Download - Brighter Choice
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
1/22
DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
& SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY
O F F I C E O F T H E N E W YO R K ST A T E C O M P T R O L L E R
Report of Examination
Period Covered:
July 1, 2009 April 30, 2011
2011M-168
Brighter Choice Charter
School For Boys
Financial Operations
Thomas P. DiNapoli
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
2/22
11DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
Page
AUTHORITY LETTER 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
INTRODUCTION 6
Background 6
Objective 6
Scope and Methodology 7
Comments of School Officials and Corrective Action 8
CLAIMS PROCESSING 9
Recommendations 10
RESIDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT BILLINGS 11
APPENDIX A Response From School Officials 13
APPENDIX B OSCs Comment on the Schools Response 17APPENDIX C Audit Methodology and Standards 18
APPENDIX D How to Obtain Additional Copies of the Report 20
APPENDIX E Local Regional Office Listing 21
Table of Contents
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
3/22
2 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER2
State of New York
Office of the State Comptroller
Division of Local Government
and School Accountability
November 2011
Dear School Officials:
A top priority of the Office of the State Comptroller is to help School officials manage government
resources efficiently and effectively and, by so doing, provide accountability for tax dollars spent to
support School operations. The Comptroller oversees the fiscal affairs of public Schools statewide,
as well as compliance with relevant statutes and observance of good business practices. This fiscal
oversight is accomplished, in part, through our audits, which identify opportunities for improving
operations and School board governance. Audits also can identify strategies to reduce costs and to
strengthen controls intended to safeguard School assets.
Following is a report of our audit of Brighter Choice Charter School for Boys entitled Financial
Operations. This audit was conducted pursuant to Article V, Section 1 of the State Constitution and the
State Comptrollers authority as set forth in Section 2854 of the Education Law.
This audits results and recommendations are resources for School officials to use in effectively
managing operations and in meeting the expectations of taxpayers, students, and their parents. If you
have questions about this report, please feel free to contact the local regional office for your county,
as listed at the end of this report.
Respectfully submitted,
Office of the State ComptrollerDivision of Local Government
and School Accountability
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
4/22
33DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
Office of the State ComptrollerState of New York
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A charter school is a public school financed by local, State and Federal resources that is not under the
control of the local school board and is governed under Education Law Article 56. The Brighter Choice
Charter School (School) is located in the City of Albany and is governed by the Board of Trustees
(Board), which comprises five members. The Board is responsible for the general management and
control of the Schools financial and educational affairs. The Principal of the School (Principal) is the
chief executive officer of the School and is responsible, along with other administrative staff, for the
day-to-day management of the School under the direction of the Board. The Director of Finance andOperations (Director) is the chief accounting officer and is responsible for maintaining custody of,
depositing, and disbursing School funds; maintaining the financial records; and preparing the monthly
and annual financial reports.
Charter schools have fewer legal operational requirements than traditional public schools. Most of the
regulations for a charter school are contained in the entitys by-laws, charter agreement, and the fiscal/
management plans, which are part of the charter school application. A charter school is required to set
both financial and academic goals and the renewal of the charter every five years is dependent on the
school meeting these goals. The Schools current charter was renewed in December 2010.
The Schools 2010-11 fiscal year operating expenditures totaled approximately $3.5 million. These
expenses were funded primarily with revenues derived from billing the resident school districts for
resident pupils and from certain State and Federal aid attributable to these pupils.
Scope and Objective
Our overall goal was to assess the Schools financial operations. To accomplish this, we evaluated
selected areas by performing the following survey procedures:
General governance We reviewed the Schools charter, by-laws, and Board policies and
found that the Board has adopted adequate financial policies regarding purchasing, cashreceipts and disbursements, payroll, conflicts of interest and/or code of ethics, investments,
and appointment of Board members.
Financial oversight and condition We found that generally the Board exercises sufficient
oversight of school financial operations. The Business office prepares and presents various
financial reports to the Board for review.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
5/22
4 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER4
Purchasing and cash disbursements We reviewed 51 purchases totaling $329,017 that the
School made during our audit period to determine whether the purchases were properly
approved by either the Principal and/or the Director, there was adequate verification that the
goods and services were received, and quotes were obtained for applicable purchases. We
did not find any exceptions with the 51 purchases we reviewed, and we determined that the
Schools purchasing practices effectively enabled the School to acquire goods and services in
accordance with its procurement policy.
Payroll and personnel services We reviewed salary payments for two payrolls during our
scope period and bonus payments paid to employees during our scope period. We did not note
any issues with the salary or bonus payments made to employees.
After evaluating these areas, it appears that School officials have put in place adequate controls and,
therefore, limited risk exists in these areas. As such we determined that an audit of these areas was not
necessary.
We also reviewed claims processing and resident school district billings and found that, while overall
the internal controls appeared adequate, risk existed in these areas. Therefore, we examined the Schoolscurrent related processes for July 1, 2009, to April 30, 2011. Our audit addressed the following related
questions:
Is the claim processing function designed to ensure accurate, appropriate, and timely
payments?
Are resident school district billings accurate and reasonable?
Audit Results
We found that the School paid claims totaling $329,017 before they were audited. The failure to auditclaims prior to payment resulted in the School overpaying two vendors by $8,319, and it increases the
risk that the School could pay for goods that are not received, services that are not rendered, and claims
that are not legitimate, reasonable, or for proper School purposes. Also, the School paid six claims
totaling $85,215, of 51 claims examined, later than the 60-day time period that its purchasing policy
required claims to be paid within. For example, the School paid a $15,462 invoice for health insurance
93 days after the invoice was dated. By not paying claims within the timelines outlined in the policy,
the School risks missing vendor discounts associated with timely bill payment and/or risks incurring
late fees for untimely payments.
When a student attends a charter school, the students resident school district must pay tuition to thecharter school for that student. We reviewed four resident school district bills from the 2009-10 and
2010-11 fiscal years that the School sent to its students resident school districts to determine whether
the students included on the bills had actually attended the School and whether the four bills included
the appropriate number of students. We found that the resident school district bills were accurate.
We also randomly selected 13 of the approximately 250 students enrolled in the School1 and examined
the Schools records to determine whether the School maintained adequate documentation of the
1As of April 30, 2011
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
6/22
55DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
students addresses and proof of their residence in each of their resident school districts. We did not
find any discrepancies with the documentation maintained for these 13 students. Furthermore, at the
end of each fiscal year, the Director completes a reconciliation of amounts billed and collected. We
reviewed this reconciliation for the 2009-10 school year and did not note any discrepancies.
Comments of School Officials
The results of our audit and recommendations have been discussed with School officials and their
comments, which appear in Appendix A, have been considered in preparing this report. Except as
specified in Appendix A, School officials generally agreed with our recommendations and indicated
they planned to take corrective action. Appendix B includes our comment on an issue raised in the
Schools response letter.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
7/22
6 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER6
Background
Introduction
Objective
A charter school is a public school financed by local, State, and
Federal resources that is not under the control of the local school
board. Charter schools have fewer legal operational requirements
than traditional public schools. Most of the regulations for charterschools are contained in the entitys by-laws, charter agreement, and
fiscal/financial management plans, which are part of the charter school
application. The charter agreement must be completed immediately
after the application is approved. Charter schools are required to
set both financial and academic goals. The renewal of its charter
every five years is dependent on the school meeting these goals. The
Brighter Choice Charter School for Boys (School) current charter
was renewed in December 2010.
The School is located in the City of Albany. The School is governedby the Board of Trustees (Board), which comprises five members.
The Board is responsible for the general management and control of
the Schools financial and educational affairs. The Principal of the
School (Principal) is the chief executive officer of the School and
is responsible, along with other administrative staff, for the day-to-
day management of the School under the direction of the Board. The
Director of Finance and Operations (Director) is the chief accounting
officer and is responsible for maintaining custody of, depositing,
and disbursing School funds; maintaining the financial records; and
preparing the monthly and annual financial reports. The Schools
Finance Manager electronically prepares the Schools accountingrecords and maintains them on the accrual basis of accounting.
There were approximately 250 students attending the School during
the 2010-11 fiscal year. The School has a work force of approximately
40 full- and part-time employees, and its budgeted expenses for the
2010-11 fiscal year were approximately $3.5 million, which were
funded primarily with Albany City School District tuition payments,
State and Federal aid, and donations.
The objective of our audit was to examine the Schools financial
operations. Our audit addressed the areas of claims processing and
resident district billings. More specifically, our audit addressed the
following related questions:
Is the claim processing function designed to ensure accurate,
appropriate, and timely payments?
Are resident school district billings accurate and reasonable?
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
8/22
77DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
Scope and
Methodology
We examined the Schools financial operations for the period July 1,
2009, to April 30, 2011. To accomplish this, we evaluated selected
areas by performing the following survey procedures:
General governance We reviewed the Schools charter,
by-laws, and Board policies and found that the Board has
adopted adequate financial policies regarding purchasing,
cash receipts and disbursements, payroll, conflicts of interest
and/or code of ethics, investments, and appointment of Board
members.
Financial oversight and condition We found that generally
the Board exercises sufficient oversight of school financial
operations. The Business office prepares and presents various
financial reports to the Board for review.
Purchasing and cash disbursements We reviewed 51
purchases totaling $329,017 that the School made during ouraudit period to determine whether the purchases were properly
approved by either the Principal and/or the Director, there
was adequate verification that the goods and services were
received, and quotes were obtained for applicable purchases.
We did not find any exceptions with the 51 purchases we
reviewed, and we determined that the Schools purchasing
practices effectively enabled the School to acquire goods and
services in accordance with its procurement policy.
Payroll and personnel services We reviewed salary
payments for two payrolls during our scope period and bonuspayments paid to employees during our scope period. We did
not note any issues with the salary or bonus payments made
to employees.
After evaluating these areas, it appears that School officials have put
in place adequate controls and, therefore, limited risk exists in these
areas. As such we determined that an audit of these areas was not
necessary.
We also reviewed claims processing, purchasing, payroll, and residentschool district billings and found that, while overall the internal
controls appeared adequate, risk existed in these areas. Therefore, we
examined the Schools current related processes for the period July 1,
2009, to April 30, 2011.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards (GAGAS). More information on
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
9/22
8 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER8
such standards and the methodology used in performing this audit is
included in Appendix C of this report.
The results of our audit and recommendations have been discussed
with School officials and their comments, which appear in
Appendix A, have been considered in preparing this report. Except
as specified in Appendix A, School officials generally agreed with
our recommendations and indicated they planned to take corrective
action. Appendix B includes our comment on an issue raised in the
Schools response letter.
The Board has the responsibility to initiate corrective action. We
encourage the Board to prepare a plan of action that addresses the
recommendations in this report and forward the plan to our office
within 90 days. For more information on preparing and filing your
CAP, please refer to our brochure, Responding to an OSC Audit
Report, which you received with the draft audit report. We encourage
the Board to make this plan available for public review in the SchoolSecretarys office.
Comments of School
Officials and Corrective
Action
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
10/22
99DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
Claims Processing
The claims auditing process is an integral part of the Schools internal
controls because it includes procedures designed to ensure that the
School pays only legal and proper vendor claims. An important
aspect of this internal control function is the review and approvalof claims prior to payment. An effective audit of claims helps
determine whether all necessary approvals are met by checking for
proper signatures; verifying the accuracy of claimed amounts; and
ensuring that all necessary documentation (e.g., signed receiving
slips) is attached to claims. To ensure that disbursements are for valid
expenses, or for goods or services that have actually been received,
claims must be audited and approved prior to payment. Also, it is
important for School officials to ensure that claims are approved and
paid by the due date to avoid late fees and to take advantage of any
discounts offered for timely payment of claims.
The School contracts with an external accountant to assist it in its
bookkeeping function. One of the external accountants duties
includes weekly and monthly reviews of claims. However, the
external accountant reviews claims after the claims have already
been paid, which increases the risk of that the School may make
inaccurate and/or inappropriate payments. In addition, the Schools
financial policies and procedures manual states that the School,
whenever practical, will pay invoices within 60 days of the date
of the statement. However, the School may miss out on discounts or
may incur late fees when paying invoices after 60 days. We reviewed51 claims2 totaling $329,017 and found the following exceptions:
All 51 claims were paid prior to an audit by the external
accountant.
The School overpaid two vendors by a total of $8,319. The
School overpaid a textbook manufacturer by $5,288 due to
mistakenly interpreting the amounts listed on a statement, and
it overpaid a credit card company by $3,031 because claims
processing staff were not aware that a prior balance listed on
a credit card statement had been paid the previous month.
Six claims totaling $85,215 were not paid within 60 days.
For example, the School paid a $15,462 invoice for health
insurance 93 days after the invoice was dated.3
2 Refer to Appendix B for more information on the sample selection process.3 The School did not incur late fees for this late payment.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
11/22
10 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER10
The failure to audit claims prior to payment resulted in the School
overpaying two vendors by $8,319, and it increases the risk that the
School could pay for goods that are not received, services that are
not rendered, and claims that are not legitimate, reasonable, or for
proper School purposes. Furthermore, by not paying claims within
the timelines outlined in the policy, the School risks missing vendor
discounts associated with timely bill payment and/or risks incurring
late fees for untimely payments.
1. The Board should require the external accountant to perform a
comprehensive audit of claims prior to the claims being paid.
2. School officials should ensure that claims are paid within 60 days.
Recommendations
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
12/22
1111DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
Resident School District Billings
Education Law4 provides for the funding of charter schools operating
budgets. The public school district in which a student resides is
considered the students resident school district. A charter school
derives most of its operating revenues from the school district(s) inwhich its students reside. Charter schools are required to keep an
accurate and up-to-date attendance record of student enrollment and
report these data to the students resident school districts in a timely
manner. Based on enrollment, count, attendance or full-time equivalent
(FTE)5 attendance, a charter school bills the resident school districts
for providing services to the students enrolled in the charter school.
The resident school districts reimburse the charter school based on a
reimbursement amount established by the New York State Education
Department (SED). The School bills the resident school districts for
their students tuition in six installments during thefi
scal year.
We reviewed the final resident school district bills and two other
random resident school district bills from the 2009-10 and 2010-11
fiscal years to determine whether the students included on the bills
had actually attended the School and whether the four bills included
the appropriate number of students. We found that the resident school
district bills were accurate. The following chart shows the number of
students and amounts billed for each bill selected:
Bill DateNumber of
Students
Total Amount
BilledFebruary 4, 2010 233 $471,463
May 1, 2010 251 $504,313
September 1, 2010 261 $717,501
May 1, 2011 212 $505,612
There were approximately 250 students enrolled in the School as
of April 30, 2011. We randomly selected every 20th student6 listed
on the student roster, for a total of 13 students, and reviewed the
Schools records for these students to determine whether the School
maintained adequate documentation of the students addresses and
proof of their residence in each of their resident school districts. Wedid not find any discrepancies with the documentation maintained
for these 13 students. Furthermore, at the end of each fiscal year, the
4 Article 56, Section 28565 FTE is the decimal expression of the enrollment of a student in a charter school
compared to the length of the annual session of the charter school. A student who is
enrolled for the full school year has an FTE of 1.0, while a student who is enrolled
for only half of the school year has an FTE of 0.50.6 Refer to Appendix B for more information on the sample selection process.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
13/22
12 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER12
Director completes a reconciliation of amounts billed and collected.
We reviewed this reconciliation for the 2009-10 school year and did
not note any discrepancies.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
14/22
1313DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
APPENDIX A
RESPONSE FROM SCHOOL OFFICIALS
The school officials response to this audit can be found on the following pages.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
15/22
14 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER14
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
16/22
1515DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
SeeNote 1
Page 1
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
17/22
16 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER16
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
18/22
1717DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
APPENDIX B
OSCS COMMENT ON THE SCHOOLS RESPONSE
Note 1
We believe that having the external accountant review claims prior to payment would be a better
safety net and improve the checks and balances described in the process. During our audit testing,
we found that the School overpaid two vendors by $8,119. These errors were not discovered by the
existing process and identified in a timely fashion so that the School could initiate corrective action.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
19/22
18 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER18
APPENDIX C
AUDIT METHODOLOGY AND STANDARDS
The objective of our examination was to assess the Schools financial operations. To accomplish this,
we performed an initial assessment of the internal controls so that we could design our audit to focus
on those areas most at risk. Our initial assessment included evaluations of the following areas:financial oversight, control environment, cash receipts and disbursements, purchasing, payroll, and
information technology.
During the initial assessment, we interviewed appropriate School officials, performed limited tests
of transactions and reviewed pertinent documents such as the Schools charter, financial policies
and procedures manuals, Board minutes, and financial records and reports. In addition, we obtained
information directly from the computerized financial databases and then analyzed it electronically
using computer-assisted techniques. This approach provided us with additional information about the
Schools financial transactions as recorded in its databases. Further, we reviewed the Schools internal
controls and procedures over the computerized financial databases to help ensure that the information
produced by such systems was reliable.
After reviewing the information gathered during our initial assessment, we determined that controls
appeared to be adequate and limited risk existed in most of the financial areas we reviewed. We
then decided on the reported objective and scope by selecting for audit areas that appeared to have
additional controls in place. We selected claims processing, purchasing, payroll and resident school
district billings for further audit testing. To accomplish our audit objective and obtain valid audit
evidence, our procedures included the following steps:
We interviewed key personnel to gain an understanding of the Schools claims, purchasing,
payroll, and billing processes.
We selected 51 claims and purchases to review because they appeared to be high risk based
on their large dollar amounts, questionable vendor names, and actual items purchased. The
51 claims and purchases included 10 purchases that we reviewed during our planning phase,
23 purchases that the School made during the 2009-10 school year, 17 purchases that the
School made during the 2010-11 school year, and one additional claim that was processed on
a weekend.
We reviewed the 51 claims to determine if claims were audited prior to payment and whether
there were any duplicate or late payments.
We reviewed the 51 purchases to determine if the purchases met the Schools purchasing
guidelines for competitive bidding.
We reviewed two random bi-weekly payrolls, one each from the 2009-10 and 2010-11 fiscal
years, to ensure that all full-time employees were paid in accordance with provisions in their
contracts. We reviewed all employee contracts and examined the payroll register for these two
pay-periods to determine if the employees were paid according to their employment contracts.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
20/22
1919DIVISIONOF LOCAL GOVERNMENTAND SCHOOLACCOUNTABILITY
We reviewed all employee bonuses paid at the end of the 2009-10 fiscal year using the Schools
calculation rubric used to calculate bonuses and reconciled the calculated amounts with the
amounts shown on the payroll register.
We reviewed the final resident school district bills (May) and two other random resident
school district bills from each of the 2009-10 and 2010-11 fiscal years and determined that the
students billed for were actually School students. We also performed an analytic review of the
remaining bills to determine their reasonableness.
We reviewed the year-end resident school district billing reconciliation for the 2009-10 fiscal
year and determined its reasonableness.
We randomly selected every 20th student listed on the student roster (5 percent of the
approximately 250 students enrolled as of April 30, 2011) for the most recent resident school
district bill and determined whether the School maintained address verification for each
student to ensure that the correct resident school districts were being billed.
We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditingstandards (GAGAS). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient,
appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit
objective. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objective.
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
21/22
20 OFFICEOFTHE NEW YORK STATE COMPTROLLER20
APPENDIX D
HOW TO OBTAIN ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THE REPORT
To obtain copies of this report, write or visit our web page:
Office of the State Comptroller
Public Information Office
110 State Street, 15th Floor
Albany, New York 12236
(518) 474-4015
http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/
-
8/3/2019 Brighter Choice
22/22
BINGHAMTON REGIONAL OFFICE
H. Todd Eames, Chief Examiner
Office of the State Comptroller
State Office Building - Suite 1702
44 Hawley Street
Binghamton, New York 13901-4417
(607) 721-8306 Fax (607) 721-8313
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Broome, Chenango, Cortland, Delaware,
Otsego, Schoharie, Sullivan, Tioga, Tompkins Counties
BUFFALO REGIONAL OFFICE
Robert Meller, Chief Examiner
Office of the State Comptroller
295 Main Street, Suite 1032
Buffalo, New York 14203-2510
(716) 847-3647 Fax (716) 847-3643
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie ,
Genesee, Niagara, Orleans, Wyoming Counties
GLENS FALLS REGIONAL OFFICE
Jeffrey P. Leonard, Chief Examiner
Office of the State ComptrollerOne Broad Street Plaza
Glens Falls, New York 12801-4396
(518) 793-0057 Fax (518) 793-5797
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Albany, Clinton, Essex, Franklin,
Fulton, Hamilton, Montgomery, Rensselaer,
Saratoga, Schenectady, Warren, Washington Counties
HAUPPAUGE REGIONAL OFFICE
Ira McCracken, Chief Examiner
Office of the State Comptroller
NYS Office Building, Room 3A10
Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, New York 11788-5533
(631) 952-6534 Fax (631) 952-6530
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Nassau and Suffolk Counties
NEWBURGH REGIONAL OFFICE
Christopher Ellis, Chief Examiner
Office of the State Comptroller
33 Airport Center Drive, Suite 103
New Windsor, New York 12553-4725
(845) 567-0858 Fax (845) 567-0080
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Columbia, Dutchess, Greene, Orange,
Putnam, Rockland, Ulster, Westchester Counties
ROCHESTER REGIONAL OFFICE
Edward V. Grant, Jr., Chief Examiner
Office of the State Comptroller
The Powers Building
16 West Main Street Suite 522
Rochester, New York 14614-1608
(585) 454-2460 Fax (585) 454-3545
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Cayuga, Chemung, Livingston, Monroe,
Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Wayne, Yates Counties
SYRACUSE REGIONAL OFFICE
Rebecca Wilcox, Chief Examiner
Office of the State ComptrollerState Office Building, Room 409
333 E. Washington Street
Syracuse, New York 13202-1428
(315) 428-4192 Fax (315) 426-2119
Email: [email protected]
Serving: Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Madison,
Oneida, Onondaga, Oswego, St. Lawrence Counties
STATEWIDE AND REGIONAL PROJECTS
Ann C. Singer, Chief Examiner
State Office Building - Suite 1702
44 Hawley Street
Binghamton, New York 13901-4417
(607) 721-8306 Fax (607) 721-8313
APPENDIX E
OFFICE OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER
DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AND SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY
Steven J. Hancox, Deputy Comptroller
Nathaalie N. Carey, Assistant Comptroller
LOCAL REGIONAL OFFICE LISTING