IPEDS Finance Survey Expense Allocations Are Optional This Year
March 15, 2010
Public institutions should note that part C of the finance survey was revised and is optional for this year's collection cycle - for FY09 financial data. Part C adds columns that allow operation and maintenance of plant, depreciation, and interest expense to be allocated to all other functional expense categories. The expense allocation will be mandatory for next year's collection cycle (Spring 2011 for FY10 financial data).
The IPEDS National Help Desk is receiving calls from public institutions that are using the optional "new aligned finance form" rather than using the "old unaligned finance form". Apparently, some institutions are selecting the new aligned form to enter data without realizing that the new form requires the new expense allocation. These institutions are now asking for guidance on how they should allocate costs, and are expressing concern that the allocation will result in the finance survey not agreeing to their SRECNA.
NACUBO encourages public institutions to select the "old unaligned finance form" for data entry (unless your institution/state is prepared to allocate these expenses). We also encourage public institutions and state systems to carefully review NACUBO's Advisory Report 2010-1 for guidance in preparation for next year's allocation requirement.
- IPEDS Finance Survey Tutorial
- IPEDS National Help Desk: 877.225.2568
Director, Accounting Policy
- Comments on Form 1098-T Reporting Due Soon
- New ITIN Procedures For Certifying Acceptance Agents and International Students
- Higher Education Community Offers Comments on Web Accessibility Proposal
- 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