WEST VALLEY-MISSION COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
14000 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ADDENDUM #1
Request for Proposal #7-1314 Audit Services
This addendum is being issued to inform the bidders of questions asked of the proposal
document. Answers are in bold and italics.
Sign and return one copy of this addendum as acknowledgement of receipt.
Brigit M. Espinosa
Director, General Services
Date:
_____________________________________________
Company Name:
_____________________________________________
Signed By:
_____________________________________________
Printed Name:
_____________________________________________
Phone/Fax:
_____________________________________________
Email:
_____________________________________________
1. What do you like about the service provided by your current auditing firm? What don’t
you like? Who are your current auditors?
They are very easy to work with and are very accommodating with scheduling.
Staff has indicated that there are times where duplication of efforts has
occurred when providing documentations and information to auditors. VTD is
our current audit firm.
2. Are your prior year auditors included or excluded from the current RFP process?
Included
3. Please provide a list of firms that have been sent an RFP.
Brown Armstrong CPA's
Christy White
Gilbert Associates, Inc.
Glenn, Burdette, Phillips & Bryson, CPA's
KPMG LLP
Lund & Guttry LLP
Marcum LLP Accountants and Advisors
Matson and Isom, CPA's
Messner & Hadley, LLP
Nystrom & Company LLP
Perry-Smith LLP/Crowe Howard
Vasquez & Company LLP
Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co. LLP
Vicenti Lloyd & Stutzman LLP
Wilkinson Hadley King & Co., LLP
4. What were your prior year’s contract fees for each of the last three years?
$77,700 2010-11 financial audit
$78,700 2011-12 financial audit
$78,700 2012-13 financial audit
$5,500 2012-13 Measure C audit
$11,500 2010-11 Measure H audit
$11,500 2011-12 Measure H audit
$11,000 2012-13 Measure H audit
$16,000 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 Foundation audit
5. What is the main reason the District decided to submit this RFP rather than continuing
using the services of your current auditor?
According to the District Board Policy it is time to send out an RFP for audit
services.
6. Were there any major changes in the engagement requested in the RFP compared to last
year’s engagement?
No
7. Does the District prepare its financial statements or is the auditor responsible for
preparation?
The auditors prepare the financial statements in the audit book.
8. How many auditors and how many weeks were the prior auditors on site, for interim and yearend field work?
There were between two to four auditors present during the one-week interim
audit. There were between three to five auditors present for the two-week
year-end audit. There were also a one to two-day audit scheduled for specific
categorical programs, Admissions and Records and Associated Student Body.
9. What is the expected timing of the audit? Typically we break the engagement down into
the following areas, when have these segments been completed in the past, and what is
the expected completion dates for the June 30, 2014 audit?
1)
2)
3)
4)
Planning / Interim Fieldwork Final Fieldwork Drafts of Auditors Reports
to Management Board Presentation -
One week in April
Two weeks in September
Late October
December/January
10. Please provide copies of the June 30, 2013 Financial Audit and Bond audit (performance
and financial), if available.
The 2013 Audit is not finished, the work is still in progress.
The 2012 Audit is available online
http://wvm.edu/documents.aspx?fid=26578&doc=26580&year=2012
11. What is the reason that the District is considering changing the Auditor.
See question #5
12. Was the prior auditor invited to bid or is the District required to rotate Auditors this year?
See question #2
13. How long was your prior audit firm your auditors?
Twelve years
14. How many audit adjustments were made (6/30/12) or expected (6/30/13) in the latest
audit? We are assuming the 6/30/13 audit is still in progress.
The only adjustments were in year end, approximately 5-10 were made.
Yes the 2013 audit is still in progress
15. Were any client-prepared entries given to the auditors after the year-end fieldwork had
started? If so, how many?
No
16. How many federal programs are being audited as of the 6/30/13 audit? Are the projected
Federal expenditures for the year ending 6/30/14 going to be similar in volume to that of
the prior year?
See 2012 audit for details
17. What were the itemized fees by service, for the 6/30/13 audit? Was the latest audit
scope the same as stated in the RFP? Was there any additional billing above what the
original proposed fess/contract was and if so what was this additional billing for?
See question #4
18. Does the District staff prepare the financial statements, including footnotes, and provide
them to the Auditor at the outset of the audit?
See question #7
19. How many auditors were on the latest audit engagement; how many weeks were spent in
the field (for interim and for year-end fieldwork)?
See question #8
20. Anything new in the current year (13/14)? (i.e. new funding, debt issues, or construction
projects)
New grants, additional construction project will be added as our bond
program is being developed
21. Is the District’s accounting staff stable?
yes
22. What accounting system is used?
Datatel
23. Has there been any change in your accounting system or software since the 6/30/12
audit?
No
24. Have there been any changes in management in the past year?
Yes, We have eliminated the Budget Manager position and restructured
the position and created two new Financial Analyst
25. Has there been any change in organizational structure since the 6/30/12 audit?
See question #24
26. Were there any difficulties encountered in completing the previous year audit?
No
27. Were there any problems in completing the close of the books and preparing for the
audit?
No
28. Who are the key employees assigned to work with the auditors? What is their tenure with
the District?
Ngoc Chim
Susan Hutton
Director, Fiscal Services – three years
Accounting Manager – eight years
29. Were there/are there any issues in the latest audit (i.e. any significant deficiencies or
material weaknesses or compliance findings (federal or state) noted by the Auditor)?
No, see 2012 Audit findings
30. Will separate report be needed for the District’s Foundation or the Land
Corporation? Should this fee be separately shown on the proposal?
Separate reports
Separate fees
31. The RFP references Prop 39 bond audits and 2 component units (Land Corporation and
Foundation). Does the District expect one fee for all services or prices for each element of
the audit services?
Separate fees
32. Are there separate audit reports issued for the Foundation and Land Corporation?
Yes, Land Corporation contracts separately for its audit, they selected a
different firm. The Foundation has a separate audit report but is part
of the District.
33. Are the accounting records for the Land Corporation and Foundation maintained by the
District or at an independent location?
Land Corporation is housed at an independent location
Foundation records are housed at the District
34. For the Bond related audit work, is the District’s expectation a separate bond financial
statement audit and performance audit, or just performance audit?
Both
35. Is the tax compliance (Form 990) for the Foundation included in this RFP?
Yes
36. Does the District outsource or operate its own bookstore?
Outsource
37. What were the fees paid to the current firm for the 2013 audit?
See question #4
38. What is the District’s reason for seeking audit service proposals at this time?
See question #5
39. Are there any significant changes or planned changes in operations related the District in
the next few years, which could affect the planned audit services?
The issue of Measure C, series B, in a few years will increase capital
projects activities