| Course | ACC-4150 Advanced Audit |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Written assignment on the compliance audit |
| Length | About 913 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Bachelor of Science in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for ACC 4150 Module 5
Passaic River Youth Services and Its First Single Audit: Major Programs, Compliance Tests and One Finding
Student Name
Bachelor of Science in Business Administration, Thomas Edison State University
ACC-4150: Advanced Audit
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Passaic River Youth Services and Its First Single Audit: Major Programs, Compliance Tests and One Finding
Introduction
Passaic River Youth Services, Inc. runs early childhood, after-school and family counseling programs in Paterson and Clifton. Federal grants pay for most of its work. Under the Uniform Guidance in 2 C.F.R. Part 200, a nonfederal entity that spends $1,000,000 or more of federal awards in a fiscal year beginning on or after October 1, 2024 must have a Single Audit: a financial statement audit under GAGAS plus an audit of compliance with the requirements of its major federal programs (Office of Management and Budget [OMB], 2024). Passaic River spent $2,400,000 in the year ended June 30, 2025.
Identifying Type A and Type B Programs
For an auditee spending between $1 million and $34 million, the threshold separating Type A from Type B programs is $1,000,000, so only Head Start is Type A.
| Federal program | Expenditures | Type |
|---|---|---|
| Head Start, received directly | $1,300,000 | A |
| Community Development Block Grant, through the city | 600,000 | B |
| Substance use prevention grant, through the state | 500,000 | B |
| Total | $2,400,000 |
Determining Major Programs
Head Start has not been audited as a major program in either of the two prior years, because this is the first Single Audit. A Type A program is considered low risk only if it was audited as major in at least one of the two most recent audit periods without significant problems, so Head Start is not low risk and is a major program.
Type B programs are assessed for risk when they exceed 25% of the Type A threshold, here $250,000. Both Type B programs qualify for assessment. The block grant subaward involves eligibility rules for families by income and has never been audited, while the prevention grant funds staff salaries with simpler requirements. The auditor judges the block grant high risk and the prevention grant low risk. Because Passaic River is not a low-risk auditee in its first year, major programs must cover at least 40% of total federal expenditures.
Coverage of 79% exceeds the 40% minimum. In later years, if Head Start is audited as major without significant findings, it may qualify as low risk, and if Passaic River meets the conditions for a low-risk auditee, including unmodified opinions and no material weaknesses for two years, the coverage minimum will fall to 20%. The first-year plan therefore costs more than later audits are likely to.
| Major program | Expenditures | Share of total |
|---|---|---|
| Head Start | $1,300,000 | 54% |
| Community Development Block Grant | 600,000 | 25% |
| Coverage | $1,900,000 | 79% |
Compliance Materiality and Requirements
Compliance materiality is set separately for each major program, not for the financial statements as a whole, because the auditor gives a separate opinion on compliance for each one. For Head Start, the auditor sets materiality with reference to the $1.3 million of program expenditures and the nature of the requirements, recognizing that some violations, such as serving ineligible children, may be material in nature even when the amounts are small.
The Compliance Supplement identifies which types of compliance requirements apply to each program. For the two major programs, the auditor will test:
The auditor also tests internal control over compliance for each requirement, since the Uniform Guidance requires planning to support a low assessed level of control risk.
| Requirement | Head Start test | Block grant test |
|---|---|---|
| Activities allowed and allowable costs | Trace 60 expenditures to supporting documents and the approved budget | Trace 40 expenditures to allowable activities |
| Eligibility | Inspect income documentation for 40 enrolled children | Inspect income documentation for 40 assisted families |
| Matching | Verify the required nonfederal share and its valuation | Not applicable |
| Reporting | Agree financial reports to the general ledger | Agree reports to the city's subrecipient records |
| Subrecipient monitoring | Not applicable | Not applicable; Passaic River is the subrecipient |
A Finding: Eligibility in the Block Grant
Of 40 families tested, 4 lacked current income documentation, and 1 exceeded the income limit when documentation was obtained. The finding is written in the form GAGAS prescribes for findings:
The finding is reported as a significant deficiency in internal control over compliance and as noncompliance, but the auditor does not consider it material to the program as a whole, so the compliance opinion on the block grant can still be unmodified. Keating et al. (2005) found that many nonprofits receiving federal awards had reported compliance problems, with weaknesses concentrated in smaller and newer grantees, which fits Passaic River's first audit year.
| Element | Content |
|---|---|
| Criteria | The subaward agreement and federal rules require income verification showing household income at or below 80% of the area median before assistance is provided |
| Condition | Four of 40 files lacked income documentation dated within the eligibility period, and one family's income exceeded the limit |
| Cause | A caseworker vacancy left intake to part-time staff who were not trained on documentation rules, and supervisors did not review files |
| Effect | Assistance of $3,250 was provided to an ineligible family, and eligibility for four others could not be confirmed; known questioned costs are $3,250 |
| Recommendation | Train intake staff, require supervisory review before assistance begins and obtain documentation for the four open files |
Conclusion
Passaic River's first Single Audit covers Head Start as a Type A program not yet shown to be low risk and the block grant as a high-risk Type B program, together covering 79% of federal spending. Compliance materiality is set by program, testing follows the Compliance Supplement and the eligibility finding is documented in standard form, supporting unmodified compliance opinions with one reported finding (Messier et al., 2017).
References
Keating, E. K., Fischer, M., Gordon, T. P., & Greenlee, J. (2005). The Single Audit Act: How compliant are nonprofit organizations? Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 17(3), 285-309. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-17-03-2005-B002
Messier, W. F., Glover, S. M., & Prawitt, D. F. (2017). Auditing and assurance services: A systematic approach (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Office of Management and Budget. (2024). Guidance for federal financial assistance (2 C.F.R. Part 200, as revised April 2024).
What the ACC 4150 Module 5 instructions ask for
ACC-4150's fifth module turns to audits of compliance, the work behind every Single Audit report. Compliance audits test whether an entity followed laws, regulations, contracts and grant terms, and the most common example is the Single Audit of governments and nonprofits that spend federal awards. Prompts usually ask you to determine whether a Single Audit is required, identify Type A and Type B programs, select major programs, set compliance materiality, plan tests of compliance requirements and evaluate or write findings. Passaic River's year ended June 30, 2025, so the post-2024 thresholds apply here; a case set in an earlier year would use the old $750,000 trigger. A short outline of the conclusions you expect to reach helps keep the analysis focused.
How the ACC 4150 Module 5 example is put together
The paper starts by confirming the Single Audit requirement with the current threshold. A table classifies the three programs, and the major program section explains the low-risk test for the Type A program and the risk assessment for each Type B program, then checks coverage in a second table. The materiality and requirements section explains why compliance materiality is set by program and maps requirements to specific tests in a third table. The finding is written element by element in a final table, followed by its effect on the reports and research on nonprofit compliance. The conclusion summarizes the audit plan and expected opinions. Numbers in the tables and text agree, which avoids the inconsistencies mentors often mark.
Reading the ACC 4150 Module 5 grading rubric
Mentors score this assignment with the written work rubric, weighing accuracy, analysis and writing, as one of seven assignments sharing 50 percent of the ACC-4150 grade. On a compliance audit, they check that the threshold and Type A level are correct for the period, that major programs are selected by the risk-based approach with adequate coverage, that compliance materiality is set at the program level and that tests match the applicable compliance requirements. Findings should include all five elements with a cause specific enough to fix. Distinguishing a finding that is reported from one that modifies the compliance opinion shows command of the reporting rules. A professional tone, as if writing to an engagement partner, fits the course's expectations.
ACC 4150 Module 5 help: mistakes that cost marks
The most common error is using an outdated threshold: the federal spending that triggers a Single Audit went from $750,000 to $1,000,000 for years starting after September 2024, and the Type A line moved up with it. Check the period before applying numbers. Another mistake is setting one materiality for the whole audit; compliance materiality is set for each major program. When writing findings, give a specific cause and a quantified effect where possible, not a general statement that controls were weak. Map each requirement to a test. A writer can plan the Single Audit in your case and draft its finding, free for your first request. Avoid stacking quotations from the standards; paraphrase and apply them instead.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More ACC 4150 and Bachelor of Science in Business Administration sample papers
- ACC 4150 Module 1: Internal Control Deficiencies Written Assignment
- ACC 4150 Module 2: Completing the Audit Written Assignment
- ACC 4150 Module 3: Assurance, Attestation and Internal Audit Assignment
- ACC 4150 Module 4: Professional Judgment Framework Assignment
- ACC 4150 Module 6: GAGAS Written Assignment
- ACC 4150 Module 7: Final Project: Comparing Major Auditing Standards
- BUS 4210 Module 1: Lululemon's Vision, Objectives and Strategy
- MAN 2100 Module 3: Organizational Structure Assignment
- MKT 2010 Module 1: Customer-Oriented Strategy Assignment
- MAN 3730 Module 3: Listening and Nonverbal Cues in a Hybrid Team
ACC 4150 Module 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free ACC 4150 Module 5 sample paper?
The compliance audit paper is reproduced here: a nonprofit's Single Audit planned with Type A and B programs, major program selection, compliance tests and one finding in standard form.
When is a Single Audit required?
When a nonfederal entity spends $1,000,000 or more of federal awards in a fiscal year beginning on or after October 1, 2024; the earlier threshold was $750,000.
How are major programs selected in a Single Audit?
Through a risk-based approach: Type A programs not shown to be low risk are major, high-risk Type B programs are added and coverage must meet the 40% or 20% minimum.
What are the elements of an audit finding?
Criteria, condition, cause and effect, usually followed by a recommendation and, where applicable, questioned costs.
How is materiality set in a compliance audit?
Separately for each major program, considering both the amount of expenditures and the nature of the compliance requirements.