GASB Seeks Comments on SEA Performance Reporting
September 11, 2008
The GASB has issued a "Request for Response" document to gather feedback from constituents. The GASB’s objective is to develop guidelines - not accounting and reporting standards - for organizations that voluntarily choose to report on their service efforts and accomplishments.
The GASB acknowledges that it is beyond its scope to establish the goals and objectives of governmental organizations, including public colleges and universities. However, because SEA performance reporting can provide important qualitative information about a government’s effectiveness and accountability, the GASB seeks to assist organizations who want to develop and report such nonfinancial measures of service performance.
The GASB identifies four essential components of an effective SEA report and six qualitative characteristics of SEA performance information. The four components are:
- purpose and scope
- major goals and objectives
- key measures of SEA performance
- discussion and analysis of results and challenges
The six qualitative characteristics, as set forth in Concepts Statement No. 2, Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting, are:
NACUBO encourages public institutions to review the proposed guidelines and provide feedback to the GASB by October 31, 2008. Member institutions can also help inform NACUBO comments by providing by providing feedback to Sue Menditto, Director, accounting policy.
- NACUBO Expresses Concerns with ED Proposal to Expand Federal Financial Responsibility Rules
- IRS Proposes Modifications to 1098-T Reporting
- ED Policy to Require Annual Student Aid Compliance Audits Beginning FY17
- 2016 Intermediate Accounting and Reporting Fall
October 24-25, 2016
- ON-DEMAND: The CBO's Role in Diversity and Inclusion on Campus
- ON-DEMAND: The Clery Act: Strategic Planning to Mitigate Institutional Risk
- ON-DEMAND: Title IX: Key Issues Surrounding Institutional Compliance
- ON-DEMAND: NACUBO Live! Higher Education Accounting Forum
- ON-DEMAND: Responsibility Center Management: Two Different Perspectives