less
for
Asian
clients
or
African-American
or
black
clients.
M
M
We
don't
feel
that
that
using
that
as
a
parameter
as
a
parameter
as
to
how
we
are
serving
percentage-wise
with
within
the
particular
population
that
we
are
serving
that
doesn't
necessarily
translate
equally,
so
we
would
have
to
look
at
out
of
all
of
the
population
with
disabilities.
How
does
that
kind
of
compare
to
what
we
have
internally,
but
to
your
specific
question
around
the
cost?
I
think
part
of
that
comes
down
to
just
a
smaller
number
of
individuals
that
we
are
serving
also
us.
M
We
need
to
also
do
a
better
job
in
communicating
what
all
services
are
available
to
every
population
in
in
their
particular
languages,
if
that
is
part
of
part
of
the
barrier
and
to
ensure
that
they
that
they
receive
the
full
scope
of
services
that
that's
available.
But
I
know
that
I
have
a
a
very
specific
question
on
that.
I
would
have
to
do
some
research
and
get
back
to
you
on
that.
A
Okay,
see,
none
I'll,
take
a
motion
to
approve
the
audit
moved
by
assemblywoman
Miller
second,
by
Senator
Hammond
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye
any
opposed
motion
passes.
Thank
you
very
much
all
right.
We
will
move
on
to
item
four
e
and
this
is
the
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services
Division
of
Health
Care
financing
policy,
dual
enrollments
and
supplemental
drug
rebates
and
will
welcome
Mr,
evendon
and
Mr
Peterson
to
the
table
and
please
go
ahead
and
make
your
presentation.
N
Vice,
chair
and
committee
members
for
the
record
I'm
will
Everton
Deputy
legislative
auditor
beginning
on
page
one
and
continuing
through
Page
four.
In
the
auto
report,
we
provide
background
information
on
a
division
of
healthcare
financing
policy,
including
the
vision's
mission,
budgeting,
Staffing
revenues
and
expenditures
for
fiscal
year
2021
and
shown
in
exhibit
one
on
page
two.
In
addition,
the
report
includes
information
on
different
Medicaid
programs
such
as
Managed
Care
organizations,
abbreviated
as
mcos
overview
of
the
supplemental
drug
rebate
program,
the
federal
Medicaid
assistance
percentage
and
the
public
assistance
report.
N
The
Paris
intermatched
Interstate
match
is
performed
quarterly
in
February,
May,
August
and
November
of
each
year.
The
vet
is
participation,
submitting
program.
Enrollment
data
for
pairs
matching
is
required
by
the
Social
Security
Act,
as
a
condition
of
receiving
Medicaid
funding
for
automated
Data
Systems.
This
act
also
requires
the
states
to
have
eligibility
determination
system
that
provides
for
data
matching
through
pairs
or
any
successor
system,
including
magic
with
medical
assistant
programs
operated
by
other
states.
N
Using
the
Paris
Interstate
match
data
we
identified
7092
Nevada
Medicaid
recipients
who
are
actively
enrolled
in
the
MCO,
but
also
have
concurrent
enrollment
in
another
State's
Medicaid
Program
for
44
out
of
the
50
recipients
tested
that
were
enrolled
in
Nevada.
First
monthly
capitation
payments
continue
in
an
average
of
12
months
after
the
individual
enrolled
in
another
state
using
statistical
principles.
We
estimated
improper
payments
for
calendar
year
2020
for
13
million
and
9.9
million
for
calendar
year
2021..
N
In
the
report
we
acknowledged
during
the
public
health
emergency,
there
are
restrictions
on
Medicaid
disenrollment.
However,
I
stayed
in
on
page
seven
per
Federal
Public
Health
Emergency
guidelines
during
the
public
health
emergency.
The
division
was
still
allowed
to
disrupt
individuals
from
Medicaid.
If
the
person
was
found
to
be
no
longer
a
state
resident
exhibit
three
and
page
9
in
the
report
shows
examples
of
five
Nevada
Medicaid
recipients
who
had
concurrent
enrollments
in
other
states
their
length
of
concurrent
enrollment
and
total
improper
capitation
payment
to
calendar
year
2020.
N
continuing
on
page
nine,
we
discussed
at
federal
law
and
state
policy
do
not
allow
to
Medicaid
recipient
to
be
enrolled.
Concurrently
with
another
State
Medicaid
Program
to
qualify
for
Medicaid,
you
need
to
be
a
resident
of
the
state.
You
apply
for
Medicaid,
so
once
a
Medicaid
recipient
enrolled
in
another
State's
program,
they
no
longer
qualify
as
a
Nevada
resident
for
eligibility
purposes.
N
We
also
acknowledge,
on
page
nine,
that
using
the
Paris
data
alone
could
not
solely
be
used
to
determine
a
recipient's
eligibility
and
terminate
coverage.
The
energy
agency
must
seek
additional
information
from
the
recipient.
However,
per
federal
law
Winchester
State
confirms
the
recipient
has
been
determined
to
be
enrolled
in
another
State's
Medicaid
Program.
The
state
is
not
required
to
provide
advance
notice,
a
termination.
N
In
addition,
on
page
nine,
we
know
other
states.
We
reviewed,
have
documented
processes
for
performance
analysis
of
the
pairs
data,
for
example,
although
not
mentioned
in
the
report,
we
observed
the
state
of
New
York
has
detailed
processes
for
following
up
on
Paris
data,
Interstate
matches
and
disenrolling
ineligible
participants
and
recovering
and
proper
decapitation
payments
retroactively
for
the
months
where
medical
claims
for
recipients
were
not
paid.
N
Continuing
the
bottom
of
page
nine
and
top
of
page
10.
In
the
report
we
discussed
in
the
report
that
the
division
does
not
have
a
process
or
policies
procedure
to
identify
and
recover
in
proper
capitation
payments
for
dual
enrollments.
However,
contracts
between
the
division
and
mcls
allow
the
division
to
adjust
or
recover
in
proper
capitation
payments
for
up
to
three
years,
as
defined
by
the
contracts
and
proper
payments,
include
fraud,
waste
abuse
and
errors
on
the
part
of
the
division.
N
on
March
27
2019,
the
division
issued
a
memorandum
to
mcos
detailing
the
requirement
to
submit
rebates.
Let's
say
one
percent
administration
fee
at
the
end
of
each
quarter.
Furthermore,
the
division
indicated
mcos
were
to
provide
a
comprehensive
reconciliation
of
Pharmacy
rebates
and
voice
and
received
with
each
payment.
However,
despite
issuing
the
memorandum,
we
found
a
division
took
no
additional
action
to
verify
millions
of
dollars
in
supplemental
drug
rebates.
N
N
N
Continuing
on
page
11,
the
report
discusses
that
division
did
not
obtain
supporting
documentation
to
ensure
supplemental
drug
rebate.
Payments
were
made
accurately
or
timely.
In
addition,
the
division
did
not
establish
formal
policies
and
procedures
to
reconcile
or
review
documentation.
A
supplemental
drug
rebates
invoice
collected
received
by
mcos.
N
During
the
audit,
we
found
the
division
to
not
have
supporting
documentation
from
the
MCO
to
determine
what
supplemental
drug
rebates
were
owed.
We
requested
directly
from
the
mcos
the
supporting
documentation
for
supplemental
drug
rebates,
in
which
we
identified
another
900
000
dollars
in
drug
rebates
were
collected
by
the
mco's
from
drug
manufacturers,
but
not
remitted
to
the
state.
N
Starting
on
the
bottom
of
page
11.
We
discussed
that
required
audits
of
certain
MCO
activities
related
to
supplemental
drug
rebates
are
not
being
performed
as
outlined
in
Senate
bill
378.,
which
requires
a
division
to
form
an
annual
audit
of
each
MCO,
including
analysis
of
all
claims
processed
to
evaluate
supplemental
drug
rebate,
compliance
continuing
to
page
212.
N
Effective
January
1st
2022
the
division
amended
its
MCO
contracts
and
include
Provisions
that
help
ensuring
compliance
with
statues
by
requiring
annual
audits
by
the
division
and
by
the
independent
account
and
give
the
state
or
its
legs
a
need.
The
right
to
review
and
audit
information
related
to
supplemental
drug
rebates
and
provide
for
Mutual
cooperation
and
Grant
Auditors
full
access
to
relevant
information
according
to
the
division
staff
turnover
impacted,
the
division's
ability
to
perform
and
obtain
audits
specified
in
Senate
bill
378..
N
On
pages,
12
and
13
of
the
report
contains
10
recommendations
to
reduce
improper
MCO
capitation
payments
and
improve
the
collection
of
MCO
supplemental
drug
rebates.
Appendix
a
starting
on
page
14
in
report
shows
MCO
composite
estimates
for
capitation
rates
by
region,
category
and
age
group
for
calendar
years
2020
and
2021.
N
K
I
I
actually
was
scratching
itch,
but
now
that
you
asked
me
thank
you
I'm
just
this
is
actually
not
for
the
Auditors,
though
it's
for
the
Department.
A
O
Madam
chair,
if
I
may
start
the
response.
This
is
Marla
McDade,
Williams,
deputy
director
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services
before
I
have
Miss
roybald
respond.
I
just
want
to
take
an
opportunity
to
thank
the
LCB
Auditors
for
this
audit
and
acknowledge
that
we've
had
changes
in
leadership
at
the
division
of
healthcare
financing
and
policy,
and
we've
had
multiple
vacancies
in
the
division
throughout
the
pandemic.
The
department
is
committed
to
assisting
the
division
and
putting
the
systems
in
place
to
prevent
these
findings
in
the
future
and
to
make
needed
improvements.
O
Additionally,
we're
looking
forward
to
the
efforts
of
the
Department
of
administration
on
developing
solutions,
to
position,
vacancies
and
challenges
with
retention
of
staff
and
and,
as
you
know,
audits,
come
in
and
they
assess
how
we're
managing
programs
and
there's
never
an
intent
not
to
Implement
programs
as
well
as
we
can,
particularly
with
Medicaid
I,
think,
there's
always
a
focus
on
ensuring
that
we
are
doing
everything
we
can
to
provide
proper
Services
while
ensuring
that
we're
managing
as
responsibly
as
we
can
fiscally.
O
If
there's
a
specific
question,
you
know
I'm
happy
to
turn
it
over
to
Sandy
but
I.
You
know,
there's
never
an
intent
not
to
implement
programs
as
well
as
we
can
it.
Just
it
just
happens,
and
you
know
when
we
do
our
best
to
ensure
that
we
are
have
policies
and
procedures
in
place
and
that
we
have
the
staff
to
actually
comply
and
I.
P
Good
morning,
thank
you
for
the
question:
Sandy
rublid
for
the
record
I'm
a
Deputy
Administrator
at
the
division
of
healthcare
financing
and
policy.
We
again
thank
the
Auditors
for
these
findings.
It
does
help
us
improve
our
program,
which
is
very
important
to
us.
We
are
currently
discussing
how
we
would
go
about
recovering
any
improper
payments
with
both
our
federal
partners-
and
we
heard
this
morning
about
other
states
that
are
doing
this.
We
will
also
be
speaking
to
those
other
states
and
look
forward
to
providing
that
detail
in
our
corrective
action
plan.
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
I
would
just
like
to
take
a
personal
moment
and
express
my
condolences
and
I'm
sure
of
the
committee
over
the
passing
of
Miss
Melissa
Lewis,
who
was
your
chief
of
fiscal
operations
and
so
I
know
that
that
will
also
leave
a
hole
in
your
team.
But
please
know-
and
please
relay
to
your
colleagues
that
we
are
all
thinking
of
you.
Thank
you.
Thank.
O
Q
A
That
thank
you
so
with
that
I
will
take
a
motion
to
approve
this
audit
so
moved
by
assemblywoman,
Miller
seconded
by
Senator
Hammond
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye,
all
those
opposed
motion
passes
and
we
will
move
on
two
or
five
yay.
We
left
four.
We
went
to
five
agenda
item
five:
the
presentation
of
governmental
and
private
facilities
for
children,
Mr
Crossman.
Please
go
ahead.
E
Thank
you
Vice
chair
for
the
record,
Dan
Crossman
legislative
auditor.
One
of
the
roles
that
we
have
is
to
review
governmental
and
private
facilities
for
children
on
an
ongoing
basis
and
provide
information
to
assist
in
legislative
oversight.
Ultimately,
ultimately,
our
goal
is
to
help
ensure
adequate
protection
of
the
children
that
are
in
these
facilities.
Our
efforts
in
this
area
have
been
to
continue
to
increase
the
number
of
facilities
that
we
can
visit
and
inspect
this
year.
E
R
R
R
On
page
8
of
the
report,
we
state
that
Nevada
homes
for
youth
has
a
provisional
sapta
certification,
has
maintained
licensure
through
hcqc
and
continues
to
accept
placements
from
DFS.
As
an
update
to
our
report,
we
were
notified
last
week
that
the
facility
failed
to
renew
their
sapta
certification
after
being
placed
on
corrective
action,
which
is
a
licensure
requirement
for
this
type
of
facility.
R
Sapta
certification
was
withdrawn
from
the
facility
as
of
December
1st
2022..
As
stated
on
page
8
of
our
report.
We
recommend
that
the
licensing
agencies
and
placement
agency
enhance
communication
and
coordinate
their
efforts
to
ensure
proper
oversight
of
the
facility,
beginning
at
the
bottom
of
page
8
through
Page
11.
We
discuss
concerns
noted
at
never
give
up
youth
Healing
Center
commonly
referred
to
as
ngu
ngu
is
a
psychiatric
Residential,
Treatment
Facility
licensed
by
hcqc.
This
was
our
second
visit
to
ngu
in
the
last
five
years.
R
Some
of
the
significant
issues
noted
in
noted,
included,
incomplete
and
missing
medication
records,
administration
of
medication
without
statutorily
required
consent
and
staff
were
unaware
of
children's
treatment
plans.
Additionally
damaged
property
post
safety
hazards.
There
were
missing
statutory
required,
Personnel
records
and
training
and
documentation
was
missing
that
an
incident
was
reported
in
accordance
with
mandated
reporting
requirements.
R
R
Following
our
inspections
in
August
2022,
we
communicated
our
concerns
to
hcqc
hcqc,
completed
three
complaint
investigations
prior
to
our
visit
and
completed
two
additional
complaint
investigations.
After
our
visit,
noting
similar
concerns,
hcqc
also
imposed
a
financial
sanction
on
the
facility
continuing
to
Pages
12
through
14.
We
discuss
Three
Angels
care.
Three
Angels
care
is
a
foster
care
agency
licensed
by
Washoe
County
Human
Services
Agency.
R
R
Washoe
County
implemented
corrective
action
plans
for
two
of
the
homes
and
issued
an
additional
corrective
action
plan
for
the
director
of
Three
Angels
care.
All
corrective
action
plans
have
since
been
resolved
according
to
Washoe
County
on
pages
14
through
17.
We
note
our
concerns
with
two
homes
licensed
through
the
advanced
foster
care
program
at
the
Division
of
Child
and
Family
Services
or
DCFS
issues
included
on
secured
tools,
chemicals
and
knives.
R
There
was
not
a
secure
method
for
medication,
storage,
incomplete
training,
records,
missing
documentation
to
support
a
repeat
background
check
for
a
foster
parent
and
weak
policies
and
procedures.
Additionally,
complaint
forms
were
not
readily
available.
The
complaint
process
was
not
posted
and
there
was
no
documentation
that
children
were
made
aware
of
their
right
to
file
a
complaint.
R
In
turn,
a
serious
complaint
on
behalf
of
a
child
was
not
forwarded
to
the
legislative
auditor.
After
our
inspections
in
July,
2022
DCFS
did
not
renew
one
of
the
foster
parents.
Licenses
DCFS
previously
did
not
classify
their
Advanced
Foster
Care
Homes
as
foster
care
homes
that
provide
Specialized
Care
after
discussion
with
their
legal
counsel.
They
were
advised
that
their
homes
are
considered
foster
homes
that
provide
Specialized
Care
under
statute.
R
On
pages
17
and
18,
we
noted
a
concern
for
implementation
of
federal
standards
established
by
the
prison
rape,
elimination
act
commonly
referred
to
as
Pria
at
two
of
the
eight
correction
and
detention
facilities
that
we
inspected.
Prius
standards
require
juvenile
correction
and
detention
facilities
to
use
a
screening
tool
to
assess
children
for
sexual
victimization
or
abusiveness.
R
We
determined
two
facilities
used
a
screening
tool
which
did
not
assess
for
10
of
the
11
items
required
by
screening
standards.
The
pre-coordinator
for
the
state
agreed
the
facilities
did
not
use
a
screening
tool
that
met
Federal
standards.
The
state
has
developed
a
screening
tool
for
facilities
to
use,
as
stated
on
page
18
of
our
report.
We
recommend
that
the
facilities
obtain
and
implement
the
assessment
tool
developed
by
the
state
or
create
their
own
assessment
tool
which
meets
Pria
requirements.
R
R
NRS
218g
requires
facilities
to
forward
to
the
legislative
auditor
copies
of
any
complaint
filed
by
a
child
under
their
custody
or
by
any
other
person.
On
behalf
of
such
a
child.
Concerning
the
health,
safety,
welfare
and
civil
and
other
rights
of
the
child,
we
received
636
complaints
from
30
facilities
in
Nevada
in
fiscal
year
2022.,
the
other
27
Nevada
facilities
reported
that
no
complaints
were
filed
during
this
time.
R
Based
on
our
review
of
complaints,
we
have
identified
that
collection,
documentation,
review
and
resolution
of
complaints
vary
at
each
facility.
Facilities
also
have
different
interpretations
of
what
constitutes
health
safety,
welfare
and
civil
and
other
rights
of
a
child
exhibit
4.
On
page
21
summarizes
complaints
received
in
fiscal
year,
2022
submitted
by
facilities
based
on
the
type
of
facility.
R
During
our
inspections,
we
found
two
complaints
that
were
not
forwarded
to
the
legislative
auditor.
One
complaint
alleged
neglect
of
a
child
at
a
facility
and
another
complaint
described
physical
discipline
of
a
child
at
a
facility
appendix
a
on
page
22,
contains
a
glossary
of
terms
used
in
the
report
relevant
to
child
welfare.
R
Appendix
B
on
page
26
contains
a
list
of
inspections.
We
completed
appendix
C.
On
pages,
27-29
provides
some
background.
Population
and
Staffing
information
on
the
57
children's
facilities
in
Nevada
appendix
D,
beginning
on
page
30,
is
our
methodology.
That
concludes
my
presentation.
I
would
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
the
subcommittee
may
have.
A
A
A
I've,
I've,
I,
just
don't
even
know
what
to
say
when
I
hear
some
of
these
complaints.
So
I
appreciate
your
time
in
presenting
this
report
and
with
that
I
would
I
would
hope
that
we
don't
here
another
Report
with
these
same
complaints
in
the
future.
A
Okay,
with
that
I'll
take
a
motion
to
accept
the
audit.
Thank
you.
Assemblywoman
Miller
moved
for
the
audit
second
from
Senator
Hammond
any
discussion
from
the
committee.
A
All
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye.
All
those
opposed
motion
passes.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
today
and
with
that
we
will
go
to
agenda
item
six
presentation
of
state
of
Nevada
single
audit
report
and
Miss
Getz
and
Mr
schlicker
from
Eid
Bailey
I.
Believe
please.
S
Good
morning
Madam
Vice,
chair
of
members
of
the
audit
subcommittee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Tammy
Goetz
audit
supervisor
I
will
begin
with
a
brief
overview
and
background
information
on
the
single
Auto
report
for
the
year
ended.
June,
30th
2021.,
the
single
audit
was
performed
under
a
contract
with
the
firm
of
ID
Bailey.
The
single
audit
is
required
by
the
federal
government
for
state
agencies
who
accept
and
expend
federal
funds.
S
The
audit
of
federal
funds
is
an
audit
of
certain
programs
and
related
requirements
established
by
the
federal
government
for
use
and
management
of
those
funds.
The
financial
statements
are
comprised
of
the
independent
Auditor's
report,
Management's
discussion
and
Analysis.
The
financial
statements
notes
to
the
financial
statements
required
supplemental
information
and
related
notes
and
the
independent
Auditor's
report
on
financial
reporting.
S
The
independent
Auditor's
report
in
the
single
audit
report
notes
the
financial
statements
received
an
unmodified
opinion.
This
means
the
Auditors
have
been
able
to
access
all
financial
information
and
that
the
information
conformed
to
accounting
principles
generally
accepted
in
the
United
States
of
America.
S
S
S
The
17
findings
related
to
the
financial
statement,
audit
related
to
errors
in
recording
unemployment,
Highway
fund,
inventory
receivables
and
developer
deposits,
Capital
assets
and
Medicaid
and
Chip
receivables,
liabilities,
expenses
and
payables.
Additional
errors
were
found
regarding
cash
and
investment.
Disclosures
outside
bank
account,
reconciliations,
prescription
rebates,
internal
balances
and
the
overall
control
environment
and
activities.
S
Accounting
adjustments
were
made
to
correct
most
errors.
The
remaining
findings
relate
to
Federal
Awards.
As
previously
stated,
there
were
46
Federal
compliance
findings
in
fiscal
year
2021.,
which
is
an
increase
from
prior
years.
There
were
25
in
fiscal
year
2020
and
33
findings.
In
fiscal
year
2019.
S
In
addition,
the
single
Auto
report
contains
Management's
response
to
auditor
findings,
including
the
prior
audit
findings
and
corrective
action
plans
prepared
by
agencies
who
received
the
findings
as
part
of
the
audit
process.
I'd
Bailey
confirmed
the
status
of
these
findings
related
to
any
programs
audited
in
the
current
year.
S
Furthermore,
Federal
entities
are
supposed
to
issue
management
decisions
regarding
state
agency
corrective
actions
for
any
current
year,
findings,
essentially
approving
or
denying
the
corrective
action
plans.
That
concludes
my
overview
of
the
single
Auto
report.
I
would
like
to
express
the
audit
division's
appreciation
for
the
professionalism
of
I'd
bailly
in
completing
the
single
audit
this
year
and
in
Prior
years,
representatives
from
Eid
Bailey
are
present
today.
To
answer
any
questions
the
committee
members
may
have
thank.
A
You
thank
you
very
much
and
are
there
any
questions
from
the
committee
assemblywoman
Dickman.
T
Hi,
yes,
thank
you.
Kurt
schlicker
audit
partner
with
Eid
Bailey
for
the
record
I
do
just
want
to
add
quickly.
We
very
much
appreciate
and
want
to
thank
LCB
for
their
continued
collaboration.
They
are
fantastic
to
work
with
great
assistance.
T
T
The
the
findings
this
year
are
a
significant
increase
from
the
prior
year
and
I'm
not
going
to
belabor
all
the
findings
and
go
into
excori.
You
know
into
bad
detail,
however.
I
do
want
to
highlight
that
we
did
write
a
finding
over
the
overall
control
environment
of
the
state
and
the
increase
in
findings
that
we've
seen
and
the
number
of
findings
that
we've
seen.
T
We've
we've
continually
seen
a
lack
of
improvement
in
the
reliability
or
the
quality
of
data
that
is
being
prepared
and
presented
to
the
controller's
office
reviewed
compiled,
whether
from
State
agencies
or
from
within
the
controller's
office,
and
we've
seen
a
continued
decline
in
that
reliability
and
quality
of
data,
and
that
is
what
led
to
our
overall
control
environment.
Finding
that
we
presented
today,
most
of
the
findings
in
detail
for
material
non-compliance
relate
to
reporting,
findings
and
subrecipient
monitoring
findings
and
those
reporting
findings
again
speak
towards
reliability
and
accuracy
of
data
and
I.
T
Think
at
the
root
cause
for
the
majority
of
these
findings
is
due
to
reliability
and
accuracy
of
data.
So
again,
I
just
want
to
thank
LCB
I.
Do
want
to
thank
the
state
agencies
in
the
controller's
office
too.
Even
though
there's
a
lot
of
findings,
they
do
work
with
us.
They
are
Cooperative,
they
don't
withhold
information
from
us,
but
you
know
I'm
speaking
more
towards
the
outcome.
As
far
as
reliability,
not
the
process,
they
are
very
professional.
It's
just
there's
a
lot
of
errors.
T
So
with
that
again,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions,
but
if
you
have
none,
then
we'll
move
on.
Thank.
A
K
A
All
right.
We
will
move
on
to.
A
Agenda
item
seven
Mr
Crosman:
please.
E
Thank
you,
Vice
chair
for
the
record,
Dan
Crossman
legislative
auditor
I'll
just
briefly
highlight
what
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
here
for
a
few
minutes.
The
six-month
reporting
process
was
established
in
years
ago
was
established
in
statute
many
years
ago
to
help
ensure
that
audit
recommendations
are
implemented
to
the
satisfaction
of
my
office
as
well
as
this
subcommittee.
E
A
U
Yes,
good
morning,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Eugene
alera
audit
supervisor.
In
March
2022
we
issued
the
report
on
the
Department
of
Corrections.
The
six-month
report
issued
by
the
office
of
Finance
was
received
in
December
2022
and
indicated
that
13
of
our
16
recommendations
were
partially
implemented
and
no
action
was
taken
on
three
recommendations.
U
After
reviewing
the
evidence,
we
now
consider
recommendation
11
to
be
partially
implemented
due
to
the
late
submission
of
evidence
and
the
need
for
additional
documentation.
We
are
not
changing
the
status
of
recommendation
13
at
this
time.
Therefore,
as
of
the
date
of
this
meeting,
the
status
of
our
16
recommendations
is
14,
partially
implemented
and
two
with
no
action
taken.
U
These
16
recommendations
are
listed
in
your
packet
and
relate
to
improving
the
Department's
processes.
Regarding
use
of
force,
monitoring,
training,
data
collection
and
other
related
activities,
we
have
two
questions
related
to
our
recommendations
that
we
would
like
to
direct
to
the
department
today.
The
first
question
is:
why
hasn't
the
department
made
significant
progress
towards
four
full
implementation?
V
Yeah,
thank
you
Vice
chair
and
members
of
the
legislative
audit
subcommittee.
My
name
is
James
arenda
I'm,
the
director
for
the
Nevada
Department
of
Correction.
Today
is
my
day.
Four
with
the
agency,
however,
I
did
review
the
audit
and
the
findings
and
the
recommendations
that
were
given
to
me
yesterday.
V
My
history,
also,
as
you
know,
with
eliminating
the
shotgun
juice
for
a
use
of
force
in
the
agency,
was
not
an
easy
task,
but
was
a
high
priority
of
mine,
and
a
continuation
of
trying
to
improve
use
of
force
is
going
to
be
one
of
my
big
goals
over
the
next
four
years,
but
with
the
resulting
of
the
last
four
to
six
months
on
compliance
to
the
recommendations.
I'll
leave
that
up
to
deputy
director
William
getter.
Q
Good
morning,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Bill
gitter
deputy
director
of
operations
for
the
Department,
soon
to
be
Warden
of
Ely,
State,
Prison,
again
Madam
Vice,
chair
and
committee
members.
Q
First
question:
why
haven't
we
made
more
progress?
Well
over
the
past
year,
especially
the
past?
The
six
months
of
this
report,
the
Personnel
shortages
in
the
department
have
reached
pretty
much
one
in
three
officers
and
that
pushes
our
supervisory
management
staff
forward
online
to
ensure
the
daily
operations.
The
Humane
treatment
of
of
offenders
is
our
primary
responsibility,
protection
of
the
public.
Q
So
in
the
in
the
midst
of
our
Personnel
shortages,
we
have
been
working
every
day
to
maintain
this
Securities
public
in
the
and
the
Humane
treatment,
the
offenders
and
not
so
much
pushing
the
administrative
ball
forward
with
these
initiatives.
That's
not
not
an
excuse.
We
certainly
take
it
seriously
and
it's
lucky
that
the
detectors
come
back
to
the
department
and
new
leadership
has
has
been
established
so
that
we
can
not
only
continue
our
daily
efforts
of
maintaining
Public
Safety
and
the
Humane
treatment
for
the
offenders,
but
also
pushing
these
these
initiatives
forward.
Q
So
we
can
bring
them
all
to
fruition
and
make
the
department
better
I'd
like
to
take
a
moment
to
thank
Mr
Crossman
his
staff.
They
always
do
a
phenomenal
job.
They
make
our
department
better
and
the
way
they
do
it
and
their
professionalism
makes
me
want
to
work
hard
to
be
better
for
their
department.
So
thank
you.
Mr
Crossman.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
I
I,
guess
my
suggestion
would
be
that
perhaps
we
might
want
to
hear
from
you
in
the
future
about
an
update
and
where
we're
at
at
that
point
on
this
subject,.
A
Moved
by
assemblywoman
Miller
seconded
by
Senator
Hammond
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say:
I
all
those
opposed
motion
passes
and
we
will
go
to
7
B
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services
Division
of
Child
and
Family
Services
management
of
maltreatment
reports
and
child
health
Miss
Gantz.
Please
go
ahead
when
you're
ready.
S
Good
morning
again,
Madam
Vice,
chair
and
members
of
the
audit
subcommittee
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Tammy
Goetz
audit
supervisor.
In
March
2022
we
issued
an
auto
report
on
the
Division
of
Child
and
Family
Services
management
of
male
treatment
reports
and
child
health.
The
division
filed
its
plan
for
corrective
action
in
June,
2022.
S
Enclosed
in
your
binder
is
a
six-month
report
prepared
by
the
office
of
Finance
on
the
status
of
the
11
recommendations
contained
in
the
audit
report.
As
of
December
2022,
the
office
of
Finance
indicated
nine
recommendations
were
fully
implemented
and
no
action
was
taken
on
two
recommendations:
recommendations,
number
six
and
number
10.
S
The
division
asserted
this
recommendation
is
a
high
priority
and
will
be
implemented
after
recommendation,
number
10
is
completed.
Recommendation
number
10
was
to
complete
a
feasibility
assessment
of
Lincoln.
The
Medicaid
claims
database
to
Unity
the
office
of
Finance
also
indicated
the
division
plans
to
identify
ways
to
locate,
grant
funding,
to
establish
a
link
between
Medicaid
and
unity.
S
The
division
stated
it
will
contract
with
the
vendor
to
complete
the
project
once
funding
is
secured,
while
a
link
between
these
two
systems
would
be
useful,
we
found
it
not
necessary
in
order
to
review
medical
claims
for
evidence
of
possible
abuse
and
neglect.
We
obtained
and
reviewed
claim
data
directly
from
Medicaid
to
complete
our
audit
testing.
W
For
the
record,
I'm
John,
bradkey,
Deputy,
Administrator,
child
welfare
and
I,
first
and
foremost,
thank
the
audit
team
for
this
audit
that
truly
helps
us
improve
the
care
and
treatment
of
children
in
our
custody.
W
W
We
also
wish
to
express
our
appreciation
for
the
appropriation
of
arpa
funds
to
this
purpose.
This
will
greatly
enhance
our
ability
to
oversee
many
processes
in
the
division.
That
is
my
response.
A
A
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
Miller,
second,
from
Senator
Hammond,
any
discussion.
A
Hearing
none
all
those
in
favor,
say:
aye
I,
all
those
opposed
motion
passes
and
we
will
move
on
to
7c
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services
Division
of
Health
Care
financing
and
policy
information
security
and
Ms
Idol
Bingham.
A
Are
you
there?
You
are
please
go
ahead
when
you're
ready
thank.
X
You
good
morning,
Madam
Vice,
chair
and
members
of
the
audit
subcommittee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
Shirley
I
tell
Bingham
information
security,
audit
supervisor.
In
March
of
2022,
we
issued
an
audit
report
on
the
division,
Health
Care
financing
and
policy
information,
security
of
the
Department
of
Health
and
Human
Services.
X
A
Thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
we
will
ask
for
questions.
A
A
Okay,
I'm
sorry
I
didn't
hear
what
you
said
totally.
Thank
you
very
much
assembly,
woman,
dick
and
made
me
the
motion
to
approve
a
second
by
Senator
Hammond,
any
discussion,
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
I,
all
those
opposed
hearing
none
motion
passes.
Thank
you
very
much
and
thank
you
assemblywoman
Dickman.
A
So
with
that
we
will
go
to
agenda
item
8,
which
is
the
second
period
and
final
period
of
public
comment,
we'll
invite
our
in
person
in
Las,
Vegas
and
Carson
City
first
and
then
we'll
do
our
virtual.
So,
let's
start
with
Las
Vegas.
Do
we
have
anybody
here
that
would
like
to
make
public
comment.
A
Seeing
none
BPS
when
you're
ready,
we'll
go
to
the
phone
lines.
Thank.
D
D
A
I
appreciate
that,
thank
you
very
much
and
with
that
I
would
like
to
thank
the
audit
Department
Mr
Crossman
for
all
your
hard
work.
I
know
that
these
are
time
consuming
and
they
are
done
very
well,
and
we
are
very
happy
that
you
are
all
with
us
to
do
these
reports
so
with
that
I
will
adjourn
the
meeting
and
thank
you
very
much
all
of
you
for
your
time.
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
Dickman
you're,
welcome.
Thank
you.
Everybody
have
a
nice
day
and
see
you
soon.