Financial Reports: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Questions relating to the interim financial statements
Q1 - How close are the interim financial statements to
being as accurate as the final year-end audited numbers? Answer
Q2 - Isn't the University's net loss only a
paper loss because of the projected $11 million of depreciation expense? Answer
Questions relating to the financial information included on
the GASB 35 Report
Q1 - What is the GASB 35 really all about anyway? Answer
Q2 - I thought GASB 35 was supposed to make the financial
reports easier to read. Answer
Q3 - How come I can't
find the two things I am
looking for - financial aid given to graduate students and health care
expenses for the last five years? Answer
Q4 -Where do I find the actual-to-budget comparison on
the audited financial statements? Answer
Q5 - How come the Student Financial Support in the
Annual Financial Report's Management Discussion & Analysis
(MD&A) is different than the
Student Financial Support in the income statement? Answer
Q6 - Why did you begin
grouping the funds into Restricted and Unrestricted
funds rather than the way it always was before - Current and Non-current
funds? Answer
A6. The GASB has been steadily moving the not-for-profit
financial reports to look more like the for-profit financial
reports. GASB 34 and 35 (adopted by MTU on July 1, 2000)
combined MTUs eight fund groups into a single column consolidated
balance sheet and income statement. The GASB has permanently and
drastically changed the financial reporting of governments and
universities.
I like to draw an analogy of the Current Funds Statement to
Elvis. Although Elvis lives in the hearts and minds of many fans,
and although many fans make their pilgrimage to Graceland, the King is
dead. Likewise, GASB 35 changed the perspective of reporting Current
and Non-current funds to reporting Restricted and Unrestricted
funds. Although Current Funds Statement lives in the
hearts and minds of many administrators, it also is dead.
I predict that over time, Current Funds Statement sightings
will diminish, just as Elvis sightings have diminished.
Questions relating to the netting feature of GASB 35
Q1 - Where are the fund transfers? Answer
Q2 - Where is the Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) from
Research? Answer
Q3 - I ran adhoc reports (Oracle Reports or
Discoverer), but my reports don't tie out to the audited financial
statements. What's up? Answer
Questions relating to GASB 35 and fund reporting
Q1 - I need to complete a survey. Where do I find the
Current Funds Statement? Answer
Q2 - So are you saying that fund accounting has
been thrown out the window by GASB 35? Answer
Q3 - I'm confused. I was told that cash outlays for
capital expenditures (building and equipment) was always only a
balance sheet transaction. You say, it wasn't? Answer
Questions relating to the General fund carryforwards
Q1 - Where are the General fund carry forwards on these
financial statements? Answer
Q2 - Are the General Fund carryforwards included in the
fund balance (deficit)? Answer
Questions relating to "old" data
Q1 - I want to do a 5 and a 10 year comparison of
revenues and expenses. Where are the audited financial statements
before 2001? Answer
Q2 - How do I get the pre-Banner data (prior to FYE
6/30/1993)? Answer
Questions relating to the interim financial statements
Back
to Top
Q1 - How close are the interim
financial statements to being as accurate as the final year-end audited
numbers?
Answer: We are very proud of our month-end closing
process. Very few universities or colleges have as accurate or timely
month end closing and reporting as MTU. We continue to improve our
month end closing processes so that there are now only three
significant closing procedures that are not done at month end, but are
only done for the fiscal year end close.
Here are the three differences:
1. Accruals of Accounts Payable
We typically close the books at the end of the second working day of
the month. On the other hand, at the end of the fiscal year (June 30),
we accrue expenses through the last day of the audit field work, i.e.
sometime in late August or early September. As a result, because the
window of opportunity to record expenses is open so long, the accounts
payable and accrued expenses are much larger at the end of the fiscal
year as compared to the end of any other month. There is nothing we can
do to change this under accrual of non-payroll related expenses.
2. Tuition Scholarship allowances and
financial aid expense
This split between tuition allowance and expense is compiled based on
the elaborate National Association of College and University Business
Officers (NACUBO) allocation. This allocation takes a significant
commitment of time and effort to complete. It is therefore only done
one time per year, and that is only for the audited financial
statements. Thus, the interim comparative statements are consistent,
because neither the current fiscal year nor the prior fiscal year have
the student financial support allocation. New in FY05 (and
forward) - This
estimate is now recorded on the interim financials.
3. Reclassifications and timing
These two items are best explained through examples of recent changes
in our accounting processes.
A. Both the construction-in-progress
expenditures and the equipment expenditures are currently netted or
offset against the Net Additions to Plant account in the FY04
(and forward) interim financial statements. This "netting" or
offsetting was only
done at year-end in FY03. When comparing the FY04 and FY03 fiscal
years,
this is an example of both reclassification and timing.
B. Timing (only): During FY04, we
have recorded and recognized depreciation expense on a monthly basis.
During FY03, we only recorded and recognized depreciation on a
quarterly basis - September, December, March, and June. Therefore
depreciation expense in January, February, April, and May, 2004 will be
greater than the equivalent month's expense in 2003.
Back to Top
Q2 - Isn't the University's net
loss only a paper loss because of the projected $11 million of depreciation expense?
Answer: That is a very astute observation, because
depreciation expense is indeed a non-cash item. To get a good
understanding of the relationship of cash and net income, let's look at
the second page of University's FY2003 Cash Flow Statement. This
important financial report shows how you can indeed have an operating
loss, but still increase the University cash! You start with the
operating loss, but then you have to add back the depreciation. On the
other hand, there are also other balance sheet cash transactions that
are not reflected on the income statement that directly affect cash. A
good example of that is construction-in-progress (CIP) which does not
show up on the income statement, but decreases cash.
Back to Top
Questions relating to the financial information included on
the GASB 35 Report
Back
to Top
Q1 - What is GASB 35
really all
about anyway?
Answer: The simplest way to think of GASB 35 is to change
the perspective of fund accounting from Current and Non-current funds
to Unrestricted and Restricted funds.
Restricted funds are used to account for activities which
are restricted for specific purposes by external agencies and
donors. Sponsored research projects are included in this grouping
as well as restricted gift accounts, scholarships and
fellowships. We also include the Loan fund, most of the Plant
fund and the Agency fund in the Restricted funds grouping.
Back to Top
Q2 - I thought GASB 35 was
supposed to make these financial reports easier to read.
Answer: By moving from the eight funds that we were
previously displaying to two fund group classifications, things really
are easier to understand. We now only have to think in binary
terms. The decision becomes easy when we only have to ask - is
the source of funds an external source with strings attached? If so,
then it is restricted. If not, then the activity is unrestricted.
Q3 - How come I
can't find the two things I am looking for - financial aid given to
graduate students and health care expenses for the last five years?
Answer: Just like the
TV commercial that tells us
"...there are some things that money just can't buy," there are many
things that the GASB 35 statements can't tell you either. For specific
informational requests, you will need to use the "ASK
MIKE" icon at the bottom of this page.
Back to Top
Q4 - Where do I find the
actual-to-budget comparison on these audited financial statements?
Answer: The audited financial reports only report the
actual revenues and expenses. The actual-to-budget comparisons are
considered managerial reports, and therefore not audited.
Back to Top
Q5 - How come the Student
Financial Support in the Annual Financial Report's Management
Discussion & Analysis (MD&A) is different than the Student
Financial Support in the income statement?
Answer: The simplest way to explain this prickly question
is through an example, such as the graduate student tuition support.
(For experienced MTU Banner users, these are E5 accounts.)
On the MD&A this tuition support is included in the
Student Financial Support line item. However, on our income statement
(SRECNA), the grad tuition support is included in either the
Instruction or the Research line items, not in Student Financial
Support.
There are other financial aid items, such as the Tuition
Reduction Incentive Program (TRIP) that are also confusing to
non-accountants. Unless you are an accounting theorist, rather than
trying to understand or reconcile these amounts, my recommendation is
to accept them as presented and worry about the more important things
in life!
Back
to Top
Q6 - Why did you begin
grouping the funds into Restricted and Unrestricted
funds rather than the way it always was before - Current and Non-current
funds?
Answer: The GASB has been
steadily moving the not-for-profit financial reports to look more like
the for-profit financial reports. GASB 34 and 35 (adopted
by MTU on July 1, 2000) combined MTUs eight fund groups into a single
column consolidated balance sheet and income statement. The GASB
has permanently and drastically changed the financial reporting of
governments and universities.
I like to draw an analogy of the Current Funds Statement to
Elvis. Although Elvis lives in the hearts and minds of many fans,
and although many fans make their pilgrimage to Graceland, the King is
dead. Likewise, GASB 35 changed the perspective of reporting Current
and Non-current funds to reporting Restricted and Unrestricted
funds. Although Current Funds Statement lives in the
hearts and minds of many administrators, it also is dead.
I predict that over time, Current Funds Statement sightings
will diminish, just as Elvis sightings have diminished.
Back
to Top
Questions relating to the netting feature of GASB 35
Back to Top
Q1 - Where are the fund
transfers?
Q2 - Where is the Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) from
Research?
Answer to both: GASB 35 presents the financial
information
on a combined funds basis. Therefore, since the "transfers in" of one
fund are exactly equal to the "transfers out" of another fund, there is
a net amount of $0 transfers to report. The same is true with the
research overhead return (ICR) in the General fund is exactly equal to
the research overhead charges to the various projects in the Expendable
Restricted fund group.
Back to Top
Q3 - I ran adhoc reports
(Oracle Reports or Discoverer), but my reports don't tie out to
the audited financial statements. What's up?
Answer: There are a number of GASB 35 eliminations
and
reclasses that are necessary to complete the financial statements. The
most notable are the necessary adjustments for the elimination of the
capital acquisitions. Under the old fund accounting reporting, those
expenditures were grossed up as expenses within the various functions
(Instruction, Research, etc) with an offset as a revenue item in the
plant fund. Under GASB 35, there are no capital expenses in the
operating funds and no corresponding offsetting revenue in the
Plant fund. Instead, these expenditures are reported similar to
for-profit corporations. Capital expenditures are reported only on the
balance sheet, not on both the balance sheet and the income statement.
Back to Top
Questions relating to GASB 35 and fund reporting
Back to Top
Q1 - I need to complete a
survey. Where do I find the Current Funds Statement?
Answer: The Current Funds Statement has been eliminated by
GASB 35, so you won't find it in the audited financial statements
anymore. Ditto for General Fund revenues and expenditures. If you need
help, Ask Mike.
Back to Top
Q2 - So are you
saying
that fund accounting has been thrown out the window by GASB 35?
Answer: No, the cash basis structure of
fund accounting is still
in place even though the reporting formats and classifications have
changed. Accounting for the write off of bad debts is a good example
that
demonstrates how the cash basis structure of true fund accounting is
still in place. Assume the University had an accounts receivable that
was determined uncollectable, so it was written off to bad debt
expense. After the write off, the balance sheet for that account
(Banner fund), would only have negative cash and a negative fund
balance. The only way to eliminate this situation is to transfer cash
from another fund into this account (Banner fund).
GASB 35 has both directly and indirectly affected
financial reporting. For example, under the previous AICPA reporting
model (with its fund-by-fund combining income statements and balance
sheets), the apportionment or allocation of interest income across fund
groups was very important. Under the current GASB 35 reporting of
combined funds, only the integrity of the interest/investment income is
important. How that income is spread across the various fund groups is
irrelevant with the exception of the appropriate allocation to
restricted funds (examples: Perkins Loans, research contracts, and debt
service reserves).
A good example of the direct effect of GASB 35
reporting is the non-recognition of $13 million of Federal Direct
Student Loans (FDSL) payments. Currently this is an in-and-an-out on
our balance sheet, so this does not show up on our financial
statements. Previously (AICPA reporting format), this would have been
$13 million of Federal grants revenue and $13 million of Student
financial aid expense. This is a direct and material reporting change!
An example of an indirect effect of GASB 35 on fund
reporting is the recognition of Distance Education revenues and
expenses. MTU had previously recorded these revenues and expenses in
the Designated fund group. All of the other Michigan universities
recorded this activity in the General Fund. From a GASB 35 combined
funds perspective, it doesn't matter. Under the previous AICPA
reporting format, these revenue and expense dollars would be considered
material to the individual fund groups, and would've therefore, been a
major point of discussion with the external auditors.
Conclusion - fund accounting has not been thrown out, but GASB
35 has materially changed both our internal and external reporting.
Back to Top
Q3 - I'm confused. I was told
that cash outlays for capital expenditures (building and equipment) was
always only a balance sheet transaction. You say, it
wasn't?
Answer: That's correct. Under the AICPA reporting
model, Current Fund cash
outlays for equipment were recorded as an expense in the Current Fund's
functions (a/k/a Banner programs such as Instruction, Research,
etc). This was true cash basis fund accounting. At the same time that
the expense was posted in the Current Funds (General, Designated,
Auxiliary, and Expendable Restricted), a fund addition (revenue) was
posted in the Plant Fund .
In 1999, it was $4 million. This series of transactions inflated both
revenues and expenses on our Combined Income Statement.
GASB 35 reporting is cleaner since there is an eliminiation of
the inflated revenue and expenese. After this GASB 35 elimination takes
place, we are left with true "balance sheet only" transactions.
Conclusion: What you heard was a myth for fiscal years prior
to the FY2001 adoption of GASB 35. Up until June 30, 2000 the Current
Fund equipment expenditures were included in Educational and General
expenses. They were not balance sheet only transactions.
Back to Top
Questions relating to the General fund carryforwards
Back to Top
Q1 - Where were the General
fund
carryforwards on these financial statements?
Q2 - Were the General Fund carryforwards included in the
fund balance (deficit)?
Answer to both: Although carryforwards used to be
identified in the old AICPA fund accounting reporting format, under
GASB 35 the General fund carryforwards are not included in either the
Combined balance sheet or the Combined income statement. As to the
second question, the carryforwards are not included in the fund
deficit. These are budget adjustments that do not appear on the
"actuals" financial reports. In "accountingeze," these are off-balance
sheet unfunded liabilities.
Back to Top
Questions relating to "old" data
Back to Top
Q1 - I want to do a 5 and a 10
year comparison of revenues and expenses. Where are the audited
financial statements before 2001?
Answer:The audited financial statements prior to 2001
are
presented in the AICPA audit guide format, and they are available upon
request. It would be a monumental task to recast that data into the
current GASB 35 format. Trying to do a "longitudinal" study without
recasting the old data to the new reporting format would give
meaningless results.Therefore that information is not presented.
Back to Top
Q2 - How do I get the
pre-Banner
data (prior to FYE 6/30/1993)?
Answer: Only the audited financial statements in the old
AICPA audit guide format are available. There is no ad hoc report
writing tool that could retrieve data from the Unisys software.
Back to Top

|