City of Edmond

City of EdmondNOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING

The City of Edmond encourages participation from all its citizens. If participation at any Public meetingis not possible due to a disability, notification to the City Clerk at least 48 hours prior to the scheduledmeeting is encouraged to make the necessary accommodations. The City may waive the 48-hour rule ifsigning is not the necessary accommodation.

AGENDA

Finance/Audit CommitteeWednesday, March 19, 2014

4:00 p.m.City Council Chambers

20 S. Littler, Edmond, OK

CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP

1. Call to Order.

2. Approve the minutes from February 19th, 2014.

3. Discussion and consideration of the responses to the 2014 request for internal audit services.

4. Discussion and consideration of the arbitrage rebate calculations by EideBailly of the EPWA SalesTax & Utility System Revenue Bonds, Series 2004.

5. Discussion and consideration of the annual review of the 457(b) and 401(a) deferredcompensation plans and the funds performances for year 2013 presented by Great-WestRetirement representative Gary Wilkins and Chara Green.

6. Discussion and consideration of the analysis by DiMeo Schneider & Associates, LLC, of the 457Deferred Compensation Plan as of December, 2013.

7. Accept the City Treasurer's month end investment reports for January 31st and February 28th,2014.

8. New Business - (In accordance with the Open Meeting Act, new business is defined as any matternot known about or which could not have been reasonably foreseen prior to the time of posting ofthe agenda.)

9. Adjournment.

Finance/Audit Committee 2. Meeting Date: 03/19/2014

InformationAgenda ItemApprove the minutes from February 19th, 2014.

Background

AttachmentsFeb 2014 Minutes

of 2

FINANCE/AUDIT COMMITTEE

February 19, 2014 1. Call to Order. Chairman Stephen Schaus called a regular Finance/Audit Committee meeting to order at 4:00 pm in the City Council Chambers on Wednesday, February 19, 2014. Present were Charles Lamb, Nick Massey, Larry Stevens, City staff, and guests. 2. Approve the minutes of January 14, 2014. Motion made by Massey, seconded by Lamb, to approve the minutes. Motion carried unanimously. Chairman Schaus stated the following three items would be discussed at one time. Chris Gander, Bond Advisor with BOSC-Oppenheim, .addressed the Committee and stated the three following outstanding bonds will be combined into the “Sales Tax and Utility System Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2014 in the aggregate amount not to exceed $25,000,000. He stated the savings on Series 2003B (Sr. Bonds) will be $140,000, the 2004 (Sr. Bonds) will be $850,000 and the 2004 (Jr. Bonds, the callable portion) will be $1,200,000. He noted the average interest rate will be approximately 2.75%. The Bonds will be sold on March 6th and close soon after April 1st due to the call date. 3. Discussion and Consideration of refunding the Utility System Revenue Bonds, Series 2003B (Sr. Bonds). Motion by Lamb, seconded by Massey, to approve refunding of the above Bonds. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Discussion and Consideration of refunding the Utility System Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 (Sr. Bonds). Motion by Massey, seconded by Lamb, to approve refunding the above Bonds. Motion carried unanimously. 5. Discussion and Consideration of refunding the Sales Tax and Utility System Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 (Jr. Bonds – the callable portion). Motion by Lamb, seconded by Massey, to approve refunding the above Bonds. Motion carried unanimously. 6. Discussion and Consideration of the analysis by DiMeo Schneider & Associates, LLC, of the 457 Deferred Compensation Plan as of December, 2013. In 2012 the Committee approved a budget of $14,950 for one-time investment consulting services. In 2013 the City hired DiMeo Schneider as the Pension Plan Fund Manager, to perform an analysis of the 457 Plan investment options, fee, and fund performance. DiMeo Schneider also re-negotiated the City’s costs with the current service providers, Great-West Retirement (record-keeper) and its affiliate, Advised Asset Group (investment advisors), with annual savings of $8,302 for administrative fees and the reduction of asset-based fees for managed accounts of approximately $4,000 to $5,000 annually.

of 2

Holly Wescott, Treasury Coordinator, addressed the Committee and stated as a result of the negotiations, new contracts with both entities will need to be formally approved by Council. In addition, the Committee will need to discuss and determine if the City wants to offer different funds or move to lower-cost shareclasses. DiMeo recommended to terminate without replacement Davis NY Venture A and to discuss termination of Heartland Value and OakMark. Other issues recommended for discussion was whether to replace Risk based funds with Target Date Funds and replacing AAG with a non-affiliated group acting in an advising/consulting capacity because AAG is not independent of Great-West and DiMeo advocated independent services. She stated Great-West representatives will attend the next meeting to present the annual review of the 457 Plan. She noted during the last discussion with Gary Wilkins, the regional director, he indicated they wanted to accommodate whatever direction the City chooses to go regarding these issues. Great West is not suggesting adding any additional funds, but are willing to offer substitutions. Consensus of the Committee was to continue this item until the next meeting in order to further discuss the recommendations from DiMeo Schneider with Great-West. 7. Acceptance of the City Treasurer’s Investment Report for month ending December 31, 2013. Motion by Lamb, seconded by Massey, to accept the Treasurer’s investment report for December, 2013. Motion carried unanimously. 8. New Business: Holly Wescott, Treasury Coordinator, addressed the Committee and stated a team has been created to work on a new RFP for merchant services. 9. Adjournment. The meeting adjourned at 4:30 pm.


InformationAgenda ItemDiscussion and consideration of the responses to the 2014 request for internal audit services.

Background

AttachmentsCrawford RFP ResponseCompass RFP Response

PROPOSAL FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES

FOR

THE CITY OF EDMOND

INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES RFP14-012 CLOSING DATE MARCH 4, 2014 AT 2:00 PM CST

PROPOSAL FOR INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF EDMOND

INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICES RFP14-012

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Description

Page

LETTER OF INTRODUCTION – TRANSMITTAL LETTER

3

I. COMPANY BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

PROFILE OF THE FIRM FINANCIAL SOUNDNESS PERSONNEL INTERNAL AUDIT TEAM FOR CITY OF EDMOND EXPERIENCE LIST OF CLIENTS & CONTACTS

4-13

II. ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY

PREPARATION AND START-UP GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE

13-14

METHODOLOGY

III. FEES AND COSTS

14

ATTACHMENT A – FIRM ORGANIZATION CHART

ATTACHMENT B – CITY COUNCIL & MANAGEMENT RISK SURVEY ATTACHMENT C – RISK ASSESSMENT ATTACHMENT D – ENGAGEMENT PROFILE ATTACHMENT E – INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN ATTACHMENT F – INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS ATTACHMENT G – CALCULATION OF ESTIMATED HOURS & FEES ATTACHMENT H – FIRM PEER REVIEW ATTACHMENT I – PROOF OF PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE ATTACHMENT J – FIRM OAB ANNUAL PERMIT Firm Contact Person: Frank Crawford, CPA Firm President Crawford & Associates, P.C. 10308 Greenbriar Place Oklahoma City, OK 73159 Phone: (405) 691-5550 Cell Phone: (405) 229-9084 Fax: (405) 691-5646 Email: [email protected]



3

March 4, 2014 Ms. Brenda Mayer, CPPO Purchasing Manager City of Edmond 100 East First Edmond, Oklahoma 73034 Dear Ms. Mayer: Crawford & Associates, P.C. is pleased to provide the enclosed response to your request for internal audit services. As you may already know, we are a very unique Firm in that since 1984 we have provided accounting, auditing and consulting services exclusively to state and local governments. We are recognized throughout Oklahoma and the Nation as the leader in this field by both our CPA peers and the various governmental entities in the State and the Country. We have been recognized by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) as the first auditing Firm in the United States to have audited a local government which early implemented the provisions of GASB Statement 34, The New Reporting Model. In addition, Firm Chairman Emeritus Mike Crawford is the AICPA national representative and past Vice Chairman of the Governmental Accounting Standards Advisory Council (GASAC) that advises the GASB; and Firm President Frank Crawford is the past Chairman of the AICPA National Government Expert Panel that works directly with the GASB and leads the accounting profession nationally in governmental auditing. In 1997, the Firm recognized a need for providing expert internal auditing and related consulting services. Therefore, the practice was expanded to meet this need by adding professional staff that had specific internal auditing and related consulting experience to provide those services to our clients. As a result, we have experienced significant growth in the demand for those services and continue to welcome opportunities to provide these specialized services to assist our clients in meeting their needs. In addition, we place the utmost importance on maintaining and enhancing the integrity and objectivity of the accounting and audit profession. In fact, Firm Chairman Emeritus, Mike Crawford, is the co-author of the national publication, The CPAs’ Multistate Guide to Ethics and Professional Conduct, and annually provides ethics training to other CPAs across the country. We feel strongly that, when acquiring internal audit services of such a specialized nature, the most important factors to consider in relation to fees are qualifications, experience and level of available services. We believe when you compare the qualifications, experience and service of our Firm in relation to that of any other Firm, you will agree that Crawford & Associates, P.C., is the best Firm available to the City of Edmond. We encourage you to learn more about Crawford & Associates and our proud history and exciting future at our web site www.crawfordcpas.com. We are very excited about the opportunity to serve the City of Edmond as internal auditor and would be more than happy to meet with you to further discuss our proposal. Respectfully submitted, Crawford & Associates, P.C



4

I. COMPANY BACKGROUND INFORMATION: PROFILE OF THE FIRM OVERVIEW – HISTORY OF THE FIRM Crawford & Associates, P.C. is a 20-person Firm headquartered in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Since its creation in 1984, the Firm has earned an international, national and statewide reputation second to none in the area of governmental accounting and consulting. Our vision in 1984 to establish a CPA Firm to exclusively serve governments has proven to be ahead of its time, as many professional service Firms are now learning the value of specialization. Crawford & Associates, established by brothers Mike and Frank Crawford, specializes in providing consulting and accounting services solely to governmental entities and training and consultation to other CPA Firms that provide accounting and auditing services to governmental entities. We offer a variety of services including annual financial statement preparation, accounting and reconciliation assistance, accounting and financial management technical assistance, internal control analysis and design, data-mining analysis, accounting policy and procedure development, contract internal auditing, fraud and other special investigations, quality assurance reviews, training, and expert witness testimony in litigation and labor arbitration matters. In addition, the Firm is nationally recognized for its financial analysis tool, the Performeter®, used by government entities around the world as a measure of the government’s financial health and performance. FINANCIAL SOUNDNESS Crawford and Associates is celebrating its 30th year in business, has no long-term debt, owns title to all its assets, and is 100% owned by five local shareholders. The Firm in its 30 year existence has never had any litigation filed against it, nor has the Firm ever been subject to an investigation by a regulatory authority. Furthermore, the Firm has no contingent liabilities. PERSONNEL – FIRM ASSOCIATES (See Organization Chart at Attachment A) INDIVIDUAL POSITION YEARS WITH FIRM LOCATION Mike Crawford, CPA Chairman Emeritus 30 Oklahoma City Frank Crawford, CPA President/Shareholder 28 Oklahoma City Deanna Crawford, CPA Manager/ Shareholder 22 McAlester, OK Marcy Twyman, CPA Manager/Shareholder 12 Oklahoma City G. Dwayne Tate, CPA Manager/Shareholder 9 Oklahoma City Brenda Wright, CPA Manager/Shareholder 12 Oklahoma City Justin Kersey, CPA, CFE Manager 6 Oklahoma City Richard Rose, CPA Manager 5 Oklahoma City Chris Pembrook, CPA Manager 3 Oklahoma City Stephanie Ballard, CPA Manager 3 Oklahoma City Joni Parker, CPA Consultant 12 Davis, OK Amanda Copeland, CPA Consultant 12 Oklahoma City Tammy Hunt Consultant 26 Oklahoma City Kristy Awtry Consultant 10 Oklahoma City Kimberly Green Consultant 10 Oklahoma City Andrea Depee Consultant 9 Oklahoma City Jennifer Traxler Consultant 8 Oklahoma City D. Ann Matthews Consultant 6 Durant, OK Kristin Lamar, CFE Consultant 7 Oklahoma City Courtney Crowder Consultant 9 Oklahoma City Wendy Moreno Quality Control Manager 21 Oklahoma City Candy Dow Office Administrator 10 Oklahoma City Debbie Crawford Office Staff 21 Oklahoma City



5

PRESIDENT FRANK CRAWFORD, CPA Frank Crawford is President of Crawford & Associates, P.C., Certified Public Accountants, an accounting Firm located in Oklahoma City, OK. The Firm specializes in providing auditing, consulting and accounting services solely to governmental entities and is a member of the AICPA’s. Over the last 30 years, Crawford & Associates has provided a variety of audit and accounting services to all sizes of government including many types of financial statement audits and attestation services, fraud investigations, internal control analysis, accounting policy and procedure development, contract internal auditing and internal monitoring, developing management anti-fraud programs and controls, quality assurance reviews, training, and expert witness testimonies.

Mr. Crawford recently completed a 4 year term as Chairman of the AICPA Government Expert Panel, and is currently the Chairman of the Oklahoma Society of CPAs Government Accounting and Auditing Committee (15 years), and has also been involved in a number of other AICPA committees and task forces as they relate to governmental accounting and auditing, including the AICPA Governmental Accounting and Auditing Committee, the AICPA Government and Not-For-Profit Expert Panel, the AICPA Government Performance and Accountability Committee, and the AICPA GASB 34 Audit Guide Revision Task Force.

Mr. Crawford is also currently the Chairman of the AICPA National Governmental Accounting and Conference Planning Task Force (10 years), and is also a member and co-chair of the Planning Committee of the AICPA’s Government and Not-For-Profit Training Conference (14 years).

Over the years, Mr. Crawford has assisted both the AICPA and GASB in the development of several implementation guides as a member of an advisory group, task force or technical content provider. His experience with GASB 34 implementation and audit issues dates back to June 30, 1999, as auditor of the first general-purpose government in the United States to implement the requirements of GASB 34.

Mr. Crawford is also currently working with many of the territories, commonwealths and freely-associated states on audit finding resolution and financial analysis projects and serves as a technical consultant and advisor to a number of Federal Government Agencies.

Frank is a frequent lecturer, trainer and discussion leader for numerous groups, including U.S. Federal Government Agencies, various local and national CPA Firms, a number of State Societies, and has appeared in several AICPA continuing professional education videos and live satellite CPE broadcasts and Webcasts related to governmental accounting and auditing.

MANAGING SHAREHOLDER MARCY TWYMAN, CPA Marcy Twyman, CPA, joined Crawford & Associates in March 2002 as Audit and Consulting Manager. Before coming to the Firm, Marcy was Finance Director at the City of Guymon, Oklahoma for 11 years. The City of Guymon was the first city in the United States to implement GASB 34. She was key in the implementation of GASB 34 and has taught various classes and seminars on the subject. Marcy is a frequent lecturer, trainer, and discussion leader for various groups including the Oklahoma Society of CPAs, Oklahoma Municipal League, and Oklahoma Municipal Clerks, Treasurers, and Finance Officers Association related to governmental accounting and management. She has also served on task forces and participated in field tests for the Governmental Accounting Standards Board in their standards-setting process. She was recognized as the 2000 Outstanding CPA in Business and Industry by the Oklahoma Society of CPAs. In 2004, Marcy became a shareholder of Crawford & Associates and currently serves as managing shareholder. She is a graduate of Panhandle State University. She has managed multiple internal audit engagements including several State colleges and universities and State agencies.



6

SHAREHOLDER BRENDA WRIGHT, CPA Brenda Wright, CPA, rejoined Crawford & Associates in February 2009 as Consulting Manager and became a shareholder in 2011. From 1991 to 2001, she worked for the Firm in financial statement auditing, internal auditing, and consulting divisions. Prior to rejoining the Firm, she served as Finance Director for the City of Mustang, Oklahoma, for seven years. Brenda has over 20 years of governmental accounting, auditing, and consulting experience. She is a frequent lecturer, trainer, and discussion leader for various groups including the Oklahoma Society of CPAs, Oklahoma Municipal League, and Oklahoma Municipal Clerks, Treasurers, and Finance Officers Association related to governmental accounting and management. She is a graduate of East Central University. She has managed multiple internal audit engagements including several State colleges and universities and State agencies. THE INTERNAL AUDIT TEAM FOR THE CITY OF EDMOND The internal audit team assembled for the City of Edmond is unparalleled in its qualifications, experience and reputation. The team’s knowledge of state and governmental accounting principles and Oklahoma State law, combined with their experience in Oklahoma State government and Oklahoma Higher Education is second to none. Under the guidance of Firm President Frank Crawford, CPA, the internal audit practice is headed by Dwayne Tate, CPA, with over 20 years’ experience with Oklahoma Higher Education institutions. Dwayne has an unprecedented understanding of colleges and universities which stems from his prior roles as Assistant Controller for the University of Central Oklahoma, Controller for Rose State College, Director of Finance for Oklahoma City Community College, and as Director of Internal Auditing for the Board of Regents for Oklahoma Colleges and Universities. To complement Dwayne Tate is a seasoned senior manager, Chris Pembrook, CPA, CGAP, Cr.FA, MBA, who has over 7 years’ experience with state agencies through his former position as Deputy Director of the Local Government and Special Services Division for the Office of State Auditor and Inspector, in addition to severing as CFO for the Oklahoma Police Pension System. Also, Chris has extensive knowledge and experience using the professional data base mining software, ACL, for audit, financial, risk and compliance data analysis. From his use of the ACL software, Chris has identified multiple instances of non-compliance with college and university pro-card purchasing policies and procedures. The internal audit team also includes Justin Kersey, CPA, CFE, and Richard Rose, CPA, both of whom have five or more years’ experience performing internal audits and financial consulting services for many Oklahoma Higher Education institutions. Brief profile descriptions are listed below. SHAREHOLDER G. DWAYNE TATE, CPA Dwayne Tate, CPA, joined Crawford & Associates in April 2005 as Consulting Manager and became shareholder in 2008. He was hired to head up the Oklahoma Higher Education Internal Audit, Consulting, and Special Projects division of the Firm. Prior to joining the Firm, he was Controller for Rose State College and Director of Finance for Oklahoma City Community College, and has a combined total of thirteen years financial management experience in Oklahoma Higher Education. He also has three years’ experience as Director of Internal Audit for the Board of Regents of Oklahoma Colleges and Universities, and two years’ experience as staff auditor with KPMG Peat Marwick. He is a graduate of the University of Oklahoma. He has managed multiple internal audit engagements including several State colleges and universities and State agencies.



7

MANAGER CHRIS PEMBROOK, CPA, CGAP, Cr.FA, MBA Chris Pembrook joined Crawford & Associates in September 2011. He has a degree in accounting from East Central University and an MBA from Oklahoma Christian University. Prior to joining the Firm, he served as the Chief Financial Officer of the Oklahoma Police Pension & Retirement System. He also worked for the Oklahoma State Auditor’s Office for seven years, two of the years serving as the Deputy Director of the Local Government and Special Services Division. During that time, he was responsible for all audit engagements for that division and supervised a staff of 54 employees. He was key in the implementation of division-wide use of ACL data-mining analysis software which helped decrease audit budgets from 35% - 50%. He is a graduate of East Central University. He has worked on various internal audit engagements including several State colleges and universities and State agencies. MANAGER JUSTIN KERSEY, CPA, CFE

Justin is a Certified Public Accountant and Certified Fraud Examiner, and joined Crawford & Associates in July 2008 and serves as accountant and consultant. He is a 2005 graduate of the University of Central Oklahoma with a bachelor's degree in accounting. Prior to joining the Firm, Justin worked as a fleet accountant in the international department of Hertz. He is a graduate of the University of Central Oklahoma. He has worked on various internal audit engagements including several State colleges and universities and State agencies. MANAGER RICHARD ROSE, CPA

Richard joined Crawford & Associates in January 2009 as a professional accountant and consultant. He is a 2000 graduate of the Southwestern Oklahoma State University with a bachelor's degree in accounting. Prior to joining the Firm, Richard worked as an auditor and staff accountant for Hunter & Gibbins, P.C., in Elk City, Oklahoma. He is a graduate of Southwestern Oklahoma State University. He has worked on various internal audit engagements including several State colleges and universities and State agencies. EXPERIENCE Crawford & Associates is a properly licensed CPA Firm in good standing with the Oklahoma Accountancy Board (license # 743). All of the Crawford & Associates staff that provide professional services meet or exceed all continuing education requirements of the Oklahoma Accountancy Board and the Governmental Accountability Office to the extent applicable. In addition, the Firm’s audit and attest practice undergoes a peer review once every three years as required. A copy of our most recent peer review report is attached (See Attachment H), and is also available on our web site at www.crawfordcpas.com. Crawford and Associates currently provides internal audit and consulting services to 20 of the 28 public colleges and universities in the State of Oklahoma. Eleven of those 18 are our internal audit clients, including the Six Regional Universities, Oklahoma City Community College, Rose State College, Western Oklahoma State College, Murray State College, and Eastern Oklahoma State College. We also currently provide internal audit services for the Oklahoma Firefighters Pension System and the Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System. We are proud of our relationship with the numerous governmental clients we have served over the past 30 years. The majority of our clients are Oklahoma municipalities, 60 plus and counting in total. We have also served State agencies, colleges and universities, and other government trusts or organizations. Over the past thirty years we have served over 100 different state and local governments in Oklahoma and around the world. Below is a list of our State and Local Government clients with references including contact information:



8

LISTING OF CITY & TOWN CONSULTING CLIENTS:

Contact Title

Client Address

Phone number/Email

Donna Doolen, Finance Director/Treasurer

City of Ada 231 S Townsend Ada, OK 74821

(580) 436-6300 [email protected]

Amy Lucas, Sr. Accountant

City of Altus 509 S. Main Altus, OK 73521


Joe Don Dunham, Business Manager

City of Alva 415 4th Street Alva, OK 73717-2340


Betty Koehn, Finance Director

City of Bixby PO Box 70 Bixby, OK 74008-0070


Robert Floyd, City Manager

City of Blanchard PO Box 480 Blanchard, OK 73010


Sandy Gaches, Clerk

Town of Byars PO Box 251 Byars, OK 74831-0251


Coleen Bishop, Clerk/Treasurer

Town of Byng 110 Byng Avenue Byng, OK 74820


Jennifer Firgard, Clerk/Treasurer

Town of Cashion 102 S. Main Cashion, OK 73016-0027


Bette Sanders, Finance Director

City of Checotah 414 W Gentry Checotah, OK 74426-2444


Pam Polk, City Manager

City of Collinsville 106 N 12th St Collinsville, OK 74021-0730


Janice Goins, Dep Clerk/Treasurer

City of Commerce PO Box 99 Commerce, OK 74339-0099


Sondra Easterly, Clerk

Town of Covington 224 W Main Covington, OK 73730-0078


Ed Stanton, City Manager

City of Crescent PO Box 561 Crescent, OK 73028-0561


Brenda Wadsworth, Clerk/Treasurer

Town of Dewar PO Box 7 Dewar, OK 74431-0007


Earlene Walker, Treasurer

City of Durant PO Box 578 Durant, OK 74702-0578


Ross Vanderhamm, Finance Director

City of Edmond PO Box 2970 Edmond, OK 73083-2970


Gayla Duke, Finance Director

City of El Reno 101 N Choctaw El Reno, OK 73036-0700

(405) 262-4070



9

Luena King, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Elgin PO Box 310 Elgin, OK 73538-0310


Donna Hysell, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Eufaula PO Box 684 Eufaula, OK 74432


Fabian Reyes, Finance Director/Treasurer

City of Frederick PO Box 399 Frederick, OK 73542-0399


Mary Hays, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Geary PO Box 125 Geary, OK 73040-0125


Wanda Calvert, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Guthrie PO Box 908 Guthrie, OK 73044-0908


Kimberly Meek, City Manager/ Finance Director

City of Guymon 219 NW 4th St. Guymon, OK 73942-4708


Tiffany Tilman, Clerk/City Manager

Town of Hennessey PO Box 306 Hennessey, OK 73742-0306


Donna White, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Henryetta PO Box 608 Henryetta, OK 74437-0608


Lorrie Brittian, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Holdenville PO Box 789 Holdenville, OK 74848-0789


Tina Foshee, City Manager

City of Idabel 201 E Main Idabel, OK 74745-4875


Tom Trueblood, Mayor

City of Kaw City PO Box 30 Kaw City, OK 74641-0030


Linda Betts, Clerk

Town of Keyes PO Box 121 Keyes, OK 73947-0121


Anita James, Treasurer

City of Kingfisher 301 N Main Kingfisher, OK 73750-2795


Sherry Pierce, Clerk

Town of Kiowa PO Box 69 Kiowa, OK 74553-0069

(918) 432-5621

Rick Endicott, Finance Director

City of Lawton 103 SW 4th Street Lawton, OK 73501-4031


Kathy Griffith, Clerk

City of Lindsay PO Box 708 Lindsay, OK 73052-0708


Toni Ervin, CFO

City of McAlester PO Box 578 McAlester, OK 74502-0578

(918)423-9300 [email protected]

Barbara Bush, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Medford PO Box 123 Medford, OK 73759-0123

(580) 395-2823



10

Lindsay Schnakenberg, Finance Director

City of Miami PO Box 1288 Miami, OK 74355-1288


Judy Redman, Finance Director/Treasurer

City of Midwest City 100 N Midwest Blvd. Midwest City, OK 73110


Dawn Vieregge, City Clerk

City of Minco PO Box 512 Minco, OK 73059-0512


Kim Johnson, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Morris 501 S. Hughes Morris, OK 74445


Janet Watts, Finance Director

City of Mustang 1501 N Mustang Rd Mustang, OK 73064


Sharon Ferguson, Treasurer

City of Newcastle PO Box 179 Newcastle, OK 73065-0179


Cathy Keller, Finance Director

City of Nichols Hills 6407 Avondale Nichols Hills, OK 73116


Evelyn Atkinson, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Okemah 502 W Broadway Okemah, OK 74859-2400


Ronnia Andrews, Clerk

City of Okmulgee PO Box 250 Okmulgee, OK 74447-0250


Sherry Bishop, Clerk

City of Owasso PO Box 180 Owasso, OK 74055-0180


Jennifer Smith, Clerk

City of Piedmont PO Box 240 Piedmont, OK

(405) 373-2621

Donna Mobly, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Prague 1116 N Jim Thorpe Blvd. Prague, OK 74864-3523


Kelly Lamberson, Finance Director

City of Sand Springs PO Box 338 Sand Springs, OK


Pam Vann, Treasurer

City of Sapulpa PO Box 1130 Sapulpa, OK 74067-1130


Joan Johnson, Clerk/Treasurer

Town of Shattuck PO Box 670 Shattuck, OK 73858-0670


Brian McDougal City Manager

City of Shawnee PO Box 1448 Shawnee, OK 74802


Shirley Lett, Clerk/Treasurer

Town of Skiatook PO Box 399 Skiatook, OK 74070-0399


Heather Shelley, Clerk/Treasurer

Town of Springer PO Box 368 Springer, OK 73458

(580) 653-2500



11

Cheryl Monks, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Stigler 115 S Broadway Stigler, OK 74462-2318


Shelldon Miggletto, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Stilwell 503 W Division Stilwell, OK 74960-2811

(918) 696-8111

Cheryl LaFerney, Clerk

City of Tuttle PO Box 10 Tuttle, OK 73089-0010

(405) 381-2335 cheryl.laferney@tuttle_ok.gov

Dollie Glenn, Clerk

City of Walters PO Box 485 Walters, OK 73572-0485


Pamela Ramirez, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Warr Acres 5930 NW 49th St. Warr Acres, OK 73122

(405) 789-2892 cityclerk@warracres_ok.gov

Karen Johnson, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Wewoka PO Box 1497 Wewoka, OK 74884-1497


Tennie Clark, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Wilburton 300 W Main St. Wilburton, OK 74578-4048


Doug Haines, Finance Director/Treasurer

City of Woodward 1219 8th St. Woodward, OK 73801-3287


Beverly Badgley, Clerk/Treasurer

City of Wynnewood 207 W Robert S Kerr Wynnewood, OK 73098-7603


LISTING OF INTERNAL AUDIT CLIENTS:

Contact Title

Client Address

Phone number/Email

Sheridan McCaffree Executive Director

Regional University System of Oklahoma 3555 Northwest 58th Street, Suite 320 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73112


Charlie Babb General Counsel

Regional University System of Oklahoma 3555 Northwest 58th Street, Suite 320 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73112


Dr. Steve Turner President

Northeastern State University 600 North Grand Avenue Tahlequah, Oklahoma 74464


David Koehn Vice President for Administration and Finance



Sue Catron Director of Business Affairs



Jessica Boles Vice President for Administration and Finance

East Central University 1100 East 14th Street Ada, Oklahoma 74820


Susie Shockey Controller

East Central University 1100 East 14th Street Ada, Oklahoma 74820




12

David Pecha Vice President for Administration

Northwestern Oklahoma State University 709 Oklahoma Boulevard Alva, Oklahoma 73717


Ross Walkup Vice President for Business Affairs

Southeastern Oklahoma State University 1405 North 4th Avenue Durant, Oklahoma 74701


Kay Lynn Roberts Controller

Southeastern Oklahoma State University 1405 North 4th Avenue Durant, Oklahoma 74701


Tom Fagan Vice President for Administration and Finance

Southwestern Oklahoma State University 100 Campus Drive Weatherford, Oklahoma 73096


Brenda Burgess Controller

Southwestern Oklahoma State University 100 Campus Drive Weatherford, Oklahoma 73096


Lisa Harper Assistant Vice President for Financial Operations

University of Central Oklahoma 100 North University Drive Edmond, Oklahoma 73034


Dr. Paul Sechrist President

Oklahoma City Community College 7777 South May Avenue Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73159


Dr. John Boyd, Vice President for Business and Finance



Brenda Carpenter Director of Finance


(405) 682-1611 ext.367 [email protected]

Ray Blanke Controller

Rose State College 6420 S.E. 15th Midwest City, Oklahoma 73110


Tricia Latham Vice President for Business Affairs

Western Oklahoma State College 2801 North Main Altus, Oklahoma 73521


Heather Hood Controller

Western Oklahoma State College 2801 North Main Altus, Oklahoma 73521


Dr. Steve Smith President

Eastern Oklahoma State College 1301 West Main Street Wilburton, OK 74578


LaDonna Howell Vice President for Business & Finance



Alaina Bray Controller



Joy McDaniel President

Murray State College One Murray Campus Tishomingo, Oklahoma 73460


Dennis Westman Assistant Vice President of Administrative Services

Murray State College One Murray Campus Tishomingo, Oklahoma 73460

(580) 371-2371, ext. 121 [email protected]

Ginger Poplin, Executive Director

Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System 421 NW 13TH ST., SUITE 100 Oklahoma City, OK 73103




13

Bob Jones, Executive Director

Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System 4545 North Lincoln Blvd., Suite 265 Oklahoma City, OK 73105-3414


Duane Michael, Chief Financial Officer / Assistant Executive Director

Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System 4545 North Lincoln Blvd., Suite 265 Oklahoma City, OK 73105‐3414


II. ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY – GOALS, OBJECTIVES, and SCOPE: PREPARATION AND START-UP The goal of the Internal Audit Firm is to function as an essential component of the City’s internal control process by striving to assist the City council, management, and staff in providing reasonable assurance of achieving the three primary objectives of the internal control process:

1. Financial reports are reliable and resources/assets are adequately safeguarded; 2. Operations are conducted in an effective and efficient manner, relatively free of waste and abuse; and

3. Compliance with applicable provisions of laws, regulations, grants and contracts is achieved.

In accordance with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, “The objective of internal auditing is to assist management and staff of an organization in the effective performance of their responsibilities. To accomplish this objective, internal auditing provides analysis, appraisals, recommendations, counsel, and information regarding the activities reviewed. The ultimate objective of an internal audit is to promote effective internal controls at a reasonable cost. The scope of internal auditing encompasses the examination and evaluation of the adequacy and effectiveness of the organization’s system of internal control and the quality of performance in carrying out assigned responsibilities. The scope of internal auditing includes: Reviewing the reliability and integrity of financial and operating information and the means used to

identify, measure, classify, and report such information.

Reviewing the systems established to ensure compliance with those policies, plans, procedures, laws, and regulations which could have a significant impact on operations and reports, and determining whether the organization is in compliance.

Reviewing the means of safeguarding assets and, as appropriate, verifying the existence of such assets. Appraising the effectiveness and efficiency of operations within the organization. Reviewing operations or programs to ascertain whether results are consistent with established goals and

objectives, and whether the operations or programs are being implemented or performed as planned.”



14

METHODOLOGY To accomplish the stated goals, objectives, and scope of internal audit, Crawford & Associates, P.C., uses a six step approach which results in a risk-based long-term audit plan approved by the City in which a list of internal audit areas are identified, assessed for risk, and determined for frequency of review based on input from the City Council and Finance/Audit Committee, City management and staff, and Crawford & Associates, P.C. Listed below is our Six Step Approach:

STEP 1. Identify potential internal audit areas for audit planning purposes through City

Council/Management Survey of Importance, ranking areas for importance by High, Medium, or Low. (See example at Attachment B)

STEP 2. Perform an independent risk analysis to identify high risk audit areas for audit

planning purposes, based on the following risk factors: Materiality, Internal Controls, Public Exposure, Complexity, Change, and Pressures (See example at Attachment C)

STEP 3. Develop engagement profile forms for each audit area to include the audit area’s risk

score and estimated hours. (See example at Attachment D) STEP 4. Prepare an annual written internal audit plan based upon the priorities determined by

the risk analysis and City Council/Management input. (See example at Attachment E) STEP 5. Perform an annual internal audit in accordance with the plan and professional

standards. STEP 6. Report the results of the internal audit and any recommendations in writing to the City

Council and Finance/Audit Committee. (See examples at Attachment F)

The internal audit will be performed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and auditing standards as set forth by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), and other applicable professional standards. We will also utilize professional auditing software, such as ACL data-mining analysis software, to perform the internal audit in an efficient and effective manner. III. Fees and Costs Fees and out-of-pocket expenses for this engagement will be billed monthly as the work progresses and are payable upon receipt of our invoices. Out-of-pocket expenses include such costs incurred by our Firm in providing the services including travel, lodging, telecommunications, printing, document reproduction, and the like, excluding any such expenses incurred directly by the City on behalf of our staff. Our fees for these services will be billed at our standard hourly rates, as follows, for the individual performing such services based on the actual number of hours of work, including travel time, performed by that individual. Standard Hourly Rates:

Firm Chairman $225 Firm President $225 Shareholders $155 Consulting Managers $140 Consulting Staff $100 Clerical Staff $35

The estimated fees for this internal audit engagement have been summarized at Attachment G – Statement of Fees and Calculation of Estimated Hours.



15

ATTACHMENT A – ORGANIZATION CHART

Frank Crawford, CPA Firm President

& Majority Shareholder

Marcy Twyman, CPA Minority & Managing

Shareholder

Brenda Wright, CPA Minority Shareholder

Dwayne Tate, CPA Internal Audit & Minority

Shareholder

Deanna Crawford, CPA Minority Shareholder

Wendy Treadwell

Quality Assurance

Tammy Hunt Quality Assurance, Client Support

Richard Rose, CPA* IT

Andrea Depee CIC Support

Kimberly Green Customer Service

Candy Dow Administrator Assistant

Justin Kersey, CPA Internal Audit &

Consulting Manager

Chris Pembrook, MBA, CPA, CGAP, CR.FA

Internal Audit & Consulting Manager

Richard Rose, CPA* Internal Audit &

Consulting Manager

Joni Parker, CPA Consulting Manager

Stephanie Ballard, CPA

Consulting Manager

D. Ann Matthews Consulting Staff

Courtney Crowder Consulting Staff

Jennifer Traxler Consulting Staff

Andres Numez Consulting Staff

Kristin Lamar, MBA Consulting Staff

Amanda Copeland, CPA

Consulting Manager

Kristy Awtry Consulting Staff

*Denotes Dual Role Yellow highlight denotes staff assigned directly to the City of Edmond internal audit proposal



ATTACHMENT B – CITY COUNCIL/MANAGEMENT SURVEY

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES LIST OF INTERNAL AUDIT AREAS

CITY COUNCIL / MANAGEMENT SURVEY OF IMPORTANCE

Instructions: The purpose of this Survey of Importance is to facilitate a risk-based approach to the performance of internal audit type monitoring procedures on an annual basis. The summary of this Survey’s results will be considered in conjunction with our Firm’s assessment of risk and the amount of resources made available for internal audit type monitoring activities to determine the frequency of audit for each potential internal audit area. Please indicate your assessment of the importance for each of the following Engagement Areas by circling the appropriate letter (H = High, M = Medium, or L = Low).

Engagement Name

Engagement Description

Board/Mgmt.Importance

(H,M,L,)

1. Sales Tax Revenue Collection and Usage Review and evaluate internal controls, policies and procedures, and records for ensuring accurate and complete revenue collection and timely deposit, and to ensure compliance with approved use of sales tax revenues.

H M L

2. Utility Billing System and Revenue Collection

Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures for utility billing, and compare to actual accounts and billings and approved rate schedules, to determine the level of compliance with those policies and procedures, and to determine the accuracy and completeness of the assessment of utility billings.

H M L

3. Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Collection Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures, and records for ensuring accurate and complete revenue collection and timely deposit. H M L

4. Municipal Court Revenue Collection Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures, and records for ensuring accurate and complete revenue collection and timely deposit. H M L

5. Parks & Recreation – Operations & Revenue Collections

Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures for operations and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness for proper safeguarding of assets and the accuracy and completeness of revenue collections.

H M L

6. Human Resources and Payroll

Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures, and records for payroll expenditures, and test for accuracy and existence. Also, review and evaluate the internal controls, procedures, and records documenting the process of hiring new employees, terminations and retirements, and determine compliance with the established design of internal controls.

H M L

7. Purchasing, Payables, & Expenditures

Review and evaluate internal controls, policies and procedures, and records for purchasing and payables/expenditures to verify accuracy, completeness, and evidence of proper approval, and to ascertain compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and procedures for purchasing and payables.

H M L

8. Procurement/Purchasing Card (Pro-Card) Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures for the City’s use of the Pro-Card and determine the level of compliance with those policies and procedures (using Data Analysis/Mining software - ACL).

H M L

9. Grants and Contracts

Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures for administering grants and contracts and evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness for proper safeguarding of assets. Also, review related expenditure records to verify evidence of proper approval and verification of allowable costs, and ascertain compliance with all applicable laws and regulations relating to grants and contracts.

H M L

10. Fleet Management

Review/Performance of preventive maintenance practices, fleet availability, cost effectiveness, and fuel usage.

H M L

11. Cash-on-Hand Review and evaluate the internal controls and procedures for safeguarding cash, and perform cash counts to verify existence. H M L

12. Capital Assets Review and evaluate the internal controls, procedures, and records for receiving, recording, disposing, and tracking capital assets. H M L

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES LIST OF INTERNAL AUDIT AREAS

CITY COUNCIL / MANAGEMENT SURVEY OF IMPORTANCE

Instructions: The purpose of this Survey of Importance is to facilitate a risk-based approach to the performance of internal audit type monitoring procedures on an annual basis. The summary of this Survey’s results will be considered in conjunction with our Firm’s assessment of risk and the amount of resources made available for internal audit type monitoring activities to determine the frequency of audit for each potential internal audit area. Please indicate your assessment of the importance for each of the following Engagement Areas by circling the appropriate letter (H = High, M = Medium, or L = Low).

Engagement Name

Engagement Description

Board/Mgmt.Importance

(H,M,L,)

13. General Ledger Account Reconciliations

Review and evaluate the internal controls, procedures, and records documenting the performance of the account reconciliations (e.g., cash), including outstanding reconciling items, and determine compliance with the established design of internal controls.

H M L

14. Information Technology – General Controls

Review and evaluate the general internal controls, policies and procedures regarding the information system (e.g., passwords, segregation of duties, data protection).

H M L

15. Disaster Recovery Plan Review and evaluate the internal controls, policies and procedures, for administering the City’s Disaster Recovery Plan and determine compliance thereof.

H M L

16. Police – Seized Property Inventory Review and evaluate the internal controls & policies and procedures as it relates to compliance with applicable laws & regulations. H M L

17. Follow-up on Prior Year Audit Findings Review and evaluate the City’s implementation of its corrective action plan to the prior year audit findings, as documented in the City’s Management Responses.

Required Annually

1. Please list below your top three areas from the listing above, those that are most important to you: 1.

2.

3.

2. Please list below any additional areas you would like the internal audit function to consider:

1.

2.

3. 4.

5.



ATTACHMENT C – RISK ASSESSMENT

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES INDEPENDENT INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICE

RISK ASSESSMENT FORM

AUDIT AREA: Human Resources and Payroll

Risk Factor Evaluation

Weight Score

1. Materiality The measure of the exposure to loss or embarrassment due to the relative dollar significance of the audit area to the budget or financial statements as a whole.

3 Over 10% of base 2 Between 2-10% of base 1 Under 2% of base Value selected: 3

x 4

12 2. Internal Controls The measure of the quality of the existing internal controls over the audit area based on existing knowledge and past audits.

3 Known to be weak 2 Acceptable 1 Known to be strong Value selected: 1

x 3

3

3. Public Exposure The measure of the likely political exposure and adverse publicity resulting from public perception or regulatory impact.

3 Major impact 2 Minor impact 1 No impact Value selected: 3

x 4

12 4. Complexity The measure of the overall complexity of the audit area including: degree of regulation, degree of automation, and number of transactions and processes.

3 Very complex 2 Moderately complex 1 Not complex Value selected: 3

x 1

3

5. Change The measure of the degree of changes in the audit areas operations in the last 12 months, including: changes in key personnel, changes in systems, and reorganization.

3 Major changes 2 Moderate changes 1 Little or no changes Value selected: 1

x 2

2

6. Pressures The measure of the degree of internal and/or external pressures on management or employees of the audit area to meet certain objectives, either personal or professional.

3 Significant pressures 2 Moderate pressures 1 Little or no pressure Value selected: 1

x 3

3

Total Score For Audit Area

35



ATTACHMENT D – ENGAGEMENT PROFILE

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES INDEPENDENT INTERNAL AUDIT SERVICE

ENGAGEMENT PROFILE FORM AUDIT AREA: Human Resources and Payroll RISK SCORE: 35 ESTIMATED AUDIT HOURS: 24-32 ENGAGEMENT FREQUENCY: Every 2 - Years INTERNAL CONTROL OBJECTIVE(S) AFFECTED:

X Financial Reporting Reliability and/or Safeguarding of Resources

Effective and Efficient Operations, Controls over Waste and Abuse

X Compliance with Laws, Regulations, Grants and Contracts ENGAGEMENT DESCRIPTION:

The system of internal control and administrative procedures surrounding the payroll process will be reviewed and evaluated for adequacy and effectiveness. Considering that payroll expenditures comprise approximately 80 % of the College’s Educational and General Budget, internal controls must be adequate and effective to properly safeguard College assets. A random sample of payroll records will be selected for testing to verify accuracy, existence, and completeness, and to ascertain compliance with applicable laws and regulations. ANTICIPATED ENGAGEMENT BENEFITS:

Deterrent to or Detection of Waste and Abuse

X Improved Policies, Programs or Controls

X Enhanced Reliability of Financial Reports X Enhanced Compliance



ATTACHMENT E – INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES INTERNAL AUDIT PLAN

FY 2014

Engagement Name Risk Score

City Council/Mgmt. Importance

(H,M,L,)

Estimated Hours

1. Sales Tax Revenue Collection and Usage 40 M 16-24

2. Utility Billing System and Revenue Collection 40 M 16-24

3. Human Resources and Payroll 35 H 16-24

4. Purchasing, Payables, & Expenditures 35 H 16-24

5. Procurement/Purchasing Card (Pro-Card) 35 H 16-24

6. Grants and Contracts 35 M 16-24

7. Follow-up on Prior Year Audit Findings N/A N/A 16-24

8. Report Writing, Meetings, and Presentations -- -- 24-32

Total Planned Hours 136-200

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES

LIST OF INTERNAL AUDIT AREAS & PROPOSED SCHEDULE ASSESSMENT OF RISK & IMPORTANCE

Engagement Name Risk Score

City Council/Mgmt.

Importance (H,M,L,)

Estimated Hours

Planned

Frequency Proposed Schedule per Fiscal Year

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

1. Sales Tax Revenue Collection and Usage 40 M 16-24 2 years

2. Utility Billing System and Revenue Collection

40 M 16-24 2 years

3. Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Collection 25 L 16-24 4 years

4. Municipal Court Revenue Collection 25 L 16-24 4 years

5. Parks & Recreation – Operations & Revenue Collections

25 L 16-24 4 years

6. Human Resources and Payroll 35 H 16-24 2 years

7. Purchasing, Payables, & Expenditures 35 H 16-24 2 years

8. Procurement/Purchasing Card (Pro-Card) 35 H 16-24 2 years

9. Grants and Contracts 35 M 16-24 3 years

10. Fleet Management 35 M 16-24 3 years

11. Cash-on-Hand 30 M 16-24 3 years

12. Capital Assets 25 L 16-24 4 years

13. General Ledger Account Reconciliations 25 L 16-24 4 years

14. Information Technology – General Controls

35 H 16-24 2 years

15. Disaster Recovery Plan 35 H 16-24 2 years

16. Police – Seized Property Inventory 30 M 16-24 3 years

17. Follow-up on Prior Year Audit Findings N/A N/A 16-24 Annual



ATTACHMENT F – INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS

[Date] [Example Council] [Address] [City], OK [Zip code] Re: Report on Internal Audit Type Monitoring Activities – [Example Entity] Members of the Council: The [Example] engaged Crawford and Associates, P. C. to provide certain professional services as identified in the Scope and Objectives of Our Services section below with regards to [Example Entity (EE)]. This report describes the scope and objectives of our services, the specific procedures we performed, our findings and recommendations, and (EE) management’s responses to our findings and recommendations. Scope and Objectives of Our Services The scope of our professional services was limited to performing certain consulting services designed to assist the [Example Council] in meeting its fiduciary responsibilities. These services were performed in accordance with the standards applicable to consulting engagements of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. With regards to this specific engagement, the scope of our services included certain internal audit type monitoring procedures in the following areas at (EE):

Purchasing Procurement Card Human Resources/Employment Services & Payroll Capital Assets Cash-on-hand Grants & Contracts

The objectives of our services in this engagement were to obtain information and review selected accounting records to determine whether any recommendations are warranted regarding the design of established internal control policies and procedures, and to report on the level of compliance with those policies and procedures as designed based on our test work. Purchasing Procedures Performed: To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed the following procedures:

Obtained and reviewed (EE) and [Example Council] policies and procedures regarding purchasing. We also conducted interviews with appropriate management and personnel.

Selected a random sample of 34 purchase orders processed during the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. To ensure a proportionately representative selection, we stratified the sample in the following manner:

o Five (5) purchase orders greater than $2,500, but less than or equal to $10,000 – those requiring a minimum of three verbal quotes;

Procedures Performed – continued:

o Four (4) purchase orders greater than $10,000, but less than or equal to $25,000 – those requiring a minimum of three written quotes;

o Six (6) purchase orders greater than $25,000, but less than or equal to $100,000 – those requiring competitive bids and must be reported to the [Example Council] ;and

o Nineteen (19) purchase orders greater than $100,000 – those requiring [Example Council] approval before purchase.

For each purchase order selected, we verified there was properly documented approvals and compliance with

purchasing policies and procedures including but not limited to quote, competitive bid, and/or [Example Council] notification or approval requirements.

Findings: All purchase orders tested were properly approved in accordance with (EE) and [Example Council] policies

and procedures.

All purchase orders tested complied with all quote, competitive bid, and/or [Example Council] notification or approval requirements.

Recommendations: We have no recommendations at this time. Procurement Card Procedures Performed: To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed the following procedures:

Obtained and reviewed (EE) policies and procedures, and laws and regulations regarding the use of the procurement card. We also conducted interviews with appropriate management and personnel.

Performed data analysis of procurement card transactions for the audit scope period of January 1, 2013

through December 31, 2013, for 190 cards with 12,655 transactions, to ensure that no single purchase exceeded the individual purchase amounts set forth by (EE) policies and the individual card limit, to ensure cardholders did not split transactions in order to make purchases in excess of their single transaction limit, and to ensure that the monthly billing cycle purchase limit did not exceed the card limit as set forth by (EE) policies and the individual card limit.

Through the use of data analysis procedures we judgmentally selected monthly billing cycles for twenty one

(21) cardholders from the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. For each monthly billing cycle selected, we verified whether supporting documentation indicated the following:

o All charges were properly supported by invoices or other supporting documentation.

o All charges were properly approved.

o All charges appear to be for a public purpose.

o All charges were for allowable purchases set by (EE) policy.

Findings:

All procurement card transactions tested were properly within cardholder limits for monthly billing cycle limits.

All procurement card transactions tested were properly approved.

12,654 of the total 12,655 transactions tested were properly supported by invoices or other supporting documentation. The following is the one charge noted that was not properly supported:

o One purchase only had a total charge receipt and not a detail receipt. So testing of public purpose and what was actually purchased could not be determined.

12,651 of the 12,655 transactions tested were expended for a public purpose. The following are the four (4) charges noted that were not for a public purpose:

o One (1) purchase of personal shoes o Two (2) purchases of funeral flowers o One (1) purchase of a sympathy card

12,650 of the 12,655 transactions tested were in compliance with (EE) policy regarding charges for allowable

purchases. The following are the five (5) charges noted that were not allowable purchases according to (EE) policy:

o Two (2) purchases of computer monitors o One (1) purchase of a printer over $500 o One (1) purchase of gasoline o One (1) purchase of travel-related (i.e., parking) expense

12,647 of the total 12,655 transactions tested were in compliance with (EE) policy regarding split purchasing.

We identified four (4) instances involving eight (8) transactions in which a cardholder split a purchase and exceeded the individual transaction limit. Of the four (4) instances noted, two (2) of the transactions had been identified and addressed by the procurement card administrator prior to our beginning the internal audit.

Recommendations: We recommend (EE) management provide additional training to cardholders who have violated (EE) policies, specifically addressing split purchase transactions and unallowable purchases. We also recommend (EE) management update the Procurement Card policy to reflect current practices on campus. Human Resources/Employment Services and Payroll Procedures Performed: To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed the following procedures:

Obtained and reviewed (EE) policies and procedures regarding Human Resources/Employment Services and Payroll. We also conducted interviews with appropriate management and personnel to gain an understanding of and to document the internal controls surrounding the employment services and payroll processes. We then conducted a walkthrough of the employment services and payroll processes, and evaluated the established internal controls as designed, noting any recommendations for strengthening those controls.


Selected a random sample of 20 new hires (8%) from a total of 266 newly hired employees for the audit

scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. For each new employee selected, we reviewed their personnel file to verify that all required documentation for processing a new hire was present and properly completed. We also reviewed the FLSA Exempt or Nonexempt classification for each new employee selected to verify the proper classification. We recalculated and compared the salary or hourly rate paid per the monthly payroll to the authorized pay rate per the Employee Transaction Form or Contract. We also compared the W-4 information in the payroll system to the W-4 Form.

Selected a random sample of 15 additional employees (2%) from a total of 703 active employees hired before the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. For each employee selected we reviewed the FLSA Exempt or Nonexempt classification to verify the proper classification. We recalculated and compared the salary or hourly rate paid per the monthly payroll to the authorized pay rate per the Employee Transaction Form or Contract. We also compared the W-4 information in the payroll system to the W-4 Form.

Selected a random sample of 5 terminated employees (13%) from a total of 40 terminations (i.e., retirements, resignations, discharges, other) for the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. For each terminated employee selected, we reviewed their personnel file to verify that all required documentation for processing a termination was present and properly completed.

Verified the proper display of Workplace Posters as required by the U.S. Department of Labor and the State of

Oklahoma Department of Labor.

Requested copies of any amended W-2’s and supporting documentation of changes for the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013.

Requested any unclaimed payroll checks and supporting documentation of follow-up for the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013.

Findings:

From the review of existing internal controls surrounding the employment services and payroll processes, we

noted that the HR Director obtains the required documentation necessary to hire a new employee (i.e., create a new record) or make changes to an existing employee’s record, and then the payroll accountant enters that information into the HR/Payroll System. There is no subsequent independent review within the HR and Payroll Office of the data entry to the source documentation to verify the completeness and accuracy of that information entered into the payroll system. However, a system-generated Payroll Reconciliation Report for Gross Amounts is run by the payroll accountant who provides explanations for changes and submits said Report to the Vice President for Administration for their review.

For the new employees hired during the audit scope period and selected for testing:

o Nineteen (95%) of the twenty new hires selected for testing had all of the required documentation for

processing a new hire (e.g., Employee Transaction Form or Contract, I-9, E-Verify, W-4, Drug-Free Workplace Policy, Loyalty Oath, insurance forms) present and properly completed. One of the new hires’ files did not contain a completed Drug-Free Workplace Policy form.

o All FLSA Exempt or Nonexempt positions were properly classified. o All salary and hourly rate amounts paid, per the monthly payrolls selected, properly agreed to the

authorized pay rate per the Employee Transaction Form or Contract. o All W-4 information in the payroll system properly agreed to the W-4 Form.

Findings – continued:

For the active employees hired prior to the audit scope period and selected for testing:

o All FLSA Exempt or Nonexempt positions were properly classified. o All salary and hourly rate amounts paid, per the monthly payrolls selected, properly agreed to the

authorized pay rate per the Employee Transaction Form or Contract. o All W-4 information in the payroll system properly agreed to the W-4 Form.

For the terminated employees, terminated during the audit scope period and selected for testing, all required

documentation for processing a termination was present and properly completed.

All Workplace Posters as required by the U.S. Department of Labor and the State of Oklahoma Department of Labor were properly displayed.

There were no amended W-2’s noted for the audit scope period.

There were no unclaimed payroll checks noted for the audit scope period. Recommendations:

1. We recommend (EE) management implement an independent review process within the HR and Payroll Office to ensure the accuracy and completeness of data entry to the source documentation for either creating a new payroll record or modifying an existing record. We further recommend that the independent review be performed by the HR Director prior to submitting the Payroll Reconciliation Report for Gross Amounts to the Vice President for Administration.

2. We recommend (EE) management reinforce with staff compliance with the designed internal control procedure to properly maintain all required supporting documentation and forms in the personnel files. We further recommend that documentation supporting staff’s due diligence and good-faith efforts or attempts to obtain the required forms also be maintained in the personnel files.

Capital Assets Procedures Performed: To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed the following procedures:

Obtained and reviewed (EE) policies and procedures regarding capital assets. We also conducted interviews with appropriate management and personnel.

Selected a random sample of 10 capital asset additions (66.7%) from a total of 15 capital assets added during

the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. For each of the additions selected, we verified the asset was properly located, properly tagged, and agreed to the invoice regarding description, date acquired, and amount.

Selected a random sample of 20 capital assets from the capital assets listing and traced them to the floor. For

each of the capital assets selected, we verified the asset was properly located, properly tagged, properly included in the inventory records, and had a matching description in the inventory records.

Selected a random sample of 5 capital assets from the floor and traced them to the capital assets listing. For each of the capital assets selected, we verified the asset was properly located, properly tagged, properly included in the inventory records, and had a matching description in the inventory records.


Selected a random sample of 10 capital asset disposals (91%) from a total of 11 capital assets disposed during the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013. For each of the disposals selected, we verified the asset was properly disposed or deleted from the capital assets listing in compliance with asset disposal policies and procedures.

Findings:

For the capital asset additions selected for testing:

o All capital assets were properly located. o All capital assets were recorded with the correct description and date acquired.

o Eight (80%) of the 10 capital assets were recorded at the correct amount or invoice cost. The

following two capital assets were not recorded at the correct amount:

Asset ID Asset Reported Actual

Item # Number Description Amount Cost

1 013099 Latitude E5520 Laptop $ 10,208.37 $ 1,208.37 2 N/A ST Imaging Digital Printer $ 8,975.00 $ 9,195.00

o Six (60%) of the 10 capital assets were properly tagged. The following four capital assets were not tagged:

Asset ID Asset Dollar Item # Number Description Location Amount 1 Not Tagged Cybex 770T-CT Treadmill WC $ 10,538.50 2 Not Tagged ST Imaging Digital Printer LB $ 9,195.00 3 Not Tagged Z925A MN $ 8,947.00 4 Not Tagged John Deere Gator TX AGE $ 6,555.00

For the capital assets selected for list to floor testing:

o Sixteen (80%) of the 20 capital assets could be located. The following four capital assets could not be located:

Asset ID Asset Reported Dollar

Item # Number Description Location Amount

1 010691 Polycom BS4000 CODEC H.323 IE-129 $ 7,049.53 2 4-28622 1996 Chevy Van MN-SHED $ 21,525.00 3 008288 Alpha Server 400 SH-203 $ 9,434.00 4 006867 Treadmill WC-206 $ 6,140.00


o All sixteen of the capital assets that were located had a matching description in the inventory records.

o Twelve (75%) of the 16 capital assets located were properly tagged. The following four capital

assets did not have a tag number issued:

Asset ID Asset Dollar Item # Number Description Location Amount 1 N/A Kwikgoal Pro Premier Goal 2B8 Field $ 5,500.00 2 N/A Sewer machine Mongoose 184 Fleet Building $ 37,840.00 3 N/A Polycom VS4000 CODEC H.323 EN-220 $ 7,049.00 4 N/A Polycom VS4000 CODEC H.323 EN-208 $ 8,050.00

o Twelve (75%) of the 16 capital assets located were located in the proper location according to inventory records. The following four capital assets were found, but were not located in their proper location according to inventory records:

Asset ID Asset Reported Dollar

Item # Number Description Location Amount

1 N/A Polycom VS4000 CODEC H.323 EN-220 $ 7,049.00 2 N/A Polycom VS4000 CODEC H.323 EN-208 $ 8,050.00 3 011341 Viewstation 82033034C3DM7 EN $ 10,949.00 4 010366 Polycom VS400 CODEC H.323 WW-B $ 8,400.00

For the capital assets selected for floor to list testing:

o All five of the capital assets had a proper matching description in the inventory records.

o Three (60%) of the 5 capital assets were properly tagged. The following two capital assets did not have a tag number recorded in the inventory listing:

Asset ID Asset Dollar Item # Number Description Location Amount 1 13474 Elmo Projector WW-116 $ 1,964.00 2 12561 IETV Camera EN-220 $ 3,499.30

o Four (80%) of the 5 capital assets were located in the proper location according to inventory records.

The following capital asset did not have a room location recorded in the inventory records:

Asset ID Asset Dollar Number Description Location Amount 13474 Elmo Projector WW-116 $ 1,964.00


All ten of the capital asset disposals selected for testing were traced to the appropriate documentation to support the deletion.

Recommendations: We recommend (EE) management and staff responsible for maintaining the capital assets inventory system and accounting for capital assets ensure that:

All capital asset additions are properly recorded at actual cost; All capital assets are properly located; All capital assets are properly tagged; and Inventory records are updated on a regular basis to remain current.

Cash-on-Hand Procedures Performed: To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed the following procedures:

Obtained and reviewed (EE) policies and procedures regarding cash-on-hand. We also conducted interviews with appropriate management and personnel to gain an understanding of and to document the internal controls for safeguarding cash-on-hand.

Obtained a complete listing of cash-on-hand, noting locations and authorized amounts. We then conducted a walkthrough of certain selected locations and evaluated the established internal controls, as designed for safeguarding cash-on-hand, noting any recommendations for strengthening those controls. We also conducted unannounced or surprise cash counts at certain selected locations to verify the accuracy and completeness of cash-on-hand.

Obtained daily cashier checkout (end of day balancing) forms for certain selected days during the audit scope period of January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013, to test compliance with the internal control policies and procedures as designed.

Findings:

The complete listing of cash-on-hand is recorded and maintained in the (EE)’s general ledger. The authorized amounts and current balances of cash-on-hand were communicated to us by (EE) management. During our cash-count testing procedures we identified no material difference between the total cash-on-hand as compared to the general ledger balance and the authorized balance.

During our walk-throughs and discussions with (EE) management and personnel, we noted that the end of day

balancing procedures do not include a review and reconciliation of the cash/check composition of daily receipts to the deposit. We also noted that the end of day balancing reports for the Wellness Center and Library do not document that an independent review of the daily balancing has been performed by someone other than the person responsible for the cash drawer.

Recommendations:

1. We recommend (EE) management revise the end of day balancing procedures to include a review and reconciliation of the cash/check composition of daily receipts to the deposit.

2. We recommend that the end of day balancing reports for the Wellness Center and Library have an independent review, and that such review be documented by signature and date on the daily balancing reports.

Grants and Contracts Procedures Performed: To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed the following procedures:

Obtained and reviewed (EE) policies and procedures regarding grants and contracts.

Conducted interviews with appropriate management and personnel to gain an understanding of and to document the internal controls surrounding the grants and contracts process.

Conducted a walkthrough of the grants and contracts process, and evaluated the established internal controls as designed, noting any recommendations for strengthening those controls.

Obtained a complete listing of grants and contracts, noting those that had not recently been audited, so as to not duplicate any recently completed external audits or program reviews.

Selected a sample of grants and/or contract that had not recently been audited to determine whether:

o The grant was properly reported in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, as of the most recent

Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA).

o Any Non-cash assistance received was properly reported as an expenditure, as required by OMB Circular A-133.

o Compliance with significant and material compliance requirement(s), identified as a major component of the grant.

Findings:

From the listing of grants and contracts, specifically those that had not recently been audited, we selected the following grant to review:

o National School Lunch Program (NSLP) – Federal grant – CFDA #10.555

For the grant selected, we reviewed the following:

o The (EE), in regards to NSLP, qualifies as a Recreational Child Care Institution (RCCI). As an RCCI, the (EE) is required to have a Statement of Fact and a Master Roster of all eligible participants of the grant, or a similar document containing the appropriate information. The (EE) does maintain a Statement of Fact; however, the (EE) does not maintain a Master Roster by the individual responsible for review of daily meal counts and the creation and invoicing for monthly reimbursement of the grant.


o The (EE) is required to perform no less than one on-site review for each site under its jurisdiction by February 1 each year. Based on interviews with staff responsible for the annual review, it appears the (EE) is conducting the annual review by February 1. However, it appears documentation is not maintained that identifies the areas reviewed, results, and the date of the review.

o Per discussion with (EE) staff and review of documentation provided by the various cafeterias, the (EE) received non-cash assistance in the form of commodities during Fiscal Year 2013. OMB Circular A-133.315 requires the following:

“Include, in either the schedule or a note to the schedule, the value of the Federal awards expended in the form of non-cash assistance. While not required, it is preferable to present this information in the schedule.”

Review of the Fiscal Year 2013 SEFA, it appears that the non-cash assistance received was not reported on the schedule or in the notes to the schedule.

o The Fiscal Year 2013 SEFA reported CFDA #10.555, National School Lunch Program, as a direct

grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Upon review of contracts specific to the grant, we compared the information presented on the SEFA to the requirements of OMB Circular A-133 and identified the following:

The single program reported should have included the following grants: CFDA #10.553 – School Breakfast Program CFDA #10.559 – Summer Food Service Program for Children

The grants should be identified as a cluster.

The grants should include the pass-through entity, the Oklahoma State Department of

Education.

Recommendations:

1. We recommend (EE) management create and maintain a Master Roster to assist and strengthen the internal controls surrounding the monthly invoicing process by ensuring only eligible participants are included on the monthly invoice.

2. We recommend (EE) management create or use the annual checklist form, provided by the Oklahoma State Department of Education, to conduct the annual reviews of each site. We also recommend the form contain the date of the review and be signed-off by the individual performing the review.

3. We recommend (EE) management implement procedures to ensure all forms of non-cash assistance are identified and properly reported on the SEFA.

4. We recommend (EE) management implement procedures to ensure all grants, in which the (EE) is a sub-recipient, include the pass-through entity on the SEFA. We also recommend that all grants, that are part of a cluster, appropriately present all applicable CFDA numbers.

Follow-up on Prior Year Recommendations

Miscellaneous Claims Encumbrance and Pre-Audit System: Although there are similar current audit period findings, it appears our recommendations regarding account coding, proper encumbrances, proper fiscal year and proper supporting documentation have been implemented. We understand that the proper selection of an account code is often times a subjective process.

(EE) Food Service – Contract Compliance: It appears our recommendation regarding the specific monitoring and recalculating of monthly commission payments has been implemented.

We would like to express our appreciation for all the courtesy and assistance we received from staff during our work at the (EE) and hope that this report will be of benefit to the [Example Council] and (EE). Crawford & Associates, P.C.

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

Proposal for CANA-P Service (Computerized Analysis of Numerical Anomalies of the Purchasing card process)

2

CANA-P Service As our governments continue to become more efficient and effective with their procurement processes, we at Crawford & Associates have developed a Computerized Analysis of Numerical Anomalies of the Purchasing card process (CANA-P).

Using specialized software and our years of experience with government finance and familiarity with governmental purchasing processes, we have developed a package of services to enhance your government’s

internal controls over the Purchasing card process by using data analytics to identify anomalies within the process that might need further investigation. The data analytics are designed to look for, among other

things, the following:

Benford’s Law anomalies (looks for the non-randomness of specific numbers)

Split purchases that violate policy regulations

Unusual vendors and/or unusual quantities from vendors

Fuel reasonableness tests

Memberships, subscriptions, and dues

Online purchases

Unusual trends by individual cardholders

Other tests as needed

Service packages We have designed this service for the ultimate flexibility, depending on the specific needs of your government. Currently, these packages are designed to be performed on a quarterly basis.

Services Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Data analytics X X X

Quarterly reports with identification of anomalies X X X

Design, modification and monitoring of P card policies X X

Investigation of anomalies X

[Example Entity]

PROCUREMENT CARD ANALYSIS FOR THE PERIOD OF

OCTOBER 2011 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2012

()

"° > ~ '"T1

0 "° 0 P.C.

& ASSOCiATES

July 22, 2013

[Director/Offical], [Title] [Street Address] [City], Oklahoma [Zip Code]

Re: Report on Procurement Card Data Mining & Analysis

[Director/Official]:

The [Example Entity] engaged Crawford and Associates, P. C. to provide certain professional services as identified in the Scope and Objectives of Our Services section below. 1bis report describes the scope and objectives of our services, the specific procedures we performed, and our findings and recommendations.

Scope and Objectives of Our Services

The scope of our professional services was limited to perform.mg certain consulting services designed to assist management in meeting its fiduciary responsibilities. These services were performed in accordance with the standards applicable to consulting engagements of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. With regards to tlus specific engagement, the scope of our services included certain internal audit type monitoring procedures performed at the [Example Entity]:

• Perform data mining and analysis procedures related to procurement card transactions based on current [Example Entity] policy, and provide the results of the mining procedures and analysis to [Example Entity] staff for their consideration.

The objectives of our services in this engagement were to perform data mining and analysis procedures to identify any procurement card transaction( s) that could potentially need further review due to the potential risk of violation of existing policies, the identification of potential policy weaknesses, and the identification of transactions that could pose a potential higher risk due to their nature.

Procedures Performed:

To accomplish the stated objectives, we performed certain procedures based on the availability of data maintained in the Bank of America system utilized by the [Example Entity]. Limitations were placed on this analysis due to the fact that "Level Ilf' data was not being captured for the [Example Entity] by the Bank of America pcard program for the period being reviewed.

If "Level III" data had been captured by Bank of America, additional procedures could have been applied to the data which would further assist in the identification of violations of current policies and for transactions that may require further review. 1bis additional analysis would increase the likelihood of identification of the foilowing items identified as non-allowable purchase in the [Example Entity]'s current policies such as:

T: 405-691-5550 F: 405·691 ·5646 I W: www.crawfordcpas.com E: [email protected] I l 0308 Greenbriar Place, Oklahoma City, OK 73159

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES,c

> Alcoholic Beverages > Cash Advances > Controlled Substances > Personal Items > Weapons, Ammunition (except Police Department) > Fuel & Lube (except when traveling for business)

The analysis performed for the period of October 2011 through September 2012 included the following:

• Split Purchase test : o Review for $1,500 quote limit

o Same cardholder, same vendor, same day o Same department, same vendor, same day

o Review for $3,000 quote limit o Same cardholder, same vendor, same day o Same department, same vendor, same day

• P-Card Holder Analysis which includes the following for each cardholder: o Total number and amount of transactions o Average transaction amount o Single, Monthly transaction ($) limits o Top two purchase made ($) o Minimum purchase made ($) o Variance Analysis between the Max and Min purchase ($)

• Benford Analysis by department: o Supporting tables for deviations from expected results for management's consideration of

further review

• Cross-tabulation tables for Departmental expenses by Merchant Category Code.

• Sales Tax transactions with total amount not recovered during the period.

• Round Amount Identification for Vendors that are more likely to carry gift cards.

Summary of Results:

1. We performed tests to identify potential split purchase transactions. These tests were an attempt to identify potential split purchases related to the [Example Entity]'s Purchasing Policies Secdon B. Competitive Bidding regulations regarding quote requirements that have been set at $1,500 & $3,000. Our test identified:

• $1,500 Limit 17 transactions for an amount of$16,473.10

• $3,000 Limit 8 transactions for an amount of $10,655.05

2. The P-Card Holder Analysis was performed to identify potential losses in cost savings for individuals not utilizing their p-card and/or identify those individuals, whom based on the usage, may not need a

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES,c

card. This possible reduction in cards issued could further minimize the potential risk to the [Example Entity] from its p~ard program. This analysis may also assist in the identification of card(s) that need single transaction limits instituted to reduce potential risks or identify which cards might need the monthly credit limit reduced based on the cardholders activity. Examples of information provided:

Twenty-four cardholders had fewer than 15 transactions per card for the time period of October 2011 to September 2012

Forty-three cardholders had a maximum single transaction amount less than $1,500 of which twenty-three did not have a single transaction amount established for the cardholder.

Four cardholders have a monthly credit limit of $100,000, of which the largest cardholder expense amount was $112,916 for the period of October 2011 to September 2012. The average expense for the same period was $92, 105.

Eight cardholders have a monthly credit limit of $20,000, of which the largest cardholder expense amount was $119,910 for the period of October 2011 to September 2012. The average expense for the same period was $64,780

3. We performed tests to identify all transactions for the period in which sales taxes were charged inappropriately, and not subsequently refunded. The tests identified net sales tax charged inappropriately that has not yet been refunded in the amount of $538.23.

4. We performed tests to identify transaction amounts that are of even dollar amounts with vendors that are more likely to sell gift cards (e.g. Walmart, Target, etc.). This test excludes restaurants as they inherently contain a higher potential rate of occurrence of an even dollar amount due to tips applied to the transaction. Our tests identified 22 transactions for an amount of $2,225 .00 that management may wish to consider additional review of the transaction(s) supporting detail.

Additional tables can be provided electronically to the [Example Entity], upon request, for any of the Benford Analysis charts for review by the p-card administrator.

We would like to express our appreciation for all the courtesy and assistance we received from staff during our work at the [Example Entity] and hope that this report will be of benefit to the [Example Entity]'s management.

~:·a, .. ~..,.~~G. Crawford & Associates, P .C.

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EXAMPLE ENTITY

POTENTIAL SPLIT TRANSACTIONS DEPARTMENT

$1,500 QUOTE POLICY

CH_Full_Name - - Txn::_Number Purchase_Date . Vendor_Name _ _ Total_Card_Spend CA_DEPT CA_:::Test_ST_ l

Barlow.Bill TXN00003149 4/4/2012 MYDER,LLC

Barlow, Bill TXN00003153 4/4/2012 MYDER,LLC

Lowery.Jim TXN00002646 2/21/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO.

Lowery,Jim TXN00002647 2/21/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO.

Luckinbill,David TXN00003371 4/18/2012 RICKS AUTOMOTIVE

Luckinbill,David TXN00003375 4/18/2012 RICKS AUTOMOTIVE

Downey, Chris TXNOOOOl 789 12/7 /2011 RONS TIRE

Newby, Bill TXN00001811 12/7 /2011 RONS TIRE

Maze, Steve TXN00001964 12/20/2011 SPECIAL OPS UNIFORMS,

Maze, Steve TXN00001972 12/20/2011 SPECIAL OPS UNIFORMS,

Hurst, Josh TXN00004039 6/8/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO.

Hurst, Josh TXN00004059 6/8/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO.

Baker, Ted TXN00004183 6/19/2012 NEWMAN SIGNS

Baker, Ted TXN00004187 6/19/2012 NEWMAN SIGNS

Baker, Ted TXN00004067 6/11/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS

Baker, Ted TXN00004073 6/11/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS Baker, Ted TXN00004075 6/11/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS

TOTAL($)

1,420.49

190.00

1,271.74

401.00

877.66

1,278.56

762.00

1,445.28

1,493.63

129.99

1,248.68

900.47

821.10

982.50

1,450.00

900.00

900.00

s 16,473.10

Fire Department

Fire Department

Fleet

Fleet

Fleet

Fleet

Line Maint

Line Maint

Pol ice Department

Police Department

Street Department

Street Department

Street Department

Street Department

Street Department

Street Department

Street Department

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

cpembrook

Rectangle

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EXAMPLE ENTITY POTENTIAL SPLIT

TRANSACTI ONS $1,500 QUOTE POLICY

CH_Full_Name Txn_Number Purchase_Date Vendor_Name Tota(.Card_Spend Total_ltem_Tax CA_Test_ST_l

Barlow,Bill TXN00003149 4/4/2012 MYDER,LLC 1,420.49 0 Yes

Barlow,Bill TXN00003153 4/4/2012 MYDER,LLC 190.00 O Yes

Hurst,Josh TXN00004039 6/8/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO. 1,248.68 0 Yes

Hurst.Josh TXN00004059 6/8/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO. 900.47 O Yes

Lowery, Jim TXN00002646 2/21/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO. 1,271.74 0 Yes

Lowery, Jim TXN00002647 2/21/2012 LOGAN COUNTY ASPHALT CO. 401.00 O Yes

Luckinbill, David TXN00003371 4/18/2012 RICKS AUTOMOTIVE 877.66 O Yes

Luckinbill, David TXN00003375 4/18/2012 RICKS AUTOMOTIVE 1,278.56 O Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00004183 6/19/2012 NEWM AN SIGNS 821.10 O Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00004187 6/19/2012 NEWMAN SIGNS 982.50 O Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00004067 6/11/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1.450.00 o Yes

Baker ,Ted TXN00004073 6/11/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 900.00 O Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00004075 6/11/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 900.00 O Yes

Maze.Steve TXN00001964 12/20/2011 SPECIAL OPS UNIFORMS, 1,493.63 O Yes

Maze, Steve TXN00001972 12/20/2011 SPECIAL OPS UNIFORMS, 129.99 O Yes

TOTAL($) s 14,265.82

cpembrook

Rectangle

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EX/\J\IPLE ENTITY

POTENTIAL SPLIT TRANSACTIONS DEPART~IENT

$3,000 QUOTE POLJ CY

CH_Full_Name Txn_Number Purchase_Oate Vendor_Name Total_Grd_Spend CA_OEPT CA_Test_ST_l Barlow, Bill TXN00001871 12/12/2011 STOLZ TELECOM LLC 2,052.43 Fire Department Yes

Barlow, Bill TXN00001873 12/12/2011 STOLZ TELECOM LLC 1,560.32 Fire Department Yes

Dogan, Don TXN00002507 2/8/2012 COUNTRY FORD MERCURY 2,784.51 Fleet Yes

Dogan, Don TXN00002518 2/8/2012 COUNTRY FORD MERCURY 632.79 Fleet Yes

Parker, Pennie TXN00002591 2/16/2012 COUNTRY FORD MERCURY 2,331.15 Fleet Yes

Dogan, Don TXN00002594 2/16/2012 COUNTRY FORD MERCURY 882.31 Fleet Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00004998 8/17 /2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 2,100.00 Street Department Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00005013 8/17 /2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1,525.00 Street Department Yes TOTAL($) s 13,868.51

cpembrook

Rectangle

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES, P.C. EXAMPLE ENTITY POTENTIAL SPLIT

TRANSACTIONS$3,000 QUOTE POLICY

CH_Full_Name Txn_Number Purchase_Date -- Vendor_Name Tota1.:_card-_Spend Total_ltem_Tax CA_Test_ST_l Barlow, Bill TXN00001871 12/12/2011 STOLZ TELECOM LLC 2,052.43 O Yes

Bar low, Bill TXN00001873 12/12/2011 STOLZ TELECOM LLC 1,560.32 0 Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00004998 8/17/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 2,100.00 0 Yes

Baker, Ted TXN00005013 8/17/2012 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 1,525.00 O Yes

Dogan, Don TXN00002507 2/8/2012 COUNTRY FORD MERCURY 2,784.51 O Yes

Dogan, Don TXN00002518 2/8/2012 COUNTRY FORD MERCURY 632.79 0 Yes

TOTAL($) s 10,655.05

cpembrook

Rectangle

Clu\WFOl!IJ & 1\SSOl'l1\TES P.C.

l'·l'1\l!O 110 1.!l Ell flNfll .YSIS

CMs Sl72 s 50.00 I s 50.00 s l ,500.00 s 50.00 s 50.00 s 50.00 1.00 LOO CL: SLSK; STL Sl.S; No C.sh

John 1113 s 14S.48 1 s 14S.48 s l ,S00.00 s 145.48 s 145.48 s 145.48 1.00 1.00 No Slgnoff CL: SI .SK; STL SLS; No C.

lee 6740 s 640. 12 3 s 213.37 s s 379.83 s 241.91 s 18.38 l .S7 20.67 CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh

Maxine 4622 s 1,818.06 3 s 606.02 s s 1.n9.oo s 19.S3 s 19.S3 9 1.09 9 1.09 CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh

lee 9S21 s 338.S9 4 s 84.6S s 1.soo.00 s 141.97 s 78.3S s 54.60 1.81 2.60 NoSl&noff CL:SLSK;STLSl .S; NoC.

Shelby 4438 s S38.41 4 s 134.60 s l,S00.00 s 400.00 s 87.07 s 22.84 4.S9 17.SI CL: SI.SK; STL Sl .S; No C.sh

April 4207 s 939.SO 4 s 234.88 s l ,S00.00 s 800.00 s 64.6S s 34.SO 12.37 23.19 CL: $1.SK; STL $1.S; No C.sh

l•mv 2424 s 2S9.7S s s Sl.95 s l ,S00.00 s 138.00 s 80.00 s S.22 l.73 26.44 No Signoff CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.S; No C.

Roy 8S38 s S09.76 6 s 84.96 s s 199.9S s 120.00 s 12.87 1.67 I S.54 No Slgnoff CL: $SK; STL: N/A; No C.sh

Jim 544S s 676.97 6 s 112.83 s l ,S00.00 s S26.00 s 132.00 s 8.97 3.98 S8.64 CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.S; No C.sh

Cayton 7416 s 566.48 7 s 80.93 s l ,S00.00 s 3SO.OO $ 92.00 s 3.48 3.80 IOO.S7 No Slgnoff CL: SI.SK; STL SLS; No C. Matt 9968 s 76S.60 7 s 109.37 s s 499.00 s IS4.97 s 32.26 3 .22 IS.47 CL: SSK; STL: N/ A; No C.sh cartton 7714 s 806.16 7 s 115.17 s s 400.00 s 241.99 s 12.00 1.6S 33.33 No Slanoff CL: $SK; STl: N/ A; No C.sh lance 6908 s 1,766.14 7 s 2S2.31 s s S23.38 s S23.38 s 49.00 1.00 10.68 CL: SIOK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Forest 446S s l ,809.04 8 s 226.13 s s 396.40 s 3S9. IO s 4.99 1. 10 79.44 No Slanoff CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Ralph 198S s J ,949.99 8 s 243.7S s s l ,620.00 s 249.99 s 12.00 6.48 13S.OO No Slgnoff Cl: SSK; STL: N/A; NoC.sh (yndi 6717 s S,482.93 8 s 685.37 s s 3,000.00 s l,2SO.OO s S8.S8 2.40 Sl.21 CL: SSK: STL: N/A; No C.sh Tra~I 620S s 116 .IS 9 s 12.91 s l ,S00.00 s 18.46 s 16.41 s 4 .34 1.12 4 .2S No Slgnoff CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.S; llo C.

S.•n 315S s 385.0S 9 s 42.78 s l .S00.00 s 111. 16 s 64.37 s 12.00 1.73 9.26 No Slgnoff CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.S; No C. Dale 8747 s 1.160.90 9 s 128.99 s 1,500 00 s 3S9.97 s 220.80 s 10.98 1.63 32.78 No Signoff CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.5; No C. John S377 s 489.42 10 s 48.94 s s 100.00 s 100.00 s 10.60 LOO 9.43

Rv•n 7660 s 79S.99 11 s 72.36 s l ,S00.00 s 41S.60 s 107.83 s 20.00 3.85 20.78 No Slgnolf CL: SI.SK; STL SLS; No C. frank 4498 s 852.89 13 s 6S.61 s s 264.00 s 194.99 s 6 .80 l.3S 38.82 No Signoff CL: SIOK; STL: N/A; NoC.Sh Lee 8797 s S,236.29 14 s 374.02 s s 4,S37.00 s 160.00 s 13.9S 28.36 325.23 E.T. 99S s 1,664.49 16 s 104.03 s s 762.00 s 219.99 s 7.SO 3.46 101.60 No Slanorr CL: $SK; STL: N/A; No C.sh

Donna 3044 s 4,128.82 16 s 258.05 s s 1,371-43 s 1,14S.50 s 6 .94 1.20 197.61 CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh David n06 s l ,25S.76 17 s 73.117 s s 31S.00 s 264.00 s S.99 L19 S2.59 No Signoff CL: SSK: STL: N/A; No C.Sh Jim 9731 s 1,346.70 J7 s 79.22 s l ,S00.00 s 280.00 s 192.00 s S.97 1.46 46.90 CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.S; No C.sh Raymon 214 s 11.786.78 20 s S89.34 s s S,717.38 s 2.731.36 s 3.24 2.09 1,764.62 No Sicooff CL: SIOK; STL: N/A; No C.Sh Charlei 7S64 s 1,767.67 25 s 70.71 s 1,500.00 s 455.14 s 431.90 s S.99 1.05 7S.98 CL: SI.SK; STl Sl.S; No C.sh Aaron 7163 s 4,324.72 2S s 172.99 s s 8 18.0S s 729.00 s 14.63 J.12 SS.92 CL: SIOK; STL: N/A; NoC.sh Justin 2434 s l ,374.S8 27 s 50.91 s s 489.9S s 220.73 s S.83 2.22 84.04 CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Jamie 5488 s l,654.52 27 s 61.28 s l ,S00.00 s 371.61 s 349.78 s l.99 1.06 186.74 No Slgnofl CL: SI.SK; STL SLS; No C. Jason 6707 s 2,S89.07 27 s 9S.89 s l,S00.00 s l , 20S.OO s 297.96 s I.SO 4.04 803.33 No Slgnorr Cl: SJ.SK; STl Sl.S; Noc. Mike 3420 s 960.37 28 s 34.30 s l ,S00.00 s 330.00 s 296.86 $ 336 1. 11 98.21 CL: SI.SK; STl SJ .S; No C.sh Erin 277 s 1,148.21 29 s 39.S9 s l ,S00.00 s 219.68 $ 110.77 $ 8. J7 1.98 26.89 No Slgnoff CL: SI.SK; STl Sl.5; No C. Ricky 8276 $ 4,2S7.68 29 s 146.82 s s l ,SJ3.00 s 780.00 s 2.60 1.94 S81.92 No Slgnoff Cl: SSK; STL: N/A; No Cash

Mark 9828 s 4,896.64 30 s 163.22 s l ,S00.00 s 729.00 $ 729.00 s 6 .63 1.00 109.9S CL: SI.SK; STL SJ.S; No C.sh Rob 2306 s l,348.01 31 s 43.48 $ l,S00.00 s 285.90 s 129.99 $ L73 2.20 16S.26 No Signofl CL: $1.SK; STl Sl.S; No C. Kenneth J3S8 s 4,381.44 3 1 $ 141.34 s 1,500.00 $ 783.24 $ 491.71 s 3.69 1.S9 212.26 No Slgnoff Cl: SI.SK; STl Sl.5; No C. Jaylene 4901 s 33,392.77 33 s 1,011.90 s s 16,837.00 s 3,419.00 s 6.80 4.92 2,476.03 CL: S20K; STL: N/A; No C.sh Ondy 85SS s S, 287.99 34 s ISS.S3 s s 998.00 s 986.9S s 8.66 1.01 11S.24 CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Ray 696 s S,672.64 34 s 166.84 s l,S00.00 s l ,3S0.86 s 839.47 s 18.11 1.61 74.S9 No 51gnoff CL: SI.SK; STL Sl .S; No C. KeJTV 168 s 3,027.06 3S s 86.49 s l ,S00.00 s 999.28 s 376.99 s 1.06 2.6S 942.72 llo Slgnoff CL: SI.SK; STl SLS; No C. Justin 4213 s 3,891.43 37 s 105.17 s s 720.72 s 648.96 s 2.37 I.II 304.10 No Signofl CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Navmon 9679 s 8,S88.94 38 s 226.02 s s 3,824.23 s 799.98 s 7.38 4.78 S l 8.19 No Signoff Cl: SSK.; STL: N/A; No Ush ~an th 15S9 s 3,350.70 39 s 85.92 s l ,S00.00 s 384.00 s 247.96 s 12.00 J .SS 32.00 CL: Sl.SK; STL Sl.S; No C.sh Anthony 6108 s 7,S34.86 40 s 188.37 s s 1,871.13 s 989.85 s L68 1.89 1, 113.77 CL: SSK: STL: N/A; No C.sh Suzy 4250 s 4,548.11 42 s 108.29 s l ,S00.00 s 726.00 s 291.43 s 2.91 2.49 249.48 CL: SI.SK; STL Sl.S; Noc.sh Joe 6894 s S,234.82 42 s 124.64 s s 2,S94.02 s 342.34 s 2.16 7.S8 l ,200.94 No Sl&noff CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh cnmon 7181 s I0,4S930 4S s 232.43 s s 6,195.47 s 1,60038 s 4.99 3.87 l ,241.S8 CL: SIOK; STL: N/A; Noc.sh Dakota 7827 s 23,7SS.76 46 s Sl6.49 s s 4,857.98 s 3,044.37 s S.30 1.60 916.60 No Slgnoff CL: SIOK; STL: N/ A; No C.sh Ste.e 9971 s 30,954.20 48 s 644.88 s s S,724.00 s 3,810.4S s 4 .14 I .SO l ,382.61 No Sl&noff CL: SIOK; STL: N/ A; No C.sh Ste.e S360 s 9,926.14 54 s 183.82 s s 1,493.63 s 1,009.28 s 3.98 1.48 375.28 CL: SIOK; STL: N/ A; No C.sh Justin 9011 s 6,066.29 SS s 110.30 s s 483.79 s 402.99 s l.20 1.20 403.16 No Slgnoff Cl: SIOK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Dun 6896 s 10,186.90 60 s 169.78 s s 3,439.S9 s l ,278.S6 s l .S2 2.69 2,262.89 No Slgnoff CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Greg 7395 s 4,465.62 68 s 65.67 s 1,500.00 s 432.3S s 385.90 s 1.40 1.12 308.82 CL: SI.SK; STl SJ.S; No C.sh Kim 7S47 s 60,309.48 70 s 861.56 s s 9.31S.OO s 6,282.84 s I0.9S 1.48 850.68 CL: S20K; STl: N/A; No C.sh Edgar 5422 s I0.26S.70 85 s 120.77 s s 1,842.60 s l,44S.28 s l.99 1.27 925.93 No 5ignoff Cl: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh RlW rd 937S s 29.809.34 109 s 273.48 s s 6, 150.00 s 2, 144.40 s 1.99 2.87 3,090.4S Cl: SI OK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Josh 5026 s 39,630.4S 110 s 360.28 s s 4,8S7.98 s 2,734.64 s 2.36 1.78 2,0SS.47 No Slgnoff Cl : SIOK; STL: N/A; No C.sh kenneth 2193 s 16,444,48 113 s l4S.S3 s l,S00.00 s 1,670.26 s 1,307.22 s 2.29 1.28 729.37 No Slgnoff Cl : SI.SK; STl $1.S; No C. Vtrdell 3208 s S7,723.44 113 s SI0.83 s s 9,487.00 s 6,726.16 s J.83 J.41 5, 184.15 CL: SlOOK; STl : N/A; No C.sh Tenny I Sl2 s 110,106.26 136 s 809.60 s s 23,000.00 s 11,407.95 s 1.57 2.02 14,649.68 Cl: $100K; STl: N/A; NoC.sh Woody S397 s 87,676.S8 141 s 621.82 s s 15,168.00 s J0,892 .00 s 14.03 1.39 1,081. 11 CL: SIOOK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Kevin 87SO s 61,935.23 IS8 s 392.00 s s S,673.00 s 3,282.89 s 0.40 J.73 14, 182.SO CL: S20K; STL: N/A; No C.sh Slselly 4S27 s SO,S32.0I 160 s 31S.83 s s S,430.60 s 4,054.00 s 2.36 1.34 2,301.10 CL: SIOK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Ch.-. rles 1048 s 119,910.05 164 s 731.16 s s 9,435.87 s 7,601.90 s 2.79 1.24 3,382.03 Cl: S20K; STL: N/A; No C.sh Eric 14 13 s 6S,996.4S 168 s 392.84 s s 7,313.60 s 7,047.96 s 2.76 1.04 2,649.86 CL: S20K; STL: N/A; No C.sh Richard 9S9S s 42,779. lS 170 s 251.64 s s 6,4 16.62 s l ,S00.00 s 2.99 4.28 2, 146.03 CL: S20K; STL: N/A; No C.sh S.ndr> 3S07 s 112,916.6S 210 s S37.70 s s 11,360.00 s 10,400.00 s 0.99 1.09 11,474.7S CL: SIOOK; STl: N/A; No C.sh ~nnie 6281 s 47,481.72 239 s 198.67 s s 3,S54.49 s 3,138.23 s 2.92 1. 1.3 1, 217.29 CL: SI OK; STL: N/A; Noc.sh C.ndy 1.209 s 28,613.84 246 s 116.32 s s 1,790.86 s l ,SSl.27 s 2.99 J .15 S98.9S CL: SSK; STL: N/A; No C.sh Kevin 2008 s 74,786.91 299 s 2S0.12 s s 7,649.13 s S,837.02 s O.S9 1.31 12,964.63 Cl: S20K; STL: N/A; No C.sh D•n 3161 s S9, l33.02 S28 s 111.99 s s 2,784.SI s 2,008.00 s 0.40 1.39 6,961.28 tl o Signoff CL: $201(; STL: N/A; llo C.sh

Thi s analys i s captu res t he profi le of cardholde r usage !or t he period covered . This analys i s can be used aooist i n the f ollowing: A. Ident i fi c ation of under util ize d c a rda - reduce n potentia l coot sav i ngs. B. Ide nt i f ication o f cards that due to uoage may need t o be canceled due t o t he f requency o f uoe - inc reased r isk t o the c ity. C. Establish~ent of S ingle a nd Monthly cardholde r t ransaction limits .

100

80

60

40

20

Waste Benford leading 1

· ······~······································· ·· ·················································································

\~············· · ······························ · ··········-----------·--·······················-----·-·· ·····-··----

',_ '-~································ ••••••••• t:-..... ~·--------· ....... ._ ............................ .

II

Leading Digits

BENFORD ONT otal_Card_Spend LEADING 1 BOUNDS TO GRAPH

0 Aat0IC0.m1 • ExpecledCoun • Lower Bo.ind • Upper Bound II



ATTACHMENT G – CALCULATION OF ESTIMATED HOURS & FEES

CRAWFORD & ASSOCIATES, P.C.CITY OF EDMONDInternal Audit Plan - Hours and FeesCalculation of Estimated Hours and Fees

Minimum Maximum16 24 Sales Tax Revenue Collection and Usage16 24 Utility Billing System and Revenue Collection16 24 Human Resources and Payroll16 24 Purchasing, Payables, & Expenditures16 24 Procurement/Purchasing Card (Pro-Card)16 24 Grants and Contracts16 24 Follow-up on Prior Year Audit Findings24 32 Report Writing, Meetings, and Presentations

136 200

Average Hours 168

Hourly Rate 140$ Justin Kersey, Manager 100% involvementHourly Rate 140$ Richard Rose, Manager 100% involvementHourly Rate 140$ Chris Pembrook, Senior Manager 100% involvementHourly Rate 155$ Dwayne Tate, Shareholder 100% involvement

Average Hrly Rate 144$

Per Year 24,192.00$ Calculation of Projected Fees based on Average Hourly Rate and Average Hours

HOURS



ATTACHMENT H – PEER REVIEW



ATTACHMENT I – CERTIFICATE OF PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE



ATTACHMENT J – OAB ANNUAL PERMIT

Internal Audit Services

RFP: 14-012

March 4, 2014

Submitted to Brenda Mayer City of Edmond P.O. Box 2970

Edmond, Oklahoma 73083-2970

Submitted by Compass Consulting LLC

PO Box 700264 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74170

Compass RFP: 14-012 Response

Table of Contents

Section Section/Page RFQ Response

Introduction Page 3 Background Pages 4 - 9 Engagement Strategy Pages 10 - 17 Cost Proposal Page 17 Appendix A: Resumes Pages 18 – 24 Appendix B: Insurance Certificates Pages 25 – 27 Appendix C: Example Audit Report Pages 28 - 40 Appendix D: Example Initiation Memo Page 41 - 43


Introduction

Compass Consulting, LLC is pleased to offer our proposal to provide internal audit services, including

detailed risk assessment, audit plan development and internal audits to the City of Edmond for fiscal

year 2014 with potential for two additional one-year terms.

Compass is an Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business (EDWOSB) located in Tulsa,

Oklahoma. The Compass team has over 40 years of internal audit and accounting experience. We have

• Created a high performing audit department from inception including developing a quantifiable

risk assessment process, building annual audit plans and performing audits.

• Implemented financial control assessment processes that document internal controls, complied

with “OMB Circular A-110, A-123, and A-133” requirements and eliminated material weaknesses

and significant deficiencies within 2 years.

• Performed operational, compliance and information technology audits in a variety of industries.

• Reported opportunities for improvement with management and jointly developed operationally

feasible action plans to remediate issues.

• Communicated with executive management, Board members and Audit Committees through

reporting and meeting presentations.

The principals of Compass have experience in corporate and governmental environments. We have

audited tribal governments, gaming, and government contracting entities which are highly regulated.

Our competitive advantage over regional accounting firms is 1) our expertise in internal audit services

and 2) our commitment to staffing projects with experienced internal auditors rather than staff level

associates. Compass principals will be performing risk assessments, developing audit plans and

communicating with Finance/Audit Committee. Principals will be highly involved in developing test

programs and reviewing work during each audit.

The attached response will show the City of Edmond that Compass has the necessary resources and

knowledge to meet the goals of the Finance/Audit Committee related to managing risk, improving

overall control and governance structures, deploying resources effectively and complying with policies,

standards and regulations. We look forward to building a great working relationship and helping you

mitigate business risk.


Background

Financial Soundness

Compass is financially sound with no debt and limited overhead. Compass has been in business since

June 2012 and continues to grow its client base. Neither Compass nor the principals have been involved

in any litigation or investigation related to audit or consulting services in the past three years.

Personnel

The Compass team has over 40 years of audit and accounting experience. Our principals hold several

certifications including Certified Public Accountant, Certified Internal Auditor, Chartered Global

Management Accountant and Certification in Risk Management Assurance. Compass maintains

certifications through meeting continuing education requirements annually required for all

certifications. We have experience in creating internal audit departments, managing complex projects,

performing audits across multiple industries and departments, performing investigations, and

interacting with senior level management and boards. In addition, our practices have quality control,

continuing education, and regulatory requirements built in to ensure compliance with Institute of

Internal Auditors Standards. Compass’ CEO and COO have Certifications in Risk Management Assurance

(CRMA). This certification is awarded to internal auditors and risk management professionals with

responsibility for and experience in risk assurance and governance practices. It demonstrates Compass’

ability to evaluate organizational and external components and develop overall enterprise risk

management programs and risk based audit programs. This certification requires knowledge and

experience in implementing risk management across organizations, departments, and processes using a

combination of the COSO Enterprise Risk Management Framework and other frameworks.

Below we have summarized experience of Compass, discussed how their experience is critical to project

success and their overall contribution to the project.

1. Sharon Bertram, CEO/Compass Audit Executive

Sharon’s resume has been provided in Appendix A for your review. She has over 30 years of

experience in accounting and auditing and is a Certified Public Accountant, Certified Internal

Auditor, Certified Global Management Accountant, Certified in Risk Management Assurance and

a Shared Services and Outsourcing Professional. As CEO and the project’s executive sponsor,


she will ensure adequate time and resources are dedicated to the City of Edmond. She is

committed to participating in risk assessment activities and audit plan development, attending

meetings with the Finance/Audit Committee and/or city council and reviewing work product for

quality control purposes.

Sharon has successfully completed large complex projects as follows:

• Developed and implemented Shared Service Strategy for parent company with 38

businesses over seven business portfolios. Five portfolios performed on government

contracts or as a subcontractor to a prime in areas of aerospace, IT, security, logistics,

and construction.

• Built and directed audit department that planned and performed financial, operational,

compliance, fraud, information technology and contract audits. Performed from 15 to

30 reviews annually identifying internal controls, process improvements and cost

savings.

• Designed and performed compliance reviews in a casino environment for Bank Secrecy

Act compliance which required data analysis and validation of large data sets.

• Oversight over casino and Peoplesoft HRMS system implementation projects.

• Responsible for development and completion of financial control assessment project for

largest tribal government in U.S.

• Lead financial audits while in public accounting of public and private companies, banks,

cities and tribal governments.

• Managed data conversion of Defined Contribution plan assets and accounts totaling

$770 million

2. Jeff Coffman, COO/Audit Director

Jeff’s resume has been provided in Appendix A for your review. Jeff has over 10 years of

experience in auditing and is a Certified Internal Auditor, and Certified in Risk Management

Assurance. As COO and the project’s operations director, he is responsible for maintaining

accountability for the project, participating risk assessment and audit plan development,

reviewing/creating audit test plans, performing/directing on-site test work, and participating in

project meetings.


Jeff has extensive audit experience that will be beneficial to the overall success of the project as

follows:

• Managed due diligence projects on business acquisitions to include coordination of

resources, writing test plans, performing test work, mapping processes, reporting and

developing integration plans

• Had oversight over corporate policy and procedure department for multiple

organizations

• Implemented a financial internal control documentation strategy and remediated

internal control weaknesses

• Managed complex compliance, operational and fraud audit projects

• Audited invoices for contract and regulatory compliance

3. Sunny Austin, Project Administration

Sunny has over 7 years of experience in administration and 5 years’ experience specifically

working for audit related departments. She is responsible for maintaining maintain project

plans, status reports, scheduling meetings, and other administrative project tasks.

4. Experienced Auditors

Upon completion of a risk assessment and determination of resources required; Compass will

staff City of Edmond’s project with experienced auditors.

Organizational Chart

Sharon Bertram CEO/Owner

Jeff Coffman COO/Owner

Experienced Auditors

Sunny Austin Audit Administrator


Experience

Compass Consulting was created in 2012 as an Oklahoma Limited Liability Corporation. Ownership is

comprised as follows: Sharon Bertram 60% and Jeff Coffman 40%. Compass is not a big regional

accounting firm, but we have the expertise to perform the work requested and will provide quality work

product and excellent customer service. We have experience providing similar services with emphasis

on government and regulatory requirements including:

State Government

• Oklahoma Statutes

• Oklahoma Competitive Bidding Act

• Accounting rules and standards – Government Accounting Standards and OMB Circular

A-110, A-123, and A-133

Tribal Governments

• Tribal laws and regulations

• Federal laws and regulations related to federal grants and awards

• Accounting rules and standards – Government Accounting Standards and OMB Circular

A-110, A-123, and A-133

Gaming

• Tribal gaming laws and regulations

• Federal gaming laws and regulations related to casinos (National Indian Gaming

Commission, Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, etc.)

• Accounting rules and standards – Government Accounting Standards and Casino

Accounting Guidance

• Federal Bank Secrecy Act Regulations

• Internal Revenue Service Regulations

Government Contracting Entities

• Federal Acquisition Regulations

• Small Business Administration rules and regulations

• Export Compliance regulations

• Security Clearance regulations

• Government contract compliance


Financial Institution Sub Contractors

• Fair Credit Reporting Act

• Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act of 2003 (16 CFR 681.2)

• Dodd-Frank Act

• Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA)

• Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

• Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulations

At any time Compass is engaged with 4 to 6 clients for services including: internal audit outsourcing,

policy and procedures, fraud investigations, merger and acquisition due diligence, business valuations,

and special projects.

The principals of Compass have experience in corporate and governmental environments. We have

audited tribal governments, gaming, and government contracting entities which are highly regulated.

Audits performed have resulted in annual cost savings or deferment of costs in many cases. Over the

last 5 years annual cost savings ranged from $250,000 to $1,000,000 a year. As mentioned above,

Compass’ experience includes the creation and management of a highly successful audit department

that planned and performed financial, operational, compliance, fraud, information technology and

contract audits. Ms. Bertram began the group herself from the ground up, and within 5 years had a

functional department of 20+ auditors with oversight of 30+ businesses in multiple industries.

Compass is diligent about delivering reports on time and within budget. While we do not have a quality

control report, the Cherokee Nation Business audit department under the direction of Ms. Bertram

received the highest rating during a Quality Assurance Review with several best practices being noted.

Recent client surveys indicated very positive marks for Compass’ and its principles’ performance

including managing project cost, schedule, communication and overall customer satisfaction. Survey

overall scores resulted in a rating of 9.9 out of 10.

Systems and technology-driven internal controls are constantly changing. We have experience using a

variety of different computing platforms and systems. Data mining products such as ACL are sometimes

utilized to perform testing and also set up continuous monitoring efforts for different areas of business.


Compass has the ability to use technology and also explain to clients why that technology is beneficial

and how it can mitigate risk.

References

Compass principals have provided Internal Audit Services in a corporate environment for: Cherokee

Nation Businesses, a wholly owned business of the Cherokee Nation. The following references can

speak to our expertise and experience:

Jay Hannah, Sr. VP Bancfirst (Former Cherokee Nation Businesses Chairman of Board)

[email protected]

405-270-1007

David Stewart, CAO of Oklahoma Ordnance Works Authority (Former Cherokee Nation Businesses

CEO)

[email protected]

918-630-3000

Callie Catcher, Osage Nation Treasurer (Former Cherokee Nation Treasurer)

[email protected]

918-287-5357

We have also provided due diligence and business valuation audits and performed special projects

for OneFire Holding Company, a Muscogee Creek Nation Company.

Gary Warnock, Managing Partner of OneFire

[email protected]

918-740-2423

mailto:[email protected]





Engagement Strategy

Preparation and Startup

Risk Assessment and Audit Plan Development

The first step is to develop a baseline for risk assessment and evaluation of control

effectiveness, and develop an audit plan for a three year period with built in flexibility to enable

responsiveness and change. Best practice is for audit departments to have a systematic process

to assess overall risk and develop a risk based audit plan. The risk assessment process begins

with developing an overall understanding of the organization and its business objectives.

Throughout the process we will be developing an audit universe of potential coverage areas

based on business units, processes, operations, and budgets. Accounts will be evaluated on

several key factors such as account balance, volume of activity, fraud potential, level of

automation, etc. This will confirm that high and medium risk accounts are addressed in the

major processes identified. In addition, we will gather information to include:

• Stakeholder concerns

• Volume of transactions

• Current state control environment

• Budget allocations, and

• Other risk factors such as major construction projects, system changes, etc.

This allows prioritization of audit areas based on business impact and inherent risks such as

changes in systems or processes, organizational changes, expansion, or external factors. Once a

draft plan is developed, Compass will work with the Finance/Audit Committee to review the

audit plan and design the best plan to address high priority risk. The plan will include an

allocation of time for special projects to allow for flexibility and responsiveness to management

needs. A well-defined audit plan will permit the Finance/Audit Committee to establish current

and longer term budgets and plans. Estimated hours to complete for each project will be

included in the annual audit plan. This will allow the Finance/Audit Committee to make

decisions related to number of audit to be performed and audit resources required to establish

coverage goals that give them the needed level of assurance. Risk assessment and audit plans


would be reviewed annually and evolve as risk profiles are enhanced and knowledge of control

structures increases. To be most effective, the risk assessment process needs to be repeated

each year to ensure priorities and risk are updated.

Data Analytics/Continuous Monitoring

Continuous monitoring enables management to continually review business processes for

adherence to and deviations from intended levels of performance and effectiveness. It is a

proactive method to detect risks and execute cost effective changes. Whereas implementation

of a comprehensive continuous monitoring process is not achievable in the first year, allocating

a small amount of time to begin analysis of continuous monitoring opportunities and begin

developing simple data mining and auditing tools is prudent.

The audit plan will be presented to the Finance/Audit Committee for approval and the Council for

approval if needed.

Audit Process

Our processes are designed to conform to all requirements of the Institute of Internal Auditors

International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing and other regulatory guidance.

All audits will be designed to address four major objectives:

• To remain independent and objective examining all facts and circumstances

• To verify the reliability and integrity of financial and operational information

• To ensure compliance with laws, regulations, and internal policy and procedures, and

• To evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of processes.

For each audit, a four step process is performed by the Compass team.


• Step One – Planning

The planning stage of the engagement consists of research and data gathering to gain a firm

understanding of the project. This would include:

o An initiation memo will be prepared for each engagement. See Appendix D for an

example.

o Review of significant financial reports used to make decisions such as budget,

department financials, metrics, etc.

o Review of policies, administrative regulations, employee manuals, organizational charts,

forms, and other applicable guidelines.

o Interview key management personnel related to their areas of concern.

This phase also includes research of a variety of sources:

o Regulatory websites for applicable statutory guidelines and requirements

o Audit resource sites such as Auditnet, Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), Information

Systems Audit and Control Associations (ISACA), Protiviti, Knowledgeleader, and other

internet resources

o Available industry guidance and resources

Upon review of initial information, we will begin to specify scope and objectives in more detail,

perform a review level risk assessment, draft audit programs and develop process/internal

control questionnaires. Our audit program template includes the following columns:

Area/Objective Risks Control Discussion Audit Approach

In addition, a detailed project schedule will be developed for each project.

• Step Two – Preliminary Review

Compass will provide a list of requested interviews and documentation prior to any on-site work

to allow scheduling of meetings and preparation of material. Department management and

staff level personnel will be interviewed to gather information and develop process

flowcharts/narratives. Once process mapping is complete, Compass will request management

review and sign off to confirm accuracy.


• Step Three – Fieldwork/Analysis of Internal Controls and Processes

During this phase, preliminary review information will be used to tailor test programs

specifically for processes, concerns and risks. Test programs are designed to focus on the

highest risk areas first. This allows Compass and management to adjust resources and time

commitments based on findings without impacting coverage of more critical processes and

reducing testing in less risky areas if needed. Any changes to the original project plan will be

documented with a change order and approved by management prior to implementation.

Our team will perform tests of transactions, analytical reviews, and validate other data and

processes. Roles and responsibilities will be evaluated to ensure proper segregation. Policies

will be reviewed for improvement opportunities. Internal controls will be identified and, if

necessary, tested to verify compliance. Control deficiencies and efficiencies will be identified.

As the audit progresses, Compass will have periodic update meetings with management to

discuss and confirm findings. All findings will be discussed with appropriate management and

validated.

Compass relies on internal policies related to work paper preparation and review to maintain

consistent and quality work product. We have the capability to perform in-depth data analysis

through a variety of analytical tools. All audit documentation will be reviewed by a Compass

principal to ensure quality. The principal will document their review and ensure any issues are

remediated prior to sign-off and submittal to management for review.

ACL and other audit documentation software will be used to increase efficiency and

effectiveness of the audit. ACL allows us to analyze large quantities of data more quickly. Audit

documentation software drives consistent documentation standards, allows quality control

review and signoff and speeds up reporting with issue tracking and automatic report draft

population.

• Step Four – Reporting and Remediation

No later than 30 days after completion of fieldwork, a draft report will be completed including

all significant findings. Management responses will be included of operationally feasible

remediation action plans, responsible party (s) and action plan due dates. The final report will


be issued once the report has been updated for exit conference decisions and approved by the

Finance/Audit Committee. Compass will be available for presentation of reports as requested.

In addition to the final report (see example in Appendix C), the following items will be provided:

1. A verbal findings report that contains observations that do not represent a

significant weakness but management needs an awareness of and monitoring.

2. A documentation package that contains updated flowcharts, policy updates, and

other data prepared during the review and beneficial to the auditee moving

forward.

Auditing and Fieldwork

Potential First Year Audit Plan

For the City of Edmond we would expect the following types of audits:

Process audits – to evaluate the internal controls needed to ensure the reliability of

financial information, protection of city assets, and compliance with regulations, policies

and procedures. The major processes would include accounts receivable, billing,

accounts payable, payroll, investments, purchasing, etc. and be audited on a rotating

basis.

Financial control audits – to evaluate, document and test financial controls

Performance audits – objective and systematic examinations of specific areas of the City

to provide and assessment of the performance and management of the operations.

These reviews include regulatory compliance, goal and objective accomplishment, data

reliability, service delivery and safeguarding of assets.

Rate reviews – review of utility rates and charges to determine the rate models are

accurately and consistently applied.


Construction audits – review of active capital expansion programs to include review of

payment request, change orders, project costs, project management and

subcontractors.

Information system audits – review and evaluate the availability, confidentiality and

integrity of the City’s information technology infrastructure. Audits could include

application reviews, processing facility reviews, system development reviews,

architecture reviews, etc.

Without much more knowledge of the City of Edmond, it is not possible to provide a detailed

audit plan. But an example of a plan for year one may be

Title Description Activity Type Estimated hours

Public Safety Center Construction Construction audit to include review of payment request, change orders, cost monitoring and project management.

Construction 400

Data Security and Privacy Audit of City’s network security and protection of confidential data

IT 280

Procurement Audit procurement processes to ensure compliance, control and efficiency

Major Process - Rotation

350

City Ethics Program Assessment Assessment of City’s ethics program as part of effective governance and to monitor conflict of interest, code of conduct and reporting.

Governance 240

Sales and Use Tax Verification of collections for sales and use tax, and any applicable franchise fees

Financial 380

Police Department Performance Audit

Performance audit and compliance with policy, procedures and best practices.

Performance 300

Credit Cards – Continuous Monitoring

Audit credit card process and build continuous monitoring reports to assess CCard

On-going assessment, continuous

240


expenditures and compliance

monitoring,

Unallocated Audit To support flexibility to respond to request and emerging risk areas

TBD 240

Fraud, Waste and Abuse investigations

Evaluation of allegations of fraud, waste and abuse

Asset protection 50

Follow-up Follow up on status of management action plans to address report recommendations

Administration 50

Administration/Risk Assessment Preparation of annual audit risk assessment and plan; audit committee meetings and other administration activities and reporting

Risk Assessment 150

Strategy Plan

If Compass is awarded the City of Edmond project, we are committed to grow our business as needed to

serve the client needs. This will include hiring an experienced audit manager to be focused on the City

of Edmond’s account. Based on the risk assessment and audit resource needs, additional staff will be

hired. To enable us to serve the client immediately, Jeff Coffman, Compass COO, will be acting audit

manager until an experience manager can be hired. If necessary, experienced contract auditors will be

engaged for the first project as needed.

State Laws, Statutes and/or local ordinances

Compass was engaged by the Oklahoma Ordnance Works Authority (OOWA), a state trust organization,

to develop policy and procedures in compliance with Oklahoma state laws and regulations. This enabled

us to gain a firm understanding of State procurement regulations and state laws that impacted OOWA.

During the planning stage of each audit, Compass will review any state laws, local ordinances and other

regulations that would impact risks and testing protocols.

Reporting

In addition to individual audit reports for each project as discussed above, we will provide the following:

• Monitoring report related to progress against the approved Audit Plan

• Audit metrics such as report turnaround, budget vs. actual hours, etc.

• Red/yellow/green report to confirm progress on action plans


Compass will discuss reporting with the City of Edmond’s Finance/Audit Committee and customize

reporting as needed to meet their expectations and needs.

Fee Schedule

Fee Schedule Proposed hourly rates

Professional audit staff

position Hourly Rates Average %

Involvement CEO/COO $125.00 30% Audit Manager/Staff $100.00 60% Audit Administrator $40.00 10%

Fee Value

Compass Consulting’s principals have experience in Internal Auditing and have excellent ratings from

customers (9.9 out of 10). Value of Internal Audit’s contribution will be seen in:

• Operationally feasible action plans

• Consultative nature of services

• Provided assurance of compliance, asset protection and information reliability

• Quality of reports

• Cost savings and deferments

• Adding value to the decision making processes

• Documentation and communication of controls

This value will be communicated to the Finance/Audit Committee and the City as a whole based on

reporting, audit metrics and benchmarking.


Appendix A

Resumes

Sharon B. Bertram, CPA, CIA, CRMA, CGMA, SSOp 8900 S. 28th West Ave., Tulsa, Oklahoma 74132

(918) 527-7412 or 299-6698 [email protected]

Broad experience in internal audit, enterprise risk management, compliance, policy development, due diligence, business process improvement, human resources and shared service delivery. Expertise in managing teams to develop and achieve goals and objectives. Have implemented high value and cost effective processes and programs. Skilled at service delivery and consultation to internal clients.

Professional Qualities and Strengths Operational Efficiencies Risk Focused Articulate Communicator Project Management

Strategic Vision Coaching and Mentoring Team Building and Collaboration Compliance Management

Budget and Cost Control Audit Management Quality Service Delivery Board Interaction

Professional Highlights Compass Consulting, Tulsa, Oklahoma 2012 – Present CEO/Owner Owner of an Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business offering a variety of services to businesses, governmental entities and tribes and striving to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of their operations, ensure compliance with laws and regulations, and strengthen governance and internal controls. Cherokee Nation Businesses/Enterprises, Catoosa, Oklahoma 2002 – 2012 Sr. Vice President, Audit, Risk and Compliance Services Sr. Vice President, Shared Services and Administration Vice President, Audit Services Directed multiple departments including Audit Services, Enterprise Risk Management, Ethics Office, Policy Administration, Information Technology, Human Resources, Due Diligence, Business Process Improvement, and Government Compliance Key Contributions

• Responsible for oversight of Shared Service departments service delivery, metrics, and strategies • Developed Shared Services strategy to deliver integrated services across seven business

portfolios consisting of entertainment, information services, manufacturing and other government contracting initiatives with consolidated revenue of $600 million

• Managed comprehensive due diligence of company acquisitions and integration • Implemented benchmarking, metrics and periodic reporting • Directed enterprise risk management process across the organization to enable management to

proactively mitigate risk • Ensured processes and procedures were developed related to compliance with government

contract provisions, Service Contract Act regulations, gaming and export compliance requirements.

• Frequent Board interaction and presentations related to acquisitions and strategies • Implemented new benefit plan design for governmental entities to reduce costs and meet

competitive demands • Directed audit department which planned and performed financial, operational, compliance,

fraud and contract audits managing corporate risk through the identification of internal

control/process improvements and cost savings. • Developed internal audit department and strategies from scratch covering nine casino

entertainment facilities and other tribal for profit entities including 8(a) operations • Designed and implemented Title 31 compliance training and monitoring program ensuring

regulatory compliance and mitigating risk. Audit program developed and performed semi-annually test resulting in deferment of over $1 million dollars in potential penalties

• Assessed corporate risk using a quantitative model resulting in an annual audit plan presented to Audit Committee, senior management and approved by multiple Boards

• Facilitated Audit Committee meetings and Board presentations including discussions on external financial audit, internal audit plans and status, ethics program, and issue resolution

• Directed multiple forensic audits and coordinated with tribal and federal authorities on prosecution.

• Coached and mentored employees, initiated audit orientation and training development programs and provided positive feedback and motivation

• Designed OMB A-123/SAS 115 compliance program and implemented documentation and testing of financial controls to include use of internal and external resources

• Implemented Ethics Hotline and procedures for all tribal entities, including annual solicitation of conflict of interest statements

• Performed as Ethics Officer with responsibility for chairing the Ethics Committee, administration of the hotline, and resolution of investigations

• Coordinated Minimum Internal Control Standards (MICS) reviews performed by internal audit staff and external auditors

• Empowered official responsible for Export and DSS Security Compliance; Cleared at Secret Level Central and South West Services, Tulsa, Oklahoma 1992 - 2002 Consultant, Audit Services Key Contributions Planned, managed and performed financial, operational, fraud and contract audits managing corporate risk through the identification of internal control/process improvements and cost savings.

• Managed data conversion of Defined Contribution plan assets totaling $770 million to Fidelity in their first weekend conversion

• Led merger team who recommended an organizational structure reducing headcount by 30 FTEs and developed a strategy for design and delivery of benefits to over 40,000 active and retired employees resulting in savings of over $60 million

• Implemented a new Cash Balance Pension Plan and enhanced 401K Retirement Plan that reduced costs by $20 million including design of a testing strategy to ensure legal compliance and data accuracy for conversion

• Analyzed plan documents and regulatory requirements to design testing plans and perform complex compliance reviews of pension, 401K and health & welfare plans

• Audited operation and maintenance contract and negotiated a $500,000 settlement for administrative cost overcharges

• Managed risk by strengthening controls over derivative trading and foreign currency transactions and ensuring activity was properly valued and reported in compliance with FAS 133 requirements

• Managed all aspects of audit consulting projects, recommended value-added process improvements and produced over $20 million of savings for the corporation

Coopers and Lybrand, Tulsa, Oklahoma 1990 - 1992 Senior Auditor, Audit Services Governmental Accounting specialist performing city and tribal government financial audits.

Formal Education and Certifications

Masters/Bachelor Degrees, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma (Graduated with honors)

Certified Public Accountant Certified Internal Auditor Certified Risk Management Assurance Chartered Global Management Accountant Shared Services and Outsourcing Professional

Additional Experience and Skills Consolidations External Audit Coordination Asset Valuation

General Ledger Revenue Distribution Joint Interest Billing

Payroll Benefit Plans Policy Administration

Professional Development • CPA Continuing Education Current • M&A Leadership Conference • Shared Service Conference 2010 • Speaker at Oklahoma Indian Gaming Conference 2009 • Speaker at IIA Gaming Conference 2007 and 2008 • IIA General Audit Management Conference • IIA Vision University for Advanced Chief Audit Executives • UNR Gaming Institute – Table Games Management and other gaming related training • Speaker at Conference for Accountancy – Tulsa University • Leadership for Extraordinary Performance, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration

at the University of Virginia • Advanced Consulting Skills, Designed Learning

Professional Associations

• Member, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants • Member, Institute of Internal Auditors • Member, Association of Certified Fraud Examiners • IIA Board of Governors – Tulsa Chapter • DVIS Board of Directors

Jeff W. Coffman, CIA, CRMA 10488 South 86th East Ave., Tulsa, Oklahoma 74133


Experience in internal audit, enterprise risk management, compliance, policy development, due diligence, and business process improvement. Strong problem solver, project manager and creative thinker.

Core Competencies – Technical Proficiencies Due Diligence Risk Management Internal Controls Project Management

Process Development Internal Audit Financial Analysis Compliance

Policy and Procedure Development Cross Functional Team Leader Communication

Professional Experience Compass Consulting, Tulsa, Oklahoma January 2013 – Present Chief Operating Officer Compass is an Economically Disadvantaged Women Owned Small Business offering a variety of services to businesses, governmental entities and tribes and striving to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of their operations, ensure compliance with laws and regulations, and strengthen governance and internal controls. Cherokee Nation Businesses (CNB), Tulsa, OK May 2005-Present CNB is the economic development arm of the second largest Native American Tribe in the United Jurisdiction s. CNB manages a diverse portfolio of over 40 business entities in the areas of Gaming, Manufacturing, IT, Environmental, Construction, Healthcare, Security Integration and Defense Operations generating in excess of $600 million in annual revenues. Sr. Manager of ERM, Ethics and Due Diligence February 2012-Present Variety of responsibilities as a member of CNB’s Business Process Improvement group focused on creating business efficiencies across the entire organization.

• Managed CNB’s Enterprise Risk Management program. This program consolidated the risk management activities across all 40 companies and developed a common risk language and mitigation method.

• Revised and Developed corporate and subsidiary level policies and procedures consolidating functions across 40 entities

• Created internal SharePoint site for all corporate and subsidiary level policies and procedures to be accessed by all employees across multiple organizations

• Managed a companywide Ethics program including employee training and inquiries from a third party hotline.

• Performed business process improvement efforts including documenting current processes, facilitating process updates and finalizing approved policies.

Manager, Due Diligence June 2010- February 2012 Created a new department under CNB’s Shared Services Division focused on the due diligence for potential acquisitions. Developed a methodology for testing, reporting and integration project management plan for all potential acquisitions.

• Developed a testing program that included: Financial, Legal (contract review), Human Resources, and Information Technology aspects


• Managed due diligence projects of 8 potential acquisitions from letter of intent to integration/termination

• Updated complex valuation models based on diligence findings • Prepared revenue projections based on current and anticipated contracts • Provided final reports including recommendations to executive management and the board of

directors Manager, Internal Audit Services October 2008-June 2010 Project Leader, Internal Audit Services March 2006-October 2008 Internal Audit Services provided key audit and risk management services to the entire portfolio of CNB companies. As part of the Internal Audit Management Team, responsibilities included leading operational, financial, compliance and investigative reviews as well as assist Audit Executive Management with administration.

• Implemented SAS112/115 financial control review programs for 3 entities • Investigation Lead on over 50 internal investigations such as kickbacks, theft, and vendor favoritism • Established budget, scope, objectives and testing methodologies for audit projects • Reviewed testing documentation for application of audit standards • Developed reports of audit findings for program and executive management and board of directors • Facilitated opening and closing conferences with key audit clientele • Coached and mentored employees and provided constructive feedback through performance

evaluations Auditor (I, II, Sr.), Internal Audit Services May 2005-March 2006 Internal Audit Services provided key audit and risk management services to the entire portfolio of CNB companies. As part of the Internal Audit Team, responsibilities included performing operational, financial, compliance and investigative reviews.

• Performed operational, financial and compliance audits in conformance with IIA standards • Developed procedures for asset review, reconciliation and reporting • Implemented time tracking solution for the department • Assisted with system implementations and testing • Participated in due diligence for potential acquisitions • Performed fraud investigations

WilTel Communications, Tulsa, OK September 2000-May 2005 WilTel was a market leading telecommunications service provider that spun off from the Williams Companies as Williams Communications in 2001 and subsequently restructured and emerged as WilTel in 2002. The company ran fiber optic cable through decommissioned pipelines to create a nationwide communications network. Level 3 Communications purchased WilTel in December 2005. Lead Analyst, Access Cost 2004-2005

• Lead a group of three associates in auditing payable invoices for contract/tariff compliance • Worked cross-functionally with planning, payables, billing, tax and finance to verify margin and cost

on a per order basis • Maintained vendor relationships via dispute resolution and invoice recognition for 60 vendors • Responsible for a voice service cost dispute accrual and a voice service cost general ledger variance

report

Business Analyst II, Revenue/Contract Compliance 2000-2004 • Developed and maintained a database of customer contract information for over 400 customer

agreements; used by multiple groups across the organization • Reviewed pending and executed revenue agreements for compliance with company billing

practices • Audited invoices vs. customer contracts for billing compliance • Performed billing functions, including A/R (collections), for 57 data service customers; responsible

for billing and collecting approximately $500,000 in revenue each month, and customer disputes > $25,000

• Developed and maintained departmental metrics • Cross-functional Process Improvement Team lead within the financial shared services organization • Implemented an audit process of current contracts to make contract review more efficient • Responsible for calculating and applying revenue deficiencies for all revenue committed data

customers Integral part in an audit of collocation racks that led to the revision of billing procedures and back-billing of over $50,000 in revenue

Formal Education and Certifications Master of Accounting and Financial Analysis Northeastern State University, Broken Arrow, OK; May 2008 Bachelor of Business Administration, Accounting and Finance Northeastern State University, Tahlequah OK; August 2000 Certified Internal Auditor Certified Risk Management Assurance

Additional Experience and Skills External Audit Coordination Asset Valuation Teammate

Policy Administration Peoplesoft Sharepoint

Quickbooks Microsoft Applications

Professional Development • IIA Governance, Risk and Control Conference • M&A Leadership Conference • IIA Audit Manager Training • IIA Sarbanes-Oxley Primer • IIA Gaming Conference

Professional Associations • Member, Institute of Internal Auditors • Member , Tulsa Chapter of the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners

Appendix B

Insurance Certificates

Appendix C

Audit Report Example

Appendix D

Initiation Memo Example


InformationAgenda ItemDiscussion and consideration of the arbitrage rebate calculations by EideBailly of the EPWA Sales Tax &Utility System Revenue Bonds, Series 2004.

Background

AttachmentsEideBailly


InformationAgenda ItemDiscussion and consideration of the annual review of the 457(b) and 401(a) deferred compensation plansand the funds performances for year 2013 presented by Great-West Retirement representative GaryWilkins and Chara Green.

Background

AttachmentsFund Performance ReviewPlan ReviewInvestment Balances

FUND PERFORMANCE REVIEW

CITY OF EDMOND 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN | 98719-01Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2013

The analytical material contained herein merely describes the process that AAG applies in evaluating funds. It may or may not be based on the plan's current investment policy and is not intended to be used by plan sponsor as a primary

basis for deciding whether to make a particular fund available under the plan. Funds listed on the Fund Performance Review are designed to meet stated investment objectives and risk profiles, but do not constitute investment advice from

AAG or its affiliate. Plan fiduciaries should review the educational material provided and consult with their investment advisers if necessary to make the investment decision. Neither AAG, nor its representatives, agents or affiliates are

permitted to give legal, ERISA, or tax advice. Any discussion of these matters included or related to this document or other educational information is provided for informational purposes only. Such discussion does not purport to be

complete or to cover every situation. Current tax and ERISA law are subject to interpretation and legislative change. The appropriateness of any product for any specific taxpayer may vary depending on the particular set of facts and

circumstances. You should consult with and rely on your own legal and tax advisers.

Unpublished Work © 2003-2012 Great-West FinancialSM

Not intended as an offer or solicitation by Advised Assets Group, LLC or any of its affiliates.

Prepared by Advised Assets Group, LLC | 8515 East Orchard Road | Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111

FUND PERFORMANCE REVIEW

The Fund Performance Review is compiled at the request of the Plan Sponsor and/or broker. It is designed as a high level analytical tool to aide

plan sponsors in carrying out their fiduciary responsibilities; it is not intended as investment advice. Plan Sponsors may wish to review the

enclosed material with their investment adviser, consultant or broker, if necessary, prior to making final investment decisions.

Funds listed on the Fund Performance Review are designed to meet stated investment objectives and risk profiles. Risks associated with the

investment options can vary significantly and the relative risks of investment categories may change under certain economic conditions. The

investment return and principal value of an investment will fluctuate so that an investor’s shares, when redeemed, may be more or less than their

original cost. Current performance may be lower or higher than performance data shown due to market activity. Past performance is not a

guarantee of future results.

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES

FOR PLAN SPONSOR USE ONLY - NOT FOR USE WITH PLAN PARTICIPANTS

Not intended as an offer or solicitation of securities

Page 2 of 22

CONFIDENTIAL - DO NOT DISCLOSE OR DISSEMINATE

Data Source: Morningstar Direct®

98719-01 | CITY OF EDMOND 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

• To quantify historical fund performance relative to peer group benchmarks.

• To identify funds that have consistently underperformed over the long-term.

• To assist in identifying style drift and discern gaps within the plan portfolio.

• An objective analysis based on set criteria.

• Based on long-term and risk-adjusted performance.

• Comparison against peer group of similar funds as determined by Morningstar, Inc.®

• Statistics are derived from an independent third-party: primarily Morningstar Direct®

• The Fund Performance Review is designed as a high level analytical tool to aide plan sponsors in carrying

* out their fiduciary responsibilities.

The purpose of this document is to provide investment -related information only for the plan sponsor in its role as a fiduciary to the Plan, not as investment advice for plans or plan participants. Although the data

contained in this report is from reliable sources, Advised Assets Group, LLC cannot guarantee is completeness or accuracy. Risks associated with investment options can vary significantly with each

particular investment category and the relative risks of categories may change under certain economic conditions. The investment return and principal of an investment will fluctuate so that an investor's

shares, when redeemed, may be more of less than their original cost.

Current performance may be lower or higher than performance data shown due to market volatility. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns.

2012 Morningstar, Inc.® All Rights Reserved. Use of this content requires expert knowledge. It is to be used by specialist institutions only. The information contained herein: ( 1) is proprietary to Morningstar

and/or its content providers; (2) may not be copied, adapted or distributed; and (3) is not warranted to be accurate, complete or timely. Neither Morningstar nor its content providers are responsible for any

damages or losses arising from the use of this information, except where such damages or losses cannot be limited or excluded by law in your jurisdiction.

OBJECTIVE:

FUNDAMENTALS:

SOURCE:

SCOPE:

FUND PERFORMANCE REVIEW: OVERVIEW



Page 3 of 22




• Return Composite: Determined by taking the equal weighted average of the 3, 5 and 10 year category return percentiles.

• Sharpe Composite: Calculated by averaging the 3 and 5 year category Sharpe percentiles.

• Overall Composite: The equally weighted average of the Return Composite and Sharpe Composite.

• Overall Morningstar Rating™: Represents a measure of an investment's risk-adjusted return, relative to similar investments.

The Overall Composite is the sole determinate for the Overall Rating for funds that do not have an Overall Morningstar Category

Rating.

• OVERALL RATING: Based on performance, risk-adjusted performance and the Overall Morningstar Rating™.

FUND PERFORMANCE REVIEW: CRITERIA

• LONG-TERM ROLLING ANALYSIS: Based on the accumulated trailing 12 quarters "Overall Ratings".

For expanded definitions of the Composites, Sharpe Ratio and Ratings, please refer to the corresponding glossary. Information for this fund evaluation was received from what we believe to be reliable sources, but

we cannot absolutely guarantee accuracy, completeness or suitability for any purpose. The performance data quoted within represents past performance and is not a guarantee or indication of future investment

results. For each fund with at least a three-year history, Morningstar calculates a Morningstar Rating based on a Morningstar Risk-Adjusted Return measure that accounts for variation in a fund's monthly performance

(including the effects of sales charges, loads, and redemption fees), placing more emphasis on downward variations and rewarding consistent performance. The top 10% of the funds in each category receive 5 stars,

the next 22.5% receive 4 stars, the next 35% receive 3 stars, the next 22.5% receive 2 stars and the bottom 10% receive 1 star. (Each share class is counted as a fraction of one fund within this scale and rated

separately, which may cause slight variations in the distribution percentages). The Overall Morningstar Rating for a fund is derived from a weighted average of the performance figures with its three-, five- and

ten-year (if applicable) Morningstar Rating metrics. Past Performance is no guarantee of future results.

• FUNDS RECEIVING A WARNING: Please see the footnotes page for Special Product Consideration Funds.



Page 4 of 22




FUND COMPLEX RATING (Based on Recent Mutual Fund Investigations)

• OVERVIEW: Due to the issues involving mutual fund complexes and their compliance with security laws and regulations, Great-West

FinancialSM developed a ratings system for funds involved in its packaged products. Mutual fund complexes are assigned a rank of red, yellow

or green.

RED RATING: A fund complex or any of its respective funds may be placed on the Red Fund Corporate Rating and may be terminated

or disqualified from participating in the packaged products if that fund complex is determined by a court or appropriate regulatory

agency or the fund complex admits to having allowed regulatory violations or corporate infractions in its funds by its employees

(officers or portfolio managers) of the complex. In such event, depending on the severity of the violation or infraction, the fund(s)

may be terminated even if such activity was not found to have occurred in a fund used by Great-West FinancialSM but elsewhere

in the fund complex.

YELLOW RATING: A fund or fund complex will be put on the Yellow Fund Complex Corporate Rating if that fund complex is by a court

or appropriate regulatory agency or admits to having allowed regulatory violations or infractions in its funds. While a fund is on the

Yellow Fund Complex Corporate Rating, no action shall be taken to terminate or replace the fund.

GREEN RATING: A fund or fund complex that has not been implicated in any regulatory violations or infractions nor has admitted to

committing such activities.



Page 5 of 22




PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

Fund Name

Ticker

Symbol

Fund

Complex

Rating

Morningstar

Category Overall

Mstar

RatingSharpe Return

Composite %

Overall Rating¹

Consecutive

Quarters

Below

# of Quarters

Below Out of

Trailing 12

Long-Term Rolling Analysis²

PassNeutralTGVAX Thornburg International Value A LW 0 0 out of 1210 34.0 20.527.3 3 Foreign Large GrowthInternational

PassAboveRERCX American Funds EuroPacific Gr R3 0 0 out of 1269.0 67.068.0 4 Foreign Large Blend

PassAboveIARAX Invesco Real Estate A Load Waived 0 0 out of 1211 47.3 54.550.9 4 Real EstateSpecialty

FailBelowRYLPX Royce Low Priced Stock Svc 4 5 out of 1214 3.7 1.52.6 1 Small GrowthSmall-Cap

FailBelowHRTVX Heartland Value 5 6 out of 1221.0 39.530.3 2 Small Value

PassAboveBGRFX Baron Growth Retail 0 0 out of 1277.0 86.081.5 4 Mid-Cap GrowthMid-Cap

PassAboveCHTTX ASTON/Fairpointe Mid Cap N 0 0 out of 1291.3 61.076.2 4 Mid-Cap Blend

PassNeutralJARTX Janus Forty S 0 3 out of 1257.7 25.541.6 4 Large GrowthLarge-Cap

PassNeutralJENRX Jensen Quality Growth R 0 0 out of 1222.3 53.037.7 3 Large Growth

PassNeutralNYVTX Davis NY Venture A Load Waived 0 4 out of 1232.7 21.026.8 3 Large Blend

PassNeutralACGIX Invesco Growth and Income A Load Waived 0 0 out of 1253.7 43.048.3 4 Large Value

PassAboveOARBX Oakmark Equity & Income II 0 0 out of 1251.7 84.568.1 4 Aggressive AllocationAsst All/Other

PassAbovePTRAX PIMCO Total Return Admin 0 0 out of 1212 69.7 31.550.6 4 Intermediate-Term BondBond /MMF30

Please refer to the Appendix page for additional footnotes



Page 6 of 22




RETURN ANALYSIS

1 Year

ReturnFund Name

1 Year

Return

1 Year

Percent

3 Year

Return

3 Year

Percent

Performance vs. Benchmark (Annualized Returns and Return Percentiles)

5 Year

Return

5 Year

Percent

10 Year

Return

10 Year

Percent

Incept.

Date

4th

Quarter

2013 1 Year

Percent

4th

Quarter

2013

5.67 50 18.89 50 7.41 50 13.77 50 7.15 50 Foreign Large Growth Peer Group N/A10International

4.22 26 15.35 32 4.90 16 11.52 16 8.34 70 Thornburg International Value A LW 05/28/1998

5.78 50 20.00 50 7.10 50 12.20 50 6.73 50 Foreign Large Blend Peer Group N/A

7.53 83 19.79 48 7.05 49 13.17 73 8.59 85 American Funds EuroPacific Gr R3 05/21/2002

-0.35 50 1.67 50 8.58 50 16.15 50 8.07 50 Real Estate Peer Group N/A11Specialty

-0.41 46 1.79 55 8.47 45 15.24 28 8.81 69 Invesco Real Estate A Load Waived 12/31/1996

8.05 50 41.03 50 16.17 50 22.08 50 9.40 50 Small Growth Peer Group N/A14Small-Cap

3.97 2 12.91 1 0.25 1 15.27 2 7.05 8 Royce Low Priced Stock Svc 12/15/1993

9.20 50 35.99 50 14.56 50 19.89 50 9.34 50 Small Value Peer Group N/A

10.21 77 32.11 18 11.86 13 19.66 47 7.16 3 Heartland Value 12/28/1984

8.12 50 35.37 50 13.97 50 20.98 50 9.39 50 Mid-Cap Growth Peer Group N/AMid-Cap

7.96 43 38.32 78 17.70 89 22.10 68 10.52 74 Baron Growth Retail 12/30/1994

8.63 50 33.71 50 15.01 50 20.42 50 9.20 50 Mid-Cap Blend Peer Group N/A

9.20 62 44.49 96 16.29 77 26.31 98 11.69 99 ASTON/Fairpointe Mid Cap N 09/19/1994

10.34 50 33.91 50 14.96 50 18.85 50 7.52 50 Large Growth Peer Group N/ALarge-Cap

10.70 59 31.73 30 14.71 46 18.01 35 9.94 92 Janus Forty S 05/01/1997

10.66 58 31.80 31 13.84 32 16.19 11 6.63 24 Jensen Quality Growth R 07/30/2003

10.10 50 31.90 50 14.94 50 17.19 50 7.03 50 Large Blend Peer Group N/A

10.87 82 34.56 78 13.04 24 16.42 35 6.78 39 Davis NY Venture A Load Waived 02/17/1969

9.49 50 31.52 50 14.73 50 16.20 50 7.21 50 Large Value Peer Group N/A

8.82 31 33.84 70 14.51 44 16.02 46 7.82 71 Invesco Growth and Income A Load Waived 08/01/2046

7.01 65 23.83 75 10.53 55 11.98 6 8.02 94 Oakmark Equity & Income II 07/13/2000Asst All/Other

0.16 50 -1.72 50 3.63 50 6.25 50 4.40 50 Intermediate-Term Bond Peer Group N/A1230Bond /MMF

-0.10 32 -2.17 33 3.82 58 6.65 58 5.77 93 PIMCO Total Return Admin 09/08/1994




Page 7 of 22




SHARPE RATIO AND EXPENSE ANALYSIS

Fund Name 3 Yr Ratio 3 Yr % 5 Yr Ratio 5 Yr % 3 Yr

Sharpe Ratio and Percentiles

5 Yr

Expense

Ratio

Manager

Tenure

Expense

%

Fund Size

$ MM

Standard

Deviation

International 0.538 50 0.793 50 15.76 18.77 1.30 5010 - - Foreign Large Growth Peer Group

0.378 17 0.698 24 15.75 17.77 1.29 52 16 28403.2 Thornburg International Value A LW

0.501 50 0.677 50 16.37 19.91 1.23 50 - - Foreign Large Blend Peer Group

0.511 54 0.755 80 15.62 18.57 1.14 59 30 121209.9 American Funds EuroPacific Gr R3

Specialty 0.578 50 0.707 50 16.55 25.35 1.22 5011 - - Real Estate Peer Group

0.590 55 0.710 54 15.93 23.82 1.25 49 19 2019.3 Invesco Real Estate A Load Waived

Small-Cap 0.967 50 1.124 50 17.01 19.54 1.33 5014 - - Small Growth Peer Group

0.103 1 0.754 2 18.97 21.94 1.51 34 13 1427.2 Royce Low Priced Stock Svc

0.916 50 0.967 50 16.24 21.38 1.31 50 - - Small Value Peer Group

0.780 14 1.000 65 15.92 19.88 1.16 65 29 1249.9 Heartland Value

Mid-Cap 0.931 50 1.173 50 15.39 17.90 1.22 50 - - Mid-Cap Growth Peer Group

1.260 94 1.270 78 13.65 16.84 1.32 39 19 8323.5 Baron Growth Retail

0.972 50 1.094 50 15.26 18.42 1.17 50 - - Mid-Cap Blend Peer Group

0.900 35 1.190 87 18.55 21.67 1.11 54 15 5104.3 ASTON/Fairpointe Mid Cap N

Large-Cap 1.077 50 1.148 50 13.86 16.29 1.11 50 - - Large Growth Peer Group

1.000 33 1.040 18 14.73 17.39 1.04 57 1 3248.5 Janus Forty S

1.179 72 1.095 34 11.55 14.66 1.17 45 21 5299.8 Jensen Quality Growth R

1.163 50 1.075 50 12.72 16.02 1.06 50 - - Large Blend Peer Group

1.000 23 0.970 19 13.07 17.18 0.88 66 18 20885.0 Davis NY Venture A Load Waived

1.155 50 1.000 50 12.94 16.69 1.06 50 - - Large Value Peer Group

1.140 46 0.970 40 12.55 16.67 0.82 76 15 9033.3 Invesco Growth and Income A Load Waived

Asst All/Other 1.080 87 1.110 82 9.64 10.70 1.09 65 18 20167.9 Oakmark Equity & Income II

Bond /MMF 1.183 50 1.746 50 2.89 3.33 0.80 5012 - -30 Intermediate-Term Bond Peer Group

0.970 22 1.670 41 3.89 3.86 0.71 61 27 237264.3 PIMCO Total Return Admin




Page 8 of 22




ANNUAL RETURNS AND STATISTICS

Fund Name 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

Calendar Year Returns

Alpha Beta R2

MPT Statistics (3 year)Turnover

Ratio

Number of

Holdings

% in Top

10 Holdings

Portfolio Construction

International 18.89 18.68 -12.05 13.80 36.12 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Foreign Large Growth Peer Group10

15.35 15.34 -13.24 13.70 31.43 0.09 0.93 94 34 86 23.9% Thornburg International Value A LW

20.00 18.16 -13.61 10.49 31.46 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Foreign Large Blend Peer Group

19.79 18.89 -13.85 9.07 38.71 2.09 0.93 96 27 395 21.5% American Funds EuroPacific Gr R3

Specialty 1.67 16.84 8.09 27.58 29.30 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Real Estate Peer Group11

1.79 16.55 7.58 22.79 29.69 0.39 0.87 59 60 45 54.3% Invesco Real Estate A Load Waived

Small-Cap 41.03 13.96 -2.59 27.71 35.91 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Small Growth Peer Group14

12.91 4.48 -14.58 31.49 53.58 -19.56 1.37 76 8 115 19.5% Royce Low Priced Stock Svc

36.01 15.93 -4.50 25.42 31.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Small Value Peer Group

32.11 13.83 -6.92 21.28 44.49 -5.87 1.17 78 24 134 19.8% Heartland Value

Mid-Cap 35.37 14.45 -3.82 25.75 40.57 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mid-Cap Growth Peer Group

38.32 16.43 1.24 24.01 34.24 0.97 1.03 84 9 103 26.2% Baron Growth Retail

33.71 16.84 -3.33 24.00 35.97 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mid-Cap Blend Peer Group

44.49 16.45 -6.55 23.02 66.18 -5.77 1.43 87 37 50 30.0% ASTON/Fairpointe Mid Cap N

Large-Cap 33.91 15.32 -1.77 16.00 34.95 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Large Growth Peer Group

31.73 23.65 -7.32 5.62 43.53 -2.88 1.12 85 43 37 43.7% Janus Forty S

31.80 13.27 -1.17 11.54 28.65 -0.71 0.91 91 22 29 43.7% Jensen Quality Growth R

31.90 15.42 -0.15 14.28 27.09 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Large Blend Peer Group

34.56 12.73 -4.78 12.11 32.06 -3.55 1.06 95 7 71 48.5% Davis NY Venture A Load Waived

31.52 14.90 -0.33 13.35 23.98 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Large Value Peer Group

33.84 14.58 -2.09 12.65 24.26 -1.63 1.01 95 29 78 25.9% Invesco Growth and Income A Load Waived

Asst All/Other 23.83 8.75 0.27 9.17 19.47 0.87 1.10 86 25 146 30.2% Oakmark Equity & Income II

Bond /MMF -1.72 6.41 6.39 7.48 12.50 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Intermediate-Term Bond Peer Group1230

-2.17 10.08 3.91 8.56 13.55 0.53 1.01 51 380 20509 75.7% PIMCO Total Return Admin




Page 9 of 22




INDEX PERFORMANCE

Index

Total

Return

1 Year

Annual

Return

2013

Annual

Return

2012

Annual

Return

2011

Annual

Return

2010

Annual

Return

2009

Total

Return

Annlzd

3 Year

Total

Return

Annlzd

5 Year

Total

Return

Annlzd

10 Year

-4.98 -4.50 12.08 8.52MSCI EMF ID -4.98 15.15 -20.41 16.36 74.50International 10

22.78 8.17 12.44 6.91MSCI EAFE Ndtr_D 22.78 17.32 -12.14 7.75 31.78

26.68 11.49 15.02 6.98MSCI World Ndtr_D 26.68 15.83 -5.54 11.76 29.99

43.30 16.82 22.58 9.41Russell 2000 Growth 43.30 14.59 -2.91 29.09 34.47Small-Cap 14

38.82 15.67 20.08 9.07Russell 2000 38.82 16.35 -4.18 26.85 27.17

34.52 14.49 17.64 8.61Russell 2000 Value 34.52 18.05 -5.50 24.50 20.58

35.74 15.63 23.37 9.77Russell Mid Cap Growth 35.74 15.81 -1.65 26.38 46.29Mid-Cap

33.50 15.64 21.89 10.36Standard & Poor's Midcap 400 33.50 17.88 -1.73 26.64 37.38

33.46 15.97 21.16 10.26Russell Mid Cap Value 33.46 18.51 -1.38 24.75 34.21

33.48 16.45 20.39 7.83Russell 1000 Growth 33.48 15.26 2.64 16.71 37.21Large-Cap

32.39 16.18 17.94 7.41Standard & Poor's 500 32.39 16.00 2.11 15.06 26.46

32.53 16.06 16.67 7.58Russell 1000 Value 32.53 17.51 0.39 15.51 19.69

-2.02 3.26 4.44 4.55BarCap US Aggregate Bond -2.02 4.21 7.84 6.54 5.93Bond /MMF 1230

-2.01 5.11 7.89 5.23BarCap US Credit -2.01 9.37 8.35 8.47 16.04

-1.41 2.42 3.69 4.61BarCap US MBS -1.41 2.59 6.23 5.37 5.89

-2.60 2.70 2.26 4.14BarCap US Government Bond -2.60 2.02 9.02 5.52 -2.20

0.37 0.81 1.25 2.67BarCap US Govt 1-3 Yr 0.37 0.51 1.56 2.40 1.41




Page 10 of 22




100% Total

• The Profile funds range from Aggressive to Conservative.

Aggressive Profile

Asset Class

International 25%

Small Cap

Mid Cap

Large Cap

20%

30%

25%

Allocation

COMPOSITION: • The asset classes for each Profile vary. Therefore, the mix of funds in which each invests also varies.

• Each profile invests in a mix of underlying funds subject to the same standards of other funds within

* Great-West FinancialSM packaged annuities.

FUNDS:

TYPE: • Profiles are static asset allocation funds that invest in underlying funds.

RISK: • They range from aggressive risk to conservative risk and invest in an optimized mix of international equity

* funds, US equity funds and fixed income funds. Allow investors to diversify among several different funds

* and asset classes with one holding.

OBJECTIVE: • To provide a well diversified portfolio. This helps to spread investing risks among various asset classes.

PROFILE SERIES: FUNDS

EXAMPLE:




Page 11 of 22




PROFILE SERIES: PERFORMANCE

Profiles compared to a series of blended benchmarks of passive indexes based on the overall asset allocation of the

particular Profile.

For example, Aggressive Profile (which is 73% domestic equity funds and 27% international funds) compared to a

weighted average return of:

73% Wilshire 5000

27% MSCI EAFE Index

Inception

Date Fund Name 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year 10 Year/S.I.

Underlying

Fund

Expense

Admin

Fee

Total

Fund

Expense

Performance (Annualized Returns)

09/16/1999 Great-West Moderate Profile II Init 0.80% 0.10% 0.90% 16.29% 8.97% 12.47% 7.04% 0.00

Weighted Composite 15.97% 9.25% 11.95% 6.29%

09/27/1999 Great-West Moderately Cnsrv Prfl II Init 0.76% 0.10% 0.86% 12.03% 7.47% 10.86% 6.48% 0.00


09/16/1999 Great-West Moderately Agg Prfl II Init 0.93% 0.10% 1.03% 20.42% 10.38% 14.47% 7.47% 0.00


09/30/1999 Great-West Conservative Profile II Init 0.71% 0.10% 0.81% 7.67% 5.97% 9.34% 5.57% 0.00


09/16/1999 Great-West Aggressive Profile II Init 1.05% 0.10% 1.15% 29.07% 12.88% 17.28% 7.76% 0.00


The performance data quoted above represents past performance and is not a guarantee or indication of future

investment results. Composite returns adjusted for applicable operating expenses and fees.

The investment return and principal value of an investment will fluctuate so that an investor's shares, when redeemed,

may be more or less than their original cost.




Page 12 of 22




PROFILE SERIES: ASSET CLASS RANGES

The five Profiles range from aggressive to conservative. More aggressive Profiles are weighted towards

international, small cap and mid-cap equities while more conservative Profiles are weighted towards short-term and

bond investments.

Profiles will always be invested within the ranges below:

Specific Profile asset allocations (within these ranges) set on an annual basis. Individual Profiles rebalanced back to

target allocations quarterly.

International:

Small Cap:

Mid Cap:

Large Cap:

Real Estate:

Bond:

10 - 40% 0 - 30% 0 - 15%

5 - 35% 0 - 25% 0 - 15%

15 - 45% 0 - 30% 0 - 15%

30 - 50% 15 - 45% 10 - 40%

0 - 10% 0 - 10% 0 - 10%

0 - 10% 10 - 30% 25 - 45%

Aggressive

Profile

Moderate

Profile

Conservative

Profile

Moderately

Aggressive

Profile

5 - 25%

0 - 10%

20 - 50%

5 - 35%

0 - 25%

5 - 35%

Moderately

Conservative

Profile

20 - 40%

0 - 10%

10 - 40%

0 - 25%

0 - 15%

0 - 30%

Short-Term: 0 - 10% 5 - 25% 25 - 45%0 - 15% 10 - 30%




Page 13 of 22




14.56%

4.80%

9.76%

Conservative

Profile

PROFILE SERIES: CURRENT ALLOCATIONS

Asset class ranges are developed using Modern Portfolio Theory and Ibbotson Optimizer software. Long-term

returns, volatility and correlation of returns of the asset classes evaluated.

An efficient frontier of available investments created using Optimizer Software

with the intent of maximizing returns at the minimum possible risk.

Committee of investment professionals meets to review output from software

and finalize allocations. Once the asset class ranges determined, underlying

investment managers are chosen to provide exposure to different investment

styles: i.e. Growth, Value, Blend

Expected Risk (standard deviation)

Expected Return

(average annual)

Current Profile Allocations

International

Great-West MFS International Growth Fund

Great-West MFS International Value Fund

Small Cap

Great-West Small Cap Growth Fund

Great-West Loomis Sayles Small Cap Value Fund

Great-West Invesco Small Cap Value Fund

Mid Cap

Great-West T. Rowe Price Mid Cap Growth Fund

Great-West Goldman Sachs Mid Cap Value Fund

Large Cap

Great-West Multi-Manager Large Cap Growth Fund

Great-West American Century Growth

Great-West Putnam Equity Income Fund

Great-West T. Rowe Price Equity Income Fund

Bond

Great-West U.S. Government Mortgage Securities Fund

Great-West Templeton Global Bond Fund

Great-West Federated Bond Fund

Great-West Putnam High Yield Bond Fund

Great-West Loomis Sayles Bond Fund

Short-Term

Guaranteed Portfolio Fund

Great-West Short Duration Bond Fund

25.22%

8.32%

16.90%

8.73%

2.91%

2.91%

2.91%

20.37%

4.07%

16.30%

42.68%

7.04%

7.04%

14.30%

14.30%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

0.00%

5.04%

1.68%

1.68%

1.68%

11.76%

2.35%

9.41%

24.64%

4.07%

4.07%

8.25%

8.25%

24.00%

5.04%

6.48%

4.80%

2.40%

5.28%

16.00%

16.00%

0.00%

6.51%

2.15%

4.36%

2.25%

0.75%

0.75%

0.75%

5.25%

1.05%

4.20%

11.02%

1.82%

1.82%

3.69%

3.69%

40.97%

8.61%

11.04%

8.20%

4.10%

9.02%

29.00%

22.50%

6.50%

Aggressive

Profile

Moderate

Profile

Moderately

Aggressive

Profile

Moderately

Conservative

Profile

10.53%

3.47%

7.06%

3.66%

1.22%

1.22%

1.22%

8.50%

1.70%

6.80%

17.82%

2.94%

2.94%

5.97%

5.97%

32.99%

6.93%

8.90%

6.60%

3.30%

7.26%

22.00%

22.00%

0.00%

18.06%

5.96%

12.10%

6.27%

2.09%

2.09%

2.09%

14.59%

2.92%

11.67%

30.58%

5.05%

5.05%

10.24%

10.24%

18.00%

3.78%

4.86%

3.60%

1.80%

3.96%

9.00%

9.00%

0.00%

Alternative

Great-West Real Estate Index

3.00%

3.00%

3.50%

3.50%

4.00%

4.00%

4.50%

4.50%

5.00%

5.00%




Page 14 of 22




PROFILE SERIES: UNDERLYING FUNDS

PercentileFund Name

1 Year

Return

1 Year

Percentile

3 Year

Return

3 Year

Percentile

4th

Quarter

2013 5 Year

Return

5 Year

Percentile

10 Year

Return

10 Year

Percentile

Performance vs. Benchmark (Annualized Returns and Return Percentiles %) 4th

Quarter

2013

Return

18.89 50 7.41 50 13.77 50 7.15 50Foreign Large Growth Peer Group 5.67 50International 10

18.21 45 9.10 74 13.55 45 8.56 76Great-West MFS International Growth Init Foreign Large Growth 5.76 52

21.68 50 7.41 50 11.59 50 6.60 50Foreign Large Value Peer Group 6.02 50

27.99 98 13.75 100 16.18 97 6.96 60Great-West MFS International Value Init Foreign Large Value 5.21 25

41.03 50 16.17 50 22.08 50 9.40 50Small Growth Peer Group 8.05 50Small-Cap 14

44.82 73 18.30 78 22.03 49 7.34 11Great-West Small Cap Growth Init Small Growth 8.65 62

37.69 50 15.41 50 20.11 50 8.84 50Small Blend Peer Group 9.05 50

34.87 25 15.27 47 19.41 35 9.95 77Great-West Loomis Sayles Sm Cp Val Init Small Blend 8.96 47

35.99 50 14.56 50 19.89 50 9.34 50Small Value Peer Group 9.20 50

35.66 48 14.77 54 19.22 39 N/A N/AGreat-West Invesco Small Cap Value Init Small Value 7.82 11

35.37 50 13.97 50 20.98 50 9.39 50Mid-Cap Growth Peer Group 8.12 50Mid-Cap

36.36 60 15.08 67 23.00 82 10.94 82Great-West T. Rowe Price Mid Cap Gr Init Mid-Cap Growth 7.72 33

34.91 50 14.65 50 20.13 50 9.25 50Mid-Cap Value Peer Group 8.73 50

33.66 38 15.92 68 19.79 43 N/A N/AGreat-West Goldman Sachs MidCap Val Init Mid-Cap Value 9.94 71

33.91 50 14.96 50 18.85 50 7.52 50Large Growth Peer Group 10.34 50Large-Cap

29.40 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AGreat-West American Century Growth Init Large Growth 9.40 24

28.93 11 11.90 10 17.48 27 8.82 81Great-West Multi-Manager LgCpGr Init Large Growth 10.69 59

31.52 50 14.73 50 16.20 50 7.21 50Large Value Peer Group 9.49 50

31.65 52 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AGreat-West Putnam Equity Income Init Large Value 9.39 47

30.01 32 14.74 50 16.83 64 7.41 58Great-West T. Rowe Price Equity Inc Init Large Value 8.81 31

-2.93 50 2.76 50 5.52 50 4.77 50World Bond Peer Group 0.38 50Bond 12

0.56 83 4.32 78 7.63 67 7.58 95Great-West Templeton Global Bond Init World Bond 1.93 88

6.61 50 8.17 50 16.27 50 7.26 50High Yield Bond Peer Group 3.19 50

7.67 72 8.18 50 16.85 63 6.20 11Great-West Putnam High Yield Bond Init High Yield Bond 3.48 70

0.93 50 5.49 50 11.05 50 6.29 50Multisector Bond Peer Group 1.71 50

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AGuaranteed Portfolio Fund Multisector Bond N/A N/A

8.05 95 9.40 96 15.37 91 8.26 92Great-West Loomis Sayles Bond Init Multisector Bond 2.40 76

-1.72 50 3.63 50 6.25 50 4.40 50Intermediate-Term Bond Peer Group 0.16 50

-2.20 31 3.17 33 5.82 40 4.73 64Great-West Federated Bond Init Intermediate-Term Bond 0.46 65

-2.63 50 2.14 50 3.13 50 3.81 50Intermediate Government Peer Group -0.60 50

-2.02 74 2.25 57 3.65 66 4.11 72Great-West US Gov Mortg Sec Init Intermediate Government -0.60 48

0.58 24 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AGreat-West Real Estate Index Initial (Idx) Real Estate -1.21 16Index Funds 16




Page 15 of 22





Footnote

Subscript Disclosure

The Overall Rating is derived from the 3, 5 and 10 year net-of-fee performance figures, the 3 and 5 year Sharpe Ratio and the Morningstar Rating. 1

The Long-Term Rolling Analysis accumulates the trailing 12 quarter Overall Ratings and determines a Pass / Fail designation accordingly. 2

A Percentile Ranking of 100% represents the best in class performance, whereas 0% represents the lowest. 3

MSCI EMF ID: A capitalization-weighted index of stocks from 26 emerging markets that only includes issues that may be traded by foreign investors. The reported returns

reflect equities priced in US dollars and do not include the effects of reinvested dividends.

4

The Fund Performance Review is a proprietary high level analytical tool that is used to evaluate fund performance and is not intended as an offer or solicitation of securities,

or as investment advice.

5

Please check on the availability of the Great-West product and its Blue Sky status for NAV. 6

MSCI Eafe Ndtr_D: Widely accepted as a benchmark for international stock performance, the EAFE Index is an aggregate of 21 individual country indexes that collectively

represent many of the major markets of the world.

7

MSCI World Ndtr_D: Includes all 23 MSCI developed market countries. Ndtr_D indexes are calculated daily and take into account actual dividends reinvested daily before

withholding taxes, but exclude special tax credits declared by companies.

8

Russell 2000 Growth: Market-weighted total return index that measures the performance of companies within the Russell 2000 Index having higher price-to-book ratios and

higher forecasted growth values.

9

Foreign investments, if part of the fund lineup, involve special risks, including currency fluctuations and political developments. 10

Specialty funds limit the number of issuers in which they invest and are generally non-diversified. 11

An investment in a Money Market Portfolio/Fund, if part of the portfolio/fund lineup, is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Although the

portfolio/fund seeks to preserve the value of your investment at $1.00 per share, it is possible to lose money by investing in the portfolio/fund.

12

Russell 2000: Consists of the smallest 2000 companies in the Russell 3000 Index, representing approximately 7% of the Russell 3000 total market capitalization. 13

Equity securities of small-sized companies may be more volatile than securities of larger, more established companies. 14

Russell 2000 Value: Market-weighted total return index that measures the performance of companies within the Russell 2000 Index having lower price-to-book ratios and

lower forecasted growth values.

15

Index Funds are not provided an overall rating as their objective is to track their respective index, not to outperform managed funds. 16

Russell Midcap Growth: Market-weighted total return index that measures the performance of companies within the Russell Midcap Index having higher price-to-book ratios

and higher forecasted growth values.

17

Standard & Poor's Midcap 400: Includes approximately 10% of the capitalization of U.S. equity securities. These are comprised of stocks in the middle capitalization range. 18

Russell Midcap Value: Market-weighted total return index that measures the performance of companies within the Russell Midcap Index having lower price-to-book ratios and

lower forecasted growth values.

19

Barra Large Cap Growth: Market capitalization-weighted index of the stocks in the Standard & Poor's 500 Index having the lowest book to price ratios. The index consists of

approximately half of the S&P 500 on a market capitalization basis.

20

Standard & Poor's 500: A market capitalization-weighted index of 500 widely held stocks often used as a proxy for the stock market. It measures the movement of the largest

issues. Standard and Poor's chooses the member companies for the 500 based on market size, liquidity and industry group representation.

21

Barra Large Cap Value: Market capitalization-weighted index of the stocks in the Standard & Poor's 500 Index having the highest book to price ratios. The index consists of

approximately half of the S&P 500 on a market capitalization basis.

22

Barclays Capital Aggregate Bond: Composed of the Barclays Capital Govt/Credit Index, the Mortgage-Backed Securities Index, and the Asset-Backed Securities Index. 23

Bar Cap Credit: Listed for corporate bond-general and high-quality funds. This index tracks the returns of all publicly issued, fixed-rate, nonconvertible, dollar-denominated,

SEC-registered, investment-grade corporate debt.

24

Bar Cap Mortgage-Backed: Includes 15- and 30-year fixed-rate securities backed by mortgage pools of the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA). 25



Page 16 of 22





Footnote

Subscript Disclosure

Bar Cap Government Bond: Listed for government-bond general and Treasury funds because it tracks the returns of U.S. Treasuries, agency bonds, and one- to three-year

U.S. government obligations. This index is effective for tracking portfolios holding non-mortgage government securities.

26

Bar Cap 1-3 Year Government: Comprised of both the Treasury Bond index (all public obligations of the U.S. Treasury, excluding flower bonds and foreign-targeted issues)

and the Agency Bond Index (all publicly issued debt of U.S. Government agencies and quasi-federal corporations and corporate-debt guaranteed by the U.S. Government).

27

In certain instances the fund shown and the related data is the load waived share class. 28

Investment options available in the plan may be through mutual funds and / or a group fixed annuity contract. Total return performance shown above represents that of the

underlying fund and does not include a deduction for any applicable annuity contract of administrative fees / expenses. Performance numbers shown above would be less

after applicable fees / expenses are deducted.

29



Page 17 of 22




APPENDIX A - ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES

1. An investment in a money market fund, if part of the fund lineup, is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Although the fund seeks to preserve the value of your investment at $1.00 per share, it is possible to lose money by investing in the fund.



Page 18 of 22




APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY12b-1 Fee The maximum annual charge deducted from fund assets to pay for distribution and marketing costs. Although usually set on a percentage basis, this amount will occasionally

be a flat figure.

Actively managed A fund attempts to add portfolio value through such active investment techniques as sector allocation (top-down) and/or security selection (bottom-up).

Aggressive Growth (Objective) Funds that seek high growth of capital. Investments may include smaller companies, companies in newly-emerging industries or in special situations

(i.e., turnaround, mergers & acquisitions, etc.).

Alpha is the coefficient that measures the portion of an investment's return arising from non-market or unsystematic risk. In actively managed portfolios, alpha is considered to be the

value added by the manager through sector or security selection. A negative alpha would indicate that active management had produced less-than-market returns.

Annual Returns Total returns calculated on a calendar-year basis. The annual return for a fund will be the same as its trailing 12-month total return only at year-end.

Annualized Returns Returns for periods longer than one year are expressed as "annualized returns." This is equivalent to the compound rate of return which, over a certain period of time,

would produce a fund’s total return over that same period.

Asset Allocation (Objective) Funds that seek high total return by investing in a mix of equities, fixed-income securities and money market instruments.

Barclays Capital Aggregate Index Composed of the Barclays Capital Govt/Credit Index, the Mortgage-Backed Securities Index, and the Asset-Backed Securities Index. The returns

published for the index are total returns, which include reinvestment of dividends.

Barclays Capital Government Bond Index Listed for government-bond general and Treasury funds. Because it tracks the returns of U.S. Treasuries, agency bonds, and one- to three-year

U.S. government obligations, this index is effective for tracking portfolios holding non-mortgage government securities. The returns published for the index are total returns, which include

reinvestment of dividends.

Basis Point One-hundredth of a percentage point. For example, 50 basis points equals .50%.

Beta also known as market or systematic risk, beta is the coefficient that measures an investment's volatility relative to "the market" (the S & P 500 Index has a beta of 1.00) as a whole.

Portfolios with a beta greater than 1.00 will move higher or lower than the market as a whole, while those with betas of less than 1.00 will move less than the market.

Bond funds Contrary to individual bonds, which offer a guaranteed rate of return, bond funds are variable funds and their returns may rise or fall depending on market conditions. Funds

with 70% or more of their assets invested in bonds are classified as Bond Funds. Bond funds are divided into two main groups: Taxable Bond and Municipal Bond. Taxable Bond Fund

categories include the following: Long-Term Government, Intermediate-Term Government, Short-Term Government, Long-Term Bond, Intermediate-Term Bond, Short-Term Bond,

Ultrashort-Bond, International- Bond, High-Yield Bond, Emerging-Markets Bond and Multisector Bond.

Capital Appreciation The market rise in share value of a company as it experiences growth in earnings and/or assets. By extension, funds will experience capital appreciation as the

underlying securities in their portfolios appreciate in value.

Capitalization The total market value of all stock issued by a company. Funds are frequently categorized by the market capitalization of the stocks in their portfolios; i.e., “small cap”

generally refers to companies valued by the market at less than $1 billion, “Mid-cap” to companies valued between $1 billion and $5 billion, and “Large-cap” to companies valued at more

than $5 billion.

Corporate Bond--General (Objective) Funds that seek income by investing in fixed-income securities. Funds with this objective may hold a variety of issues, including but not limited to

government bonds, high-quality corporates, mortgages, asset-backeds, bank loans and junk bonds.

Corporate Bond--High Yield (Objective) Funds that seek income by generally investing 65% or more of their assets in bonds rated below BBB. The price of these issues is generally

affected more by the condition of the issuing company (similar to a stock) than by the interest-rate fluctuation that usually causes bond prices to move up and down.

Diversification The investment practice of spreading assets in a portfolio among a number of different companies, industries, sectors and/or instruments. Under Modern Portfolio Theory,

the practice of diversification may assist an investor in reducing overall portfolio risk and evening out portfolio returns.

Domestic equity funds are placed in a category based on the style and size of the stocks they typically own. The style and size parameters are based on the divisions used in the

investment style box: Value, Blend, or Growth style and Small, Medium, or Large median market capitalization.

Equity-Income (Objective) Funds that are expected to pursue current income by investing at least 65% of their assets in dividend-paying equity securities.

Excess Returns The percentage of fund assets paid for operating and administrative expenses, as well as management fees. Fund expenses are reflected in a Fund’s NAV.



Page 19 of 22




APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY (CONTINUED)Expense Ratio The percentage of fund assets paid for operating expenses and management fees, including 12b-1 fees, administrative fees, and all other asset-based costs incurred by

the fund, except brokerage costs. Fund expenses are reflected in the fund’s NAV. Sales charges are not included in the expense ratio.

Foreign Stock Category An international fund having no more than 10% of stocks invested in the United States.

Fund of Funds A fund that specializes in buying shares in other mutual funds rather than individual securities. Quite often this type of fund is not discernible from its name

alone, but rather through prospectus wording (i.e.: the fund’s charter).

Government Bond--General (Objective) Offerings that pursue income by investing in a combination of mortgage-backed securities, Treasuries, and agency securities.

Growth (Objective) Funds that pursue capital appreciation by investing primarily in equity securities. Current income, if considered at all, is a secondary concern.

Growth and Income (Objective) Growth of capital and current income are near-equal objectives for these funds. Investments are typically selected for both appreciation potential and

dividend-paying ability.

Index Fund A fund that tracks a particular index and attempts to match returns. While an index typically has a much larger portfolio than a mutual fund, the fund’s management may study

the index’s movements to develop a representative sampling, and match sectors proportionately.

International Equity Funds with 40% or more of their equity holdings in foreign stocks (on average over three years) are placed in the international equity class. These categories include

Europe, Japan, International Hybrid, Latin America, Diversified Pacific, Pacific ex. Japan, Specialty Precious Metals, Diversified Emerging Markets, World Stock, and Foreign Stock. Foreign

investments involve special risks, including currency fluctuations and political developments.

Life Cycle These funds are geared toward investors of a certain age or with a specific time horizon for investing. Typically they are grouped together in sets (i.e. conservative, moderate,

and aggressive portfolios).

Management Fees The management fee is the percentage deducted from fund assets to pay an advisor or subadvisor. Often, as the fund's net assets grow, the percentage deducted for

management fees decreases. For example, a particular fund may report a management fee of 0.40% on the first $500 million in assets, 0.35% on all assets between $500 million and

$1 billion, and 0.30% on assets in excess of $1 billion. Thus, if the fund contains $1.5 billion in total net assets, the advisor scales back its management fees accordingly. Alternatively,

the fund may compute the fee as a flat percentage of average net assets.

The management fee might also come in the form of a group fee (G), a performance fee (P), or a gross income fee (I). Note: The management fee is just one (albeit a major) component

of a fund's costs. The overall expense ratio is the most useful number for investors. Actual fees are also noted in this section.

Morningstar was founded in 1984 to provide investors with useful information for making intelligent, informed investment decisions. The company’s first product, originally named the

Mutual Fund Sourcebook, proved to be innovative in its ability to tap into an underserved market. Soon a demand grew for an even more in-depth and analytical publication, leading to the

launch of Morningstar Mutual Funds in late 1986. Morningstar and Advised Assets Group are separate and unaffiliated. The Morningstar name is a registered mark of Morningstar. Marks

used in conjunction with Morningstar products or services are the property of Morningstar or its subsidiaries.

Morningstar Category identifies funds based on their actual investment styles as measured by their underlying portfolio holdings (portfolio statistics and compositions over the past

three years). If the fund is new and has no portfolio, we estimate where it will fall before assigning a more permanent category. When necessary, we may change a category assignment

based on current information.

MSCI EAFE Ndtr_D Listed for foreign stock funds (EAFE refers to Europe, Australasia, and Far East). Widely accepted as a benchmark for international stock performance, the EAFE Index

is an aggregate of 21 individual country indexes that collectively represent many of the major markets of the world. Ndtr_D indexes are calculated daily and take into account actual

dividends reinvested daily before withholding taxes, but exclude special tax credits declared by companies. In addition, Ndtr_D indexes subtract withholding taxes retained at the source,

for foreigners who do not benefit from a double taxation treaty. The returns published for the index are total returns, which include reinvestment of dividends.

MSCI World Ndtr_D Includes all 23 MSCI developed market countries. Ndtr_D indexes are calculated daily and take into account actual dividends reinvested daily before withholding

taxes, but exclude special tax credits declared by companies. In addition, Ndtr_D indexes subtract withholding taxes retained at the source, for foreigners who do not benefit from a double

taxation treaty.

Mutual fund An investment option that pools money from many shareholders and invests it in a group of stocks, bonds, or other securities. Also known as an open-end investment

management company, mutual funds are securities required to be registered with the SEC.



Page 20 of 22




NAV Stands for net asset value, which is the fund’s share price. Funds compute this value by dividing the total net assets by the total number of shares.

Net Assets The month-end net assets of the mutual fund, recorded in millions of dollars. Net-asset figures are useful in gauging a fund’s size, agility, and popularity. They help determine

whether a small company fund, for example, can remain in its investment-objective category if its asset base reaches an ungainly size.

Overall Rating The equal weighted average of the Return Composite and the Sharpe Composite. The Return Composite is the equal weighted average of the 3, 5, and 10 year

category return percentiles. The Sharpe Composite is the equal weighted average of the 3 and 5 year category sharpe percentiles.

Prospectus A fund's formal written statement, generally issued on an annual basis. In this statement the fund sets forth its proposed purposes and goals, and other facts (e.g.: history

and investment objective) that an investor should know in order to make an informed decision.

Prospectus Objective Indicates a particular fund’s investment goals, based on the wording in a fund's prospectus.

R-squared (R2) measures the degree to which movement in one variable is related to the movement in another variable. Portfolios with a high R-squared will react similarly to various

market conditions. By combining investments with low correlations, an investor can reduce the overall risk within a portfolio.

Risk Basically there are four types of risk: 1) inflation risk means your money may not earn enough in the long run because as prices go up the value of your money goes down;

2) market risk means you could lose money because the price of a stock may go down; 3) credit risk means a company or organization that borrowed your money may not be able to pay it

back; and 4) interest rate risk means you could lose money because as interest rates go up the value of bond investments goes down.

Russell 1000 Consists of the 1000 largest companies within the Russell 3000 index. Also known as the Market-Oriented Index, because it represents the group of stocks from which

most active money managers choose. The returns published for the index are total returns, which include reinvestment of dividends.

Russell 1000 Growth Market-capitalization weighted index of those firms in the Russell 1000 with higher price-to-book ratios and higher forecasted growth values. The Russell 1000

includes the largest 1000 firms in the Russell 3000, which represents approximately 98% of the investable US equity market.

Russell 1000 Value Market-capitalization weighted index of those firms in the Russell 1000 with lower price-to-book ratios and lower forecasted growth values. The Russell 1000

includes the largest 1000 firms in the Russell 3000, which represents approximately 98% of the investable US equity market.

Russell 2000 Consists of the smallest 2000 companies in the Russell 3000 Index, representing approximately 7% of the Russell 3000 total market capitalization. The returns published

for the index are total returns, which include reinvestment of dividends.

Russell 2000 Growth Market-weighted total return index that measures the performance of companies within the Russell 2000 Index having higher price-to-book ratios and higher

forecasted growth values. The Russell 2000 Index includes the 2000 firms from the Russell 3000 Index with the smallest market capitalizations. The Russell 3000 Index represents 98%

of the of the investable US equity market.

Russell 2000 Value Market-weighted total return index that measures the performance of companies within the Russell 2000 Index having lower price-to-book ratios and lower forecasted

growth values. The Russell 2000 Index includes the 2000 firms from the Russell 3000 Index with the smallest market capitalizations. The Russell 3000 Index represents 98% of the of

the investable US equity market.

Share Classes Shares of the same fund that offer different shareholder rights and obligations, such as different fee and load charges. Common share classes are A (front-end load), B

(deferred fees), C (no sales charge and a relatively high annual 12b-1 fee, such as 1.00%). Multi-class funds hold the same investment portfolio for all classes, and differ only in their

surrounding fee structure.

Sharpe Ratio measures the risk-adjusted performance of a portfolio. It is calculated by subtracting the risk-free rate of return (i.e., the return on treasury bills) from the return of the

portfolio as a whole, then dividing by the standard deviation of the returns. The higher the Sharpe Ratio, the better the risk-adjusted performance of the portfolio.

Standard Deviation A statistical measurement of dispersion about an average, which, for a mutual fund, depicts how widely the returns varied over a certain period of time. Investors use

the standard deviation of historical performance to try to predict the range of returns that are most likely for a given fund. When a fund has a high standard deviation, the predicted range of

performance is wide, implying greater volatility.

Tax-deferred earnings You don't have to pay taxes on any earnings in your 401(k) until you withdraw your money. The money in a 401(k) can grow faster than with other types of savings

plans, because the earnings you accumulate, if any, are also tax-deferred.

APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY (CONTINUED)



Page 21 of 22




APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY (CONCLUDED)Turnover Ratio A measure of the percentage of holdings that have been "turned over" -- replaced with other holdings -- within a portfolio during the course of a year.

Variable funds Investments that fluctuate with market conditions. Unlike guaranteed investments, such as bonds or CDs, variable funds don't guarantee a specific rate of return. They do

offer potential for higher earnings in return for higher degree of market risk.

World Stock Category An international fund having more than 10% of stocks invested in the US. Also known as global funds. Foreign Investments involve special risks, including

currency fluctuations and political developments.



Page 22 of 22




PLAN REVIEW

CITY OF EDMOND 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN | 98719-01Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2013

Executive Summary

Plan Assets

Asset Allocation

Plan Utilization

Participant Details

Contribution Analysis

Distributions

Loans

Web Site & KeyTalk® Utilization

Reality Investing® Advisory Services

Services Offered

Glossary of Terms

TABLE OF CONTENTS

City of Edmond 457 Deferred Compensation Plan98719-01 Reporting Period Ending December 31, 2013 For Plan Sponsor Use Only

Plan Assets

Plan Asset Balance

Account Reduction Loan Balance

Total Plan Asset Balance

As of 12/31/2012 As of 12/31/2013

$9,980,595 $11,246,863 $13,080,283

$10,319,791 $11,647,045 $13,523,130

Cash Flow

01/01/2011

to

12/31/2011

Contributions

Distributions

Net Cash Flow

$859,939

$253,107

$606,832

01/01/2012

to

12/31/2012

01/01/2013

to

12/31/2013

$866,347

$622,475

$243,873

$915,626

$1,140,752

$-225,126

As of 12/31/2011

$339,196 $400,182 $442,848

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


Participants 12/31/2011

Eligible Employees

Participants Contributing

Active Participants with Balances

12/31/2012 12/31/2013

319 316 323

263 262 270

295 295 308

Cash Flow

Terminated Participants with Balances

Participants with Loan Balance

35 39 38

Plan Utilization 12/31/2011

Participation Rate

Average Participant Paycheck Contribution Dollar Amount**

Average Participant Paycheck Contribution Percentage Rate*

82.45% 82.91%

$137 $121

6.17% 5.00%

Average Participant Contribution Amount***

Average Participant Balance

$3,162

$30,237

$3,307

$33,669

12/31/2012 12/31/2013

83.59%

$133

5.71%

$3,270

$37,794

Investment Options in Plan with a Balance 22 22 23

Figures provided represent plan information as of the reporting date listed. Please refer to the Glossary of Terms for a description of each figure's calculation.

*If your plan only allows participant paycheck elections by amount, this will reflect 0%.

**If your plan only allows participant paycheck elections by percent, this will reflect $0.

***Average of total contributions during the reporting period.

716363

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


The average number of investment options offered

in Defined Contribution plans is 19.90.*

*Source: PLANSPONSOR Defined Contribution Survey, 2012,

457 Plans

$0

$2,000,000

$4,000,000

$6,000,000

$8,000,000

$10,000,000

$12,000,000

$14,000,000

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

Your plan's total asset balance is illustrated here. Total asset balance includes the balances of all employed and previously

employed participants, in addition to plan forfeiture assets. Total loan balance includes all outstanding loans.

Plan Asset History

% Change in Plan Assets

Number of Investment Options

12/31/2012 to 12/31/2013

12/31/2011 to 12/31/2012

As of 12/31/2013, your plan offered 19 investment

options.

16.11%

12.86%

Plan Asset Balance Account Reduction Loan Balance

Plan Asset History

12/31/2013 $13,523,130

12/31/2012 $11,647,045

12/31/2011 $10,319,791

(Includes Plan Asset Balance and Account Reduction

Loan Balance)

PLAN ASSETS


Asset Class

Number of

Participants

% of

Total

Assets

As of

12/31/2013

Number of

Participants

% of

Total

Assets

As of

12/31/2012Investment Option

ASSET ALLOCATION

Asset AllocationAsset Allocation Great-West Aggressive Profile II Fund I $250,683 25 $403,423 362.23% 3.08%

Asset Allocation Great-West Conserv Profile II Fund I $5,562 5 $7,955 90.05% 0.06%

Asset Allocation Great-West Mod Aggr Profile II Fund I $280,183 19 $407,450 272.49% 3.11%

Asset Allocation Great-West Mod Conserv Profile II Fund I $39,784 10 $34,763 100.35% 0.27%

Asset Allocation Great-West Moderate Profile II Fund I $463,406 31 $586,331 354.12% 4.48%

$1,039,618 $1,439,9229.24% 11.01%

International FundInternational Fund American Funds EuroPacific Gr R3 $523,824 152 $695,742 1634.66% 5.32%

International Fund Thornburg International Value - A $644,830 166 $534,623 1515.73% 4.09%

$1,168,654 $1,230,36510.39% 9.41%

SpecialtySpecialty Invesco Real Estate A $426,868 159 $389,985 1583.80% 2.98%

$426,868 $389,9853.80% 2.98%

Small CapSmall Cap Heartland Value Fund $183,291 98 $152,497 981.63% 1.17%

Small Cap Royce Low Priced Stock Svc $116,543 92 $148,370 1031.04% 1.13%

$299,834 $300,8682.67% 2.30%

Mid CapMid Cap ASTON/Fairpointe Mid Cap N $793,555 170 $1,377,998 1807.06% 10.53%

Mid Cap Baron Growth Retail $778,982 160 $1,105,921 1736.93% 8.45%

$1,572,537 $2,483,91913.98% 18.99%

Large CapLarge Cap BlackRock Equity Index - Collective F $797,105 152 $922,188 1587.09% 7.05%

Large Cap Davis New York Venture A $982,880 135 $1,345,927 1448.74% 10.29%

Large Cap Invesco Growth & Income A $388,675 110 $619,397 1393.46% 4.74%

Large Cap Janus Forty Class S $274,582 102 $397,631 1192.44% 3.04%

Large Cap Jensen Quality Growth R $125,911 29 $162,088 281.12% 1.24%

$2,569,154 $3,447,23122.84% 26.35%

BalancedBalanced Oakmark Equity & Income II $419,152 36 $528,176 433.73% 4.04%

$419,152 $528,1763.73% 4.04%

Bond Bond PIMCO Total Return Admin $1,439,662 177 $1,584,161 18012.80% 12.11%

$1,439,662 $1,584,16112.80% 12.11%

Fixed Fixed Great-West Portfolio Fund (*) $2,001,624 80 $1,395,560 7617.80% 10.67%

$2,001,624 $1,395,56017.80% 10.67%

BrokerageBrokerage TD Ameritrade SDB Money Market $111,493 10 $23,794 110.99% 0.18%

Brokerage TD Ameritrade SDB Money Market Roth $0 0 $7,987 10.00% 0.06%

Brokerage TD Ameritrade SDB Securities $198,269 10 $248,316 91.76% 1.90%


Asset Class

Number of

Participants

% of

Total

Assets

As of

12/31/2013

Number of

Participants

% of

Total

Assets

As of

12/31/2012Investment Option

ASSET ALLOCATION

$309,762 $280,0972.75% 2.14%

Grand Total

*Your plan's default investment election(s).

$11,246,863 $13,080,283100.00% 100.00%


4%20%

3%4%17%

25%1%

10%17%

Age <=2920 Participants

5%7%1%1%7%

14%9%

30%

27%

Age >=60

11%9%3%2%

19%26%4%

12%11%2%

Asset Allocation 11%International Fund 9%Specialty 3%

Small Cap 2%Mid Cap 19%Large Cap 26%

Balanced 4%

Bond 12%Fixed 11%

Brokerage 2%

Total: 100%

Your Plan's Asset Allocation

11%17%

4%5%24%

26%

2%5%6%0%

Age 30 - 39

14%10%

3%3%22%

27%

3%7%4%7%

Age 40 - 49

12%6%4%0%

21%32%

3%11%11%0%

Age 50 - 59

Age Unknown

***There are no assets for this age group***

346 Participants

87 Participants

0 Participants

37 Participants98 Participants

104 Participants

ASSET ALLOCATION BY AGE (AS OF 12/31/2013)


The number of investment options that plan participants direct contributions, as well as the number of investment options where

balances are held in plan participant accounts, is shown here, by age and gender.

Average Number of Investment Option Allocations for New Contributions As of 12/31/2013

Average Number of Investment Options for Existing Account Balances As of 12/31/2013

Age

<=29

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

>=60

Unknown

Male Female Unknown

Age UnknownFemaleMale

<=29

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

>=60

Unknown

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

0

2

4

6

8

10

Average by Gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

0

2

4

6

8

10

Average by Gender

8

7

5

4

6

0

5

8

6

5

4

0

0

4

0

0

0

0

5

4

7

5

6

0

9

7

6

4

5

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Male Female Unknown

ASSET ALLOCATION


Your plan's percentage of participants, by age, with balances in Risk / Date Based Investment Options as well as other investment

options, is illustrated here.

Risk / Date Based Investment Options

and Other Investment Options

Other Investment Options Only

5.00% 10.20% 12.50% 9.20% 8.11% 0.00%

15.00% 5.41% 12.24% 17.31% 16.09% 0.00%

80.00% 86.49% 77.55% 70.19% 74.71% 0.00%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

Risk / Date Based Investment Options

Only

ASSET ALLOCATION (AS OF 12/31/2013)


100%

Age <=29

50%

13%

25%13%

Age 30 - 39

17%8%

25%25%

25%

Age 40 - 49

20%

20%20%

40%

Age 50 - 59

33%

67%

Age >=60

Age Unknown

28%

7%21%

14%

31%

Great-West Aggressive Profile II Fund I 28%

Great-West Conserv Profile II Fund I 7%

Great-West Mod Aggr Profile II Fund I 21%

Great-West Mod Conserv Profile II Fund I 14%

Great-West Moderate Profile II Fund I 31%

Total: 100%

Percentage of Participants with Balances inOne Risk / Date Based Investment Option

***There are no balances for this age group***

29 Participants

8 Participants

12 Participants

5 Participants

3 Participants

0 Participants

1 Participant

ASSET ALLOCATION (AS OF 12/31/2013)


Your plan's participation rates by age are shown here. Your plan's participation rate equals the total number of participants making

regular contributions divided by the total number of eligible employees.

Average Participation Rate by Age

Participation Rate

Defaulted Participants

The average Defined Contribution plan participation

rate for eligible employees is 71.90%.*


457 Plans

Your plan has 270 employees participating in the

plan. As of 12/31/2013, 1 of these employees have

not made an active investment election and their

contributions are currently being allocated to the

plan's default investment option.0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

18

# of Contributing

Participants as of

12/31/201383 65 23 081

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

As of 12/31/2013, the participation rate for your plan

was 83.59%.

PLAN UTILIZATION


Your plan's average participant contribution amount by age is shown here. Your plan's average participant contribution amount

equals the total amount of contributions divided by the total number of contributing participants.

Average Participant Contribution Amount by Age

Paycheck Contribution Information

Average Participant Contribution Amount by Age

As of 12/31/2013, your plan's average participant

paycheck contribution percentage rate was 5.71%

per payroll period.**

As of 12/31/2013, your plan's average participant

paycheck contribution dollar amount was $133 per

payroll period.**

**If your plan only allows participant paycheck elections by percent

(or amount) the value will reflect as 0% (or $0).

The average deferral rate among non-highly

compensated participants in Defined Contribution

plans is 5.20%.*

*Source: Profit Sharing/401(k) Council of America, 55th Annual

Survey of Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plans, 2012

Age

<=29

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

>=60

Unknown

2011

$2,518

2012 2013

$2,891

$2,946

$3,363

$5,743

$0

$2,149

$2,886

$3,194

$3,679

$5,786

$0

$1,806

$2,717

$3,226

$3,747

$5,213

$0

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

23 065818318

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

# of Contributing

Participants as of

12/31/2013

PLAN UTILIZATION


Your plan's average participant balance and the average number of investment options held by your plan participants are shown

here.

Average Participant Balance

Number of Investment Options

As of 12/31/2013, participants in your plan held an

average of 5.93 investment options.

On average, participants hold 4.40 investment

options in their Defined Contribution plan account.*


457 Plans

# of Participants

with a Balance

330 334 346

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

$30,237

$33,669

$37,794

PARTICIPANT DETAILS


Here is a breakdown of your plan's average participant balance by age, by year.

Average Participant Balance by AgeYour Plan

2012 20132011Age

<=29 $9,825$10,743$9,446

30 - 39

$0$0$0Unknown

$64,183$55,205$63,105>=60

$48,975$51,262$45,58450 - 59

$38,051$30,845$26,84740 - 49

$23,341$19,049$15,083

Average Participant Account Balance ¹

*Source: Tabulations from the EBRI/ICI Participant-Directed

Retirement Plan Data Collection Project

Note: Information provided by the EBRI Issue Brief, No. 380,

December 2012, Page 8

¹Account Balances are participant account balances held in

401(k) plans at the participants' current employers and are net of

plan loans. Retirement savings held in plans at previous

employers or rolled over into IRAs are not included.

# of Participants

with a Balance as

of 12/31/201320 98 104 87 37 0

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

$37,794$33,669$30,237All Ages

The average participant account balance for year-end

2011 is $58,991.*

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

PARTICIPANT DETAILS


Average Account Balance - All Participants As of 12/31/2013

Average Account Balance - Contributing Participants As of 12/31/2013

Age

<=29

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

>=60

Unknown

Male Female Unknown

Age UnknownFemaleMale

<=29

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

>=60

Unknown

Average Account Balance

Your participants have an average balance of

approximately $37,794 in this plan.

$12,301

$92,583

$26,365

$40,018

$52,641

$0

$4,050

$30,771

$9,899

$31,833

$38,776

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$4,477

$39,006

$6,732

$36,331

$49,273

$0

$12,606

$64,815

$30,047

$46,968

$44,567

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

Male Female Unknown

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

Average by Gender

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

Average by Gender

PARTICIPANT DETAILS


The number and percentage of participants who have an account balance but have not made a contribution during the reporting

period, by age and gender, are illustrated here.

Percentage of Participants with an Account Balance and No Current Paycheck Contributions During the Period

Number of Participants with an Account Balance and No Current Paycheck Contributions During the Period

Non-Contributing Participants

23.12% of your participants with an

account balance are currently not

contributing to their DC plan.

Industry Percentage of

Contributing Participants

On average, only 57% of American

workers are saving for retirement*

*Source: EBRI Issue Brief No. 384, The

2013 Retirement Confidence Survey

Male Female Unknown

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Percentage by Gender

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

0

20

40

60

Total by Gender

PARTICIPANT DETAILS


Your plan's contribution amounts by money type are shown here.

Contributions by Money Type

Contribution Detail

Money Type

01/01/2011

to

12/31/2011

Before Tax

After Tax

Roth

Rollover

Employer

Total

$831,531

$0

$0

$28,408

$0

$859,939

$824,830

$866,347

$0

$24

$41,494

$0

$789,230

$915,626

$0

$25,000

$101,396

$0

01/01/2012

to

12/31/2012

01/01/2013

to

12/31/2013

Before Tax After Tax Roth Rollover Employer

$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

CONTRIBUTIONS


Number of

Participants

Contributing

% of

Total

Number of

Participants

Contributing

% of

TotalAsset Class Investment Option

Contributions

01/01/2012 -

12/31/2012

Contributions

01/01/2013 -

12/31/2013

CONTRIBUTION ANALYSIS

Asset Allocation 2.49% 3.30%Great-West Aggressive Profile II Fund I $21,586 20 $30,180 29Asset AllocationAsset Allocation 0.18% 0.15%Great-West Conserv Profile II Fund I $1,586 3 $1,407 6Asset Allocation 2.83% 3.00%Great-West Mod Aggr Profile II Fund I $24,541 15 $27,470 20Asset Allocation 0.64% 0.67%Great-West Mod Conserv Profile II Fund I $5,515 6 $6,133 7Asset Allocation 2.67% 3.28%Great-West Moderate Profile II Fund I $23,110 20 $30,069 24

8.81% 10.40%$76,337 $95,258

International Fund 6.21% 6.20%American Funds EuroPacific Gr R3 $53,760 130 $56,783 129International FundInternational Fund 7.29% 5.98%Thornburg International Value - A $63,129 137 $54,796 133

13.49% 12.19%$116,889 $111,579

Specialty 3.91% 3.48%Invesco Real Estate A $33,858 130 $31,829 134Specialty

3.91% 3.48%$33,858 $31,829

Small Cap 3.54% 1.56%Heartland Value Fund $30,653 119 $14,277 113Small CapSmall Cap 2.57% 1.31%Royce Low Priced Stock Svc $22,228 122 $12,002 99

6.10% 2.87%$52,881 $26,279

Mid Cap 6.91% 6.37%ASTON/Fairpointe Mid Cap N $59,864 142 $58,293 144Mid CapMid Cap 8.36% 8.48%Baron Growth Retail $72,441 132 $77,645 137

15.27% 14.85%$132,304 $135,938

Large Cap 7.57% 8.85%BlackRock Equity Index - Collective F $65,568 127 $80,995 127Large CapLarge Cap 5.99% 5.49%Davis New York Venture A $51,875 132 $50,268 135Large Cap 2.46% 3.15%Invesco Growth & Income A $21,350 123 $28,802 123Large Cap 5.01% 4.20%Janus Forty Class S $43,433 106 $38,446 116

21.03% 21.68%$182,227 $198,510

Balanced 3.91% 4.11%Oakmark Equity & Income II $33,865 36 $37,627 47Balanced

3.91% 4.11%$33,865 $37,627

Bond 9.06% 11.87%PIMCO Total Return Admin $78,463 133 $108,710 134Bond

9.06% 11.87%$78,463 $108,710

Fixed 18.41% 18.56%Great-West Portfolio Fund (*) $159,524 95 $169,896 58Fixed

18.41% 18.56%$159,524 $169,896

Grand Total 100.00% 100.00%

*Your plan's default investment election(s).

$866,347 $915,626


Total Paycheck Contributions From 01/01/2013 to 12/31/2013

Total Rollover Contributions From 01/01/2013 to 12/31/2013

Average Contributions

Your participants contribute an

average of $3,270 per year.*

*Average of total contributions during the

reporting period.

Industry Average of

Participants Contributing

In comparison, based on

NAGDCA survey results, the

average deferral for

governmental DC plans is about

$3,884.*

*Source: National Association of

Governmental Defined Contribution

Administrators, 2011 Survey of Defined

Male Female Unknown

$0

$40,000

$80,000

$120,000

$160,000

$200,000

$240,000

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

$4,000

Average by Gender

$0

$4,000

$8,000

$12,000

$16,000

$20,000

$24,000

$28,000

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

Average by Gender

CONTRIBUTION ANALYSIS


Please Note: There are 8 eligible, employed participants in your plan who have not elected a paycheck contribution percentage / amount.

Paycheck Contributions per Pay Period

As a Percentage of Salary

Paycheck Contributions per Pay Period

In Dollars

Percent

# of

Participants % of Total Dollars

# of

Participants % of Total

Average Paycheck Contribution

The average deferral rate among non-highly compensated participants in Defined Contribution plans is 5.20%.*

*Source: Profit Sharing/401(k) Council of America, 55th Annual Survey of Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plans, 2012

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

9%

10+%

$0 - 25

$26 - 50

$51 - 75

$76 - 100

$101 - 125

$126 - 150

$151 - 175

$176 - 200

$201 - 225

$226 - 250

>$250

107

6

19

2

15

2

6

62

14

36

22

3

0 0.00%

3 17.65%

1 5.88%

2 11.76%

1 5.88%

6 35.29%

0 0.00%

0 0.00%

1 5.88%

0 0.00%

36.77%

2.06%

6.53%

0.69%

5.15%

0.69%

2.06%

21.31%

4.81%

12.37%

7.56%

17.65%

CONTRIBUTION ANALYSIS (AS OF 12/31/2013)


An overview of your plan's distribution activity is shown here, including distribution reasons, number of distributions and percentage

of rollovers / transfers versus payment to self.

Reasons for Distribution As of 12/31/2013

Percentages are based on dollar amount of distributions.

Distributions

Number

01/01/2013 to 12/31/2013

01/01/2012 to 12/31/2012

01/01/2011 to 12/31/2011

$1,140,752

$622,475

$253,107

21

24

27

84.07%

77.89%

9.85%

Industry Average

According to a national study of pre-retirement termination

(i.e. job changes) for those participants between age 55-70,

39% transferred their money to an IRA, 7% took a cash

payment, 47% left the money in their plan, and 6%

transferred to a new employer pension plan.*

*Source: LIMRA, Asset Retention: Keys to Success in the Rollover

Market (2011)

Comparing Common Distribution Reasons

Percentages are based on dollar amount of distributions.

2%

88%

7%3%

Death Benefit De Minimis In-Service

Retirement Separation of Service Other

As of 12/31/2013

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Retirement Separation of Service In-Service

Percentage of

Distribution

Amounts

Rolled Over /

TransferredAmount

Rollovers / Transfers Payments to Self

95.80% 4.20% 56.32% 43.68% 0.00% 0.00%

DISTRIBUTIONS


$0

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

Top Pro

vider

s

Oth

er

0

2

4

6

Top Pro

vider

s

Oth

er

Full Withdrawal Rollover IRA Summary by Top Providers by Number of Participants

Full Withdrawal Rollover IRA Summary by Top Providers by Dollars

Participant Distributions

The top providers represent

100.00% of total assets

withdrawn and rolled to an IRA.

Percentage of Assets

The top providers represent

100.00% of total participants

withdrawn and rolled to an IRA.

0

1

2

3

AM

ERIP

RIS

E

FINANCIA

L

EDW

ARD

JONES

PERSH

ING L

LC

SCOTTR

ADE

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

AM

ERIP

RIS

E

FINANCIA

L

EDW

ARD

JONES

PERSH

ING L

LC

SCOTTR

ADE

DISTRIBUTIONS (FROM 01/01/2013 TO 12/31/2013)


The total amount of all plan participant rollovers, contributions and withdrawals made, by month, are reflected here.

Total Contribution and Withdrawal Summary*

Month Rollover

Payroll

Contributions Withdrawals

*Monthly totals may not exactly match the amounts for the reporting periods on the Executive Summary pages due to any retroactive changes or corrections made.

Rollover Payroll Contributions Withdrawals

$0

$0

$0

$25,000

$0

$0

$7,792

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$66,283

$64,959

$64,660

$64,486

$98,098

$66,347

$65,892

$69,113

$70,429

$72,141

$107,780

$72,645

$8,750

$8,750

$19,735

$646,935

$21,894

$8,750

$13,887

$83,046

$272,705

$54,638

Jan 2013

Feb 2013

Mar 2013

Apr 2013

May 2013

Jun 2013

Jul 2013

Aug 2013

Sep 2013

Oct 2013

Nov 2013

Dec 2013

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

Jan 2

013

Feb 2

013

Mar

201

3

Apr 2

013

May

201

3

Jun 2

013

Jul 2

013

Aug 2

013

Sep 2

013

Oct

201

3

Nov

2013

Dec

201

3

$34,086

$20,208

DISTRIBUTIONS


Hardship Withdrawals (in Dollars)

Average Hardship Withdrawals (in Dollars)

Number of Participants Taking Hardships

Male Female Unknown

($6)

($4)

($2)

$0

$2

$4

$6

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

($6)

($4)

($2)

$0

$2

$4

$6

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

***There are no hardships*** ***There are no hardships***

***There are no hardships***

DISTRIBUTIONS (FROM 01/01/2013 TO 12/31/2013)


Here is a breakdown of your plan's total outstanding loan balance, newly issued loans and loans that have defaulted during each

period. The number of plan participants with loans and the average loan balance are also shown.

Total Outstanding Loan Balance

Loan Details

As of 12/31/2013, 71 participants in your plan had an

outstanding loan. The average loan balance of all outstanding

participant loans for your plan was $6,237.

As of 12/31/2013, 21.00% of your plan participants had an

outstanding loan.

For plans that do offer loans, an average of 11.70% of plan

participants have an outstanding loan.*

*Source: PLANSPONSOR Defined Contribution Survey, 2012, 457 Plans

New Loans

01/01/2013 to 12/31/2013

01/01/2012 to 12/31/2012

01/01/2011 to 12/31/2011

Defaulted Loans

Number Amount

45

42

42

$392,519

$433,504

$321,444

Number Amount

0

1

2

$0

$479

$14,037

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013

$339,196

$400,182

$442,848

# of Loans 63 63 71

LOANS


01/01/2011

to

12/31/2011

01/01/2012

to

12/31/2012

01/01/2013

to

12/31/2013

Activity Detail Activity Summary

WEB SITE

182

7,251

196

7,693

204

8,031

Account InquiriesAccount Changes

2013

2012

2011

*We recently redesigned the participant website and renamed some categories reported in this chart. As a result, you may see similarly named categories representing the same transaction.

TotalsAverage Distinct Users 60 61 67Total Logins 4,255 3,978 4,520

Account InquiriesAccount Balance 922 298 99Account Summary 375 0 0Account and Certificates Overview (*) 1,357 2,093 2,482Allocation and Asset Allocation (*) 212 423 193Allocations 110 0 0Asset Allocation 28 92 21Balance Comparison 164 70 84Disbursement Summary 145 162 133Electronic Statements 59 0 0Fund Overview and Prospectus (*) 157 432 514Fund Returns 193 253 151Fund Values 292 354 263Investment Overview 193 147 157Personal Rate of Return 1,061 1,028 727Statement on Demand 243 0 0Statement on Demand and Quarterly (*) 126 196 164Transaction History 2,394 2,145 2,263

8,031 7,693 7,251Totals

Account ChangesAllocations 36 28 19Deferral 44 61 52Fund Transfers 55 48 40Loan Requests 38 33 39Rebalancer 13 10 7Registration 18 16 25

204 196 182Totals


01/01/2011

to

12/31/2011

01/01/2012

to

12/31/2012

01/01/2013

to

12/31/2013

Activity Detail Activity Summary

KeyTalk®

6

21

11

22

4

15

Account InquiriesAccount Changes

2013

2012

2011

TotalsAverage Distinct Users 5 7 6Opt to Client Service Representative 91 87 84Total Calls 123 127 119

Account InquiriesAccount Balance 0 0 3Allocations 2 1 0Loans 11 19 18Transaction History 2 2 0

15 22 21Totals

Account ChangesDeferrals 0 4 0Loan Requests 4 7 6

4 11 6Totals


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

Utilization by Service and Age - Active Participants with a Balance As of 12/31/2013

Utilization by Service and Age - Active and Terminated Participants with a Balance As of 12/31/2013

Advice Managed Accounts

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

<= 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 >= 60 Unknown

REALITY INVESTING® ADVISORY SERVICES


Administrative ServicesAvailable Today /

InformationAdministrative Services

Available Today /

Information

Years on System

Online Statements

Beneficiary Recordkeeping

Online Enrollment

Deferral Recordkeeping

Automatic Enrollment

Default Percentage

Auto Escalation Percentage

Loans Available

Online Loan Initiation

Loan File Feeds

To-Do List

9.24

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

N/A

Auto Escalation Percentage Maximum

N/A

N/A

Yes

Yes

No

No

SERVICES OFFERED

Advisory Services Yes

SecureFoundation No

IRA Rollover Solution Yes

Approval Services Yes

QDIA Notices No


Term Description

Funds in Plan with a Balance Count of funds or investment options within the plan’s fund lineup that have

balances greater than $0.01 are included. This includes any employer stock

awaiting purchase and self-directed brokerage products, as applicable.

Eligible Employees Employees who have met age and service requirements and are actively

employed. The count is based upon employee information that has been

transmitted to or input by the plan on the recordkeeping system.

Distributions All full and partial withdrawals for every disbursement reason and tax reason code.

In this report, the five most common distribution types are illustrated individually;

any other types are combined into the “Other” category.

Defaulted Loan A loan that is not current on all loan assessments, which are due by the prior

quarter-end; when this occurs, the loan will default as of the next quarter-end. The

outstanding amount with accrued interest as of the default date will be tax-reported

for the calendar year in which it defaulted.

Account Reduction Loan Balance The total amount of all active, outstanding loans held by plan participants. Loans

that have been offset or deemed as a distribution are not included.

Active Participants with Balances Plan participants who are actively employed and have a balance.

Contributions Amounts deposited for all money types, both regular payroll and single rollovers.

Assets that are added to the plan during conversion to our recordkeeping system

are not included.

Loan Balance (Average) The average of all outstanding loan balances in the plan. This includes defaulted

loan balances, but does not include offset or deemed loan balances.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS


Participant Paycheck Contribution

Percentage Rate (Average)

Term Description

For plans that utilize our deferral recordkeeping services, this is the average rate

of all percentage deferrals that have been established by actively employed

participants for any held employee money types during the reporting period. Only

participant deferral amounts that are greater than 1% are included.

Net Cash Flow The plan’s total contributions less total distributions. Forfeited amounts and loan

balances are not included in this calculation.

Participant Balance (Average) The average balance of all actively employed and terminated plan participants.

Only participant balances that are $0.01 or greater are included. This balance

does not include any outstanding loan amounts.

Participant Contribution Amount

(Average)

The total amount of plan contributions for all money types divided by the number

of contributing participants, both currently employed or employed during the

reporting period.

Participant Paycheck Contribution

Dollar Amount (Average)

For plans that utilize our deferral recordkeeping services, this is the average

amount of all dollar amount deferrals that have been established by actively

employed participants for any held employee money types during the reporting

period. Only participant deferral amounts that are greater than $0.01 are included.

Participants Contributing The number of actively employed plan participants who have regular payroll

contributions during the reporting period.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS


Term Description

Terminated Participants with

Balances

Plan participants who are no longer employed, but have a balance.

Participants with Loan Balance The number of individual plan participants who have an outstanding loan balance.

This includes participants with defaulted loans, but does not include participants

with offset or deemed loans.

The percentage of the eligible employees participating in the plan; this figure is

derived by dividing the total number of contributing participants by the total number

of eligible employees. The rate is based upon participant information that is

transmitted to or input by the plan on the recordkeeping system.

Participation Rate

Payments to Self A distribution that is taken for any qualifying reason in which the distribution

proceeds are made payable directly to the participant.

Plan Asset Balance A rollup of all contributions and deposit types, transfers in / out, interest and

dividends, change in value, fees and withdrawals, and forfeiture assets.

Rollovers A distribution that is taken for a qualifying reason in which the distribution

proceeds are rolled over into an eligible plan, traditional IRA or Roth IRA.

Total Participating The number of eligible participants actively contributing to and participating in the

plan. The rate is based upon participant information that is transmitted to or input

by the plan on the recordkeeping system.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS


Term Description

Transfers A distribution that is taken for a qualifying reason in which the proceeds are

disbursed as a permissible plan transfer.

Total Plan Asset Balance A rollup of all contributions and deposit types, transfers in / out, interest and

dividends, changes in value, fees and withdrawals, and forfeiture assets plus the

total amount of all active, outstanding participant loans.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

Core securities, when offered, are offered through GWFS Equities, Inc. and/or other broker dealers.

GWFS Equities, Inc., Member FINRA/SIPC, is a wholly owned subsidiary of Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company.

Great-West FinancialSM refers to products and services provided by Great -West Life & Annuity Insurance Company (GWL&A), Corporate Headquarters: Greenwood

Village, CO; Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company of New York, Home Office: White Plains, NY; its subsidiaries and affiliates. The trademarks, logos, service

marks, and design elements used are owned by GWL&A.

Great-West Retirement Services® refers to products and services of Great -West Financial companies, as applicable, and FASCore, LLC (FASCore Administrators, LLC in

California), subsidiaries of GWL&A.

Managed account, guidance and advice services are offered by Advised Assets Group, LLC (AAG), a federally registered investment adviser and wholly owned subsidiary

of Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company and an affiliate of Great -West Life & Annuity Insurance Company of New York, Home Office White Plains, New York .

More information can be found at www.adviserinfo.sec.gov.


Participation by Asset Class and Investment OptionPlan Number: 98719-01

Plan Name: City of Edmond 457 Deferred Compensation Plan

Effective Date: 12/31/2013

0K

500K

1000K

1500K

2000K

2500K

3000K

3500K

Asset

Allo

catio

n

Balan

ced

Bond

Broke

rage

Fixed

Inte

rnat

iona

l

Larg

e Cap

Mid C

ap

Small C

ap

Specialty

Valu

e

Participation by Asset Class - Investment Value

11.0%

4.0%

12.1%

2.1%

10.7%

9.4%

26.4%

19.0%

2.3% 3.0%

Asset Allocation 11.0%Balanced 4.0%Bond 12.1%Brokerage 2.1%Fixed 10.7%International 9.4%Large Cap 26.4%Mid Cap 19.0%Small Cap 2.3%Specialty 3.0%

Total: 100.0%

Participation by Asset Class - Percent of Assets

Participants% of

Assets

Unit/Share

Value

SharesInvestment NameInvestment

ID

Asset

Class

Balance Inception To

Date Cost

P

l

a

n

N

u

m

b

e

P

l

a

n

N

a

m

D

i

v

i

s

i

o

n

B

a

s

i

D

i

v

i

s

i

o

n

V

a

l

u

D

i

v

i

s

i

o

n

N

a

m

Asset Allocation9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dMXAGP

Asset Allocation

$324,263.25GREAT-WEST AGGRESSIVE PROFILE II FUND I $403,423.36 49,018.634311 $8.23 3.08% 369

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dMXCNP

Asset Allocation

$8,321.22GREAT-WEST CONSERV PROFILE II FUND I $7,954.96 923.918896 $8.61 0.06% 99

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dMXMAP

Asset Allocation

$388,024.02GREAT-WEST MOD AGGR PROFILE II FUND I $407,449.77 46,459.494731 $8.77 3.12% 279

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dMXMCP

Asset Allocation

$34,673.89GREAT-WEST MOD CONSERV PROFILE II FUND I $34,763.00 3,820.110878 $9.10 0.27% 109

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dMXMDP

Asset Allocation

$592,835.95GREAT-WEST MODERATE PROFILE II FUND I $586,331.38 73,567.299409 $7.97 4.48% 35

Total: Asset Allocation9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Asset Allocation

$1,439,922.47 $1,348,118.33 11.01%

International9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dRERCX

International

$582,741.54AMERICAN FUNDS EUROPACIFIC GR R3 $695,741.97 14,455.473624 $48.13 5.32% 1639

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dTGVAX

International

$448,086.08THORNBURG INTERNATIONAL VALUE - A $534,622.61 17,031.619660 $31.39 4.09% 151

Total: International9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

International

$1,230,364.58 $1,030,827.62 9.41%

Specialty9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dIARAX

Specialty

$430,782.31INVESCO REAL ESTATE A $389,985.23 17,988.249354 $21.68 2.98% 158

Total: Specialty9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Specialty

$389,985.23 $430,782.31 2.98%

Small Cap9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dHT-VAL

Small Cap

$134,849.35HEARTLAND VALUE FUND $152,497.26 3,169.102611 $48.12 1.17% 989

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dRYLPX

Small Cap

$155,169.12ROYCE LOW PRICED STOCK SVC $148,370.40 10,893.570848 $13.62 1.13% 103

Total: Small Cap9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Small Cap

$300,867.66 $290,018.47 2.30%

Mid Cap9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dBGRFX

Mid Cap

$836,881.12BARON GROWTH RETAIL $1,105,920.71 15,281.480825 $72.37 8.45% 1739

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dCHTTX

Mid Cap

$1,035,291.95ASTON/FAIRPOINTE MID CAP N $1,377,998.37 31,339.512451 $43.97 10.53% 180

Total: Mid Cap9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Mid Cap

$2,483,919.08 $1,872,173.07 18.99%

Large Cap9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dACGIX

Large Cap

$506,955.49INVESCO GROWTH & INCOME A $619,396.52 22,923.633850 $27.02 4.74% 1399

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dDV-NYV

Large Cap

$1,087,870.29DAVIS NEW YORK VENTURE A $1,345,926.71 32,502.455514 $41.41 10.29% 1449

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dJENRX

Large Cap

$107,410.38JENSEN QUALITY GROWTH R $162,088.43 4,307.425794 $37.63 1.24% 28

PDBO1

Page 1 of 23/5/2014 6:51:07AM

Participants% of

Assets

Unit/Share

Value

SharesInvestment NameInvestment

ID

Asset

Class

Balance Inception To

Date Cost

P

l

a

n

N

u

m

b

e

P

l

a

n

N

a

m

D

i

v

i

s

i

o

n

B

a

s

i

D

i

v

i

s

i

o

n

V

a

l

u

D

i

v

i

s

i

o

n

N

a

m

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dJS-CAP

Large Cap

$345,606.48JANUS FORTY CLASS S $397,631.33 9,822.909321 $40.48 3.04% 1199

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dS18500

Large Cap

$622,194.66BLACKROCK EQUITY INDEX - COLLECTIVE F $922,188.16 49,408.219694 $18.66 7.05% 158

Total: Large Cap9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Large Cap

$3,447,231.15 $2,670,037.30 26.35%

Balanced9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dOARBX

Balanced

$450,968.65OAKMARK EQUITY & INCOME II $528,175.55 16,256.558429 $32.49 4.04% 43

Total: Balanced9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Balanced

$528,175.55 $450,968.65 4.04%

Bond9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dPI-TRT

Bond

$1,635,959.47PIMCO TOTAL RETURN ADMIN $1,584,160.53 148,190.885718 $10.69 12.11% 180

Total: Bond9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Bond

$1,584,160.53 $1,635,959.47 12.11%

Fixed9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dPORT

Fixed

GREAT-WEST PORTFOLIO FUND $1,395,559.82 10.67% 76

Total: Fixed9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Fixed

$1,395,559.82 10.67%

Brokerage9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dAMRTMM

Brokerage

TD AMERITRADE SDB MONEY MARKET $23,794.28 0.18% 119

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dAMRTMR

Brokerage

TD AMERITRADE SDB MONEY MARKET ROTH $7,986.78 0.06% 19

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

dAMRTSC

Brokerage

TD AMERITRADE SDB SECURITIES $248,315.74 1.90% 9

Total: Brokerage9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d

Brokerage

$280,096.80 2.14%

$13,080,282.87 $9,728,885.22 100.00%C

it

y

o

f

E

dPLAN TOTAL

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

9

8

7

1

9

-

0

C

it

y

o

f

E

d$3,518.90FORFEITURE BALANCE (INCLUDED IN ABOVE VALUES) $0.00

PDBO1

Page 2 of 23/5/2014 6:51:07AM


InformationAgenda ItemDiscussion and consideration of the analysis by DiMeo Schneider & Associates, LLC, of the 457Deferred Compensation Plan as of December, 2013.

BackgroundThis item was continued from the February meeting after discussion of the recommended changes to theplan. (The full analysis was provided in the February packet.)

The following items are change requests to Great-West as recommended by DiMeo Schneider:

• Explore changing Shareclass option as part of fee reduction for Baron Growth Retail and InvescoGrowth and Income (They do not have to be Baron Growth Instl and Invesco Growth and Income Y; weare open to Great-West options with lower expense ratios. We’d also like to look at any other shareclassoptions where you can see expense savings opportunities.)

• Explore Fund Replacement options for Heartland Value, Royce (now that I read the AAG review), andOakmark (If we do not add target dates funds, then leave OakMark alone. If we do, map OakMark fundsinto target date fund.)

• Remove Davis NY Venture A (no replacement necessary, we have several Large Cap options) (Mapinto new Investco fund)

• Discuss Target Date Funds to review for replacement of our risk-based funds

• Secure Foundation information for a insured option of target date funds

• Logistical mapping information from his mapping analyst at headquarters

• Remove Jensen(frozen account) and map into Janus


InformationAgenda ItemAccept the City Treasurer's month end investment reports for January 31st and February 28th, 2014.

Background

AttachmentsJanuary Investment ReportsFebruary Investment Reports

City of Edmond

Documents

Transcript of City of Edmond