DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY 

PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 

SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 
2 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY 

PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT 

SEPTEMBER 30, 2014

CONTENTS 

 Page 

Agency Head Letter 4 

 

 

SECTION 1 – MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Management’s Discussion and Analysis 6 

SECTION 2 – PERFORMANCE SECTION 

Fiscal Year 2014 Performance Report 19 

SECTION 3 – FINANCIAL SECTION

Independent Auditor’s Report 41 

Basic Financial Statements 

Balance Sheets 44 

Statements of Net Cost 45 

Statements of Changes in Net Position 46 

Statements of Resources (Budgetary and Non-Budgetary) 47 

Notes to Financial Statements 49 
3 

CONTENTS (CONTINUED) 

 Page 

Other Information 

Combining Balance Sheets 59 

Combining Statements of Net Cost 61 

Combining Statements of Changes in Net Position 63 

Combining Reconciliations of Net Cost of Operations (Proprietary) to Budget 65 

Schedule of Expenditures 67 

 

Schedules of Grants Made 68 

Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting 

 and on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of the Financial 

 Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 69 
DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL CO-CHAIRMAN

REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS: 

236 SHARKEY AVENUE, STE. 400 

CLARKSDALE, MS 38614 

PHONE: (662) 624-8600 

FAX: (662) 624-8537 

WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE: 

444 NORTH CAPITOL, N.W., STE. 309 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001 

PHONE: (202) 434-4872 

FAX: (202) 434-4871 

Alabama · Arkansas · Illinois · Kentucky 

Louisiana · Mississippi · Missouri · Tennessee 

www.dra.gov 

November 17, 2014 

Shaun Donovan, Director 

The Office of Management and Budget 

725 17th Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20503 

Dear Director Donovan: 

Enclosed you will find the Delta Regional Authority’s (DRA) Performance and Accountability 

Report for FY 2014. This report is an accurate and comprehensive account of the Authority’s 

performance for FY 2014 and includes comparative financial statements for FY 2013 and FY 

2014. I am pleased to report that, to date, each and every one of DRA's independent, financial 

audits have been unqualified, demonstrating that DRA is a good steward of the people’s 

investment in this agency. 

The DRA governs a culturally rich region, comprised of 252 counties and parishes in eight states, 

yet daily life remains a struggle for many. Through its leadership, strategic economic 

development investments, policy initiatives, and innovative programming the DRA strives to 

create jobs, build communities, and improve the lives of the nearly 10 million residents of the 

Delta region.

In FY 2014, the DRA—through its States’ Economic Development Assistance Program 

(SEDAP)—invested $9,448,618 of its appropriation into 63 projects in its eight-state region. This 

investment leveraged $16,047,962 in other federal, state and local funds – a ratio of 1.7 to 1 – for 

a total project investment of $25,496,580. Additionally, the DRA’s investments attracted private 

investments totaling $3,530,000 - a ratio of 2 to 5. Ultimately, the DRA has leveraged 

$19,577,962 in other public and private investments for a total investment ratio of 2.1 to 1. 

With these investments, the 2014 DRA States’ Economic Development Assistance Program is 

expected to help achieve the following results: 

• 8,564 families provided with access to improved water and sewer; 

• 50 individuals trained for a 21st century workforce; and 

• 1,560 jobs created and retained. 

Over the course of 13 funding cycles, the DRA has invested $128,636,623 in 862 projects in its 

eight-state region, leveraging $697,093,218 in other federal, state and local funds at a ratio of 5.4 

to 1. Additionally, this investment has attracted $2,026,346,351 in private investment – a ratio of 

15.8 to 1 – for a total of $2,723,439,569 in leveraged public and private funds resulting in a 

leverage ratio of 21.2 to 1. 
REGIONAL HEADQUARTERS: 

236 SHARKEY AVENUE, STE. 400 

CLARKSDALE, MS 38614 

PHONE: (662) 624-8600 

FAX: (662) 624-8537 

WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE: 

444 NORTH CAPITOL, N.W., STE. 309 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20001 

PHONE: (202) 434-4872 

FAX: (202) 434-4871 

Alabama · Arkansas · Illinois · Kentucky 

Louisiana · Mississippi · Missouri · Tennessee 

www.dra.gov 

Since its inception, SEDAP has helped to accomplish the following results: 

• 28,047 families provided with access to improved water and sewer; 

• 5,529 individuals trained for a 21st century workforce; and 

• 18,202 jobs created and retained. 

In addition, the following future SEDAP outcomes are projected: 

• 33,114 families provided with access to improved water and sewer; 

• 19,806 individuals trained for a 21st century workforce; and 

• 22,849 jobs created and retained. 

As evidence by this report, numerous accomplishments in FY 2014 have been realized through 

the following programs and initiatives: 

States’ Economic Development Assistance Program (SEDAP); 

Affordable Care (ACA) Outreach and Enrollment Strategy; 

Delta Leadership Institute (DLI); 

Small Business & Entrepreneurship Initiative; 

Healthy Delta Initiative; 

Delta Doctors Program; 

Innovative Readiness Training (IRT); 

Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG); 

Rural Health IT Revolving Loan Fund; 

Delta Health Care Services Grant Program; 

Local Development Districts (LDD) capacity building; and 

Reimagining the Delta Workforce Initiative. 

It is with great pleasure that the DRA submits its FY 2014 Performance and Accountability 

Report. Performance data included in this report has been compiled to provide the most complete 

and accurate results available. DRA will continue to grow as an agency and invest its resources 

in projects, programs, and organizations to help provide the 252 counties and parishes of the 

Delta region with the necessary infrastructure, job training, and business resources to create jobs, 

build communities, and improve lives. 

 

Sincerely, 

 

 Christopher A. Masingill 

 Federal Co-Chairman 
SECTION I - MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

6 Delta Regional Authority

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY 

Listing of Officials 

As of September 30, 2014 

Federal Co-Chairman States’ Co-Chairman 

Mr. Christopher A. Masingill Governor Phil Bryant 

Alternate Federal Co-Chairman Alternate States’ Co-Chairman 

Mr. Michael G. Marshall Mr. Chris Champion 

STATE GOVERNORS, DESIGNEES, AND ALTERNATES 

Alabama Louisiana 

Governor Robert Bentley Governor Bobby Jindal 

Mr. Jim Byard, Jr. (Designee) Mr. Doyle Robinson 

Mr. Jimmy Lester (Alternate) (Designee & Alternate) 

Arkansas Mississippi 

Governor Mike Beebe Governor Phil Bryant 

Mr. Steven B. Jones Mr. Chris Champion 

(Designee & Alternate) (Designee & Alternate) 

Illinois Missouri 

Governor Pat Quinn Governor Jay Nixon 

Mr. William Stanhouse (Designee) Mr. Bill Ransdall (Designee) 

Ms. Kim Watson (Alternate) 

Kentucky Tennessee 

Governor Steven Beshear Governor Bill Haslam 

Mr. Tony Wilder Mr. Ted Townsend (Designee) 

(Designee & Alternate) Ms. Brooxie Carlton (Alternate)
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

7 Delta Regional Authority
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

8 Delta Regional Authority

Introduction

The Delta Regional Authority (the Authority or DRA) is a federal-state partnership serving 252 

counties and parishes in an eight-state region. Led by a Federal Co-Chairman and the Governors 

of each participating state, the DRA is designed to remedy severe and chronic economic distress 

by stimulating economic development and fostering partnerships that have a positive impact on 

the region’s economy. DRA helps economically distressed communities capitalize on other 

federal and state programs focused on basic infrastructure development, transportation 

improvements, business development and job training services. 

Congress mandated (7U.S.C.§2009aa) that the DRA shall provide funding for the following four 

categories: 

• Basic public infrastructure in distressed counties and isolated areas of distress; 

• Transportation infrastructure for the purpose of facilitating economic development in the 

region; 

• Business development, with emphasis on entrepreneurship; and 

• Job training or employment-related education, with emphasis on use of existing public 

educational institutions located in the region. 

Congressional stipulations include: 

• The Authority will allocate at least 75% of Authority funds for use in distressed counties; 

and 

• The Authority shall allocate at least 50% of any funds for transportation and basic public 

infrastructure projects. 

The following is a discussion and analysis of the operating results and financial position of DRA, 

created by the Delta Regional Authority Act of 2000. The Authority’s original authorization 

expired on October 1, 2007, but was extended by the 2014 Farm Bill to 2018. 

As listed in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis and throughout the Performance and 

Accountability Report, DRA continues to emphasize performance accountability and 

sustainability within its programs. Please review this document in conjunction with the annual 

financial statements and accompanying notes. 

 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

9 Delta Regional Authority

Program Highlights for Fiscal Year 2014 

During FY 2014, the Authority continued to emphasize its four funding priority areas which are: 

basic public infrastructure, transportation infrastructure, business development, and workforce 

development, with emphasis on job creation and job retention. The total Fiscal Year 2014 

project funding allocation was $9,448,618. Basic public and transportation infrastructure project 

funding totaled $5,776,580, or 61.1% of the States’ Economic Development Assistance 

Program’s (SEDAP) investment; investment in distressed counties totaled $8,463,215, or 89.6% 

of total investment. Fiscal Year 2014 SEDAP funds leveraged $16,047,962 in additional project 

funding – a ratio of 1.7 to 1 – and $3,530,000 in leveraged private investment, a ratio of .4 to 1. 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

10 Delta Regional Authority

Fiscal Year 2014 Counties and Parishes 

Distressed counties are defined as those counties that are one percent higher than the national 

average for unemployment and/or 80% or less than the national per capita income. Nondistressed counties are those counties that are under one percent of the national average for 

unemployment and more than 80% of the national per capita income. 

The DRA Enabling Legislation requires the Authority to update its distressed and non-distressed 

county designation annually. The tabulation for Fiscal Year 2014 resulted in 212 distressed 

counties and parishes and 40 non-distressed counties (see list below). 

Distressed List as of September 30, 2014 

Alabama (20) 

Barbour 

Bullock 

Butler 

Choctaw 

Clarke 

Conecuh 

Dallas 

Escambia 

Greene 

Hale 

Lowndes 

Macon 

Marengo 

Monroe 

Perry 

Pickens 

Russell 

Sumter 

Washington 

Wilcox 

Arkansas (38) 

Ashley 

Baxter 

Bradley 

Calhoun 

Chicot 

Clay 

Cleveland 

Craighead 

Crittenden 

Cross 

Dallas 

Desha 

Drew 

Fulton 

Grant 

Greene 

Independence 

Izard 

Jackson 

Jefferson 

Lawrence 

Lee 

Lincoln 

Lonoke 

Marion 

Mississippi 

Monroe 

Ouachita 

Phillips 

Poinsett 

Randolph 

Searcy 

Sharp 

St. Francis 

Stone 

Van Buren 

White 

Woodruff 

Illinois (12) 

Alexander 

Franklin 

Gallatin 

Hardin 

Johnson 

Massac 

Perry 

Pope 

Pulaski 

Randolph 

Saline 

Union 

Kentucky (18) 

Caldwell 

Calloway 

Carlisle 

Christian 

Crittenden 

Fulton 

Graves 

Henderson 

Hickman 

Hopkins 

Livingston 

Lyon 

Marshall 

McLean 

Muhlenberg 

Todd 

Trigg 

Webster 

Louisiana (35) 

Allen 

Avoyelles 

Beauregard 

Bienville 

Caldwell 

Catahoula 

Claiborne 

Concordia 

East Carroll 

East Feliciana 

Evangeline 

Franklin 

Grant 

Iberville 

Jackson 

Jefferson Davis 

La Salle 

Lincoln 

Livingston 

Madison 

Morehouse 

Red River 

Richland 

St Bernard 

St. Helena 

St. James 

St. Martin 

Tangipahoa 

Tensas 

Union 

Vermillion 

Washington 

West Carroll 

West Feliciana 

Winn 

Mississippi (43) 

Adams 

Amite 

Attala 

Benton 

Bolivar 

Carroll 

Claiborne 

Coahoma 

Copiah 

Covington 

Franklin 

Grenada 

Holmes 

Humphreys 

Issaquena 

Jasper 

Jefferson 

Jefferson Davis 

Lafayette 

Lawrence 

Leflore 

Lincoln 

Marion 

Marshall 

Montgomery 

Panola 

Pike 

Quitman 

Sharkey 

Simpson 

Smith 

Sunflower 

Tallahatchie 

Tate 

Tippah 

Tunica 

Union 

Walthall 

Warren 

Washington 

Wilkinson 

Yalobusha 

Yazoo 

Missouri (26) 

Bollinger 

Butler 

Carter 

Crawford 

Dent 

Douglas 

Dunklin 

Howell 

Iron 

Madison 

Mississippi 

New Madrid 

Oregon 

Ozark 

Pemiscot 

Perry 

Phelps 

Reynolds 

Ripley 

Shannon 

St. Francois 

Stoddard 

Texas 

Washington 

Wayne 

Wright 

Tennessee (20) 

Benton 

Carroll 

Chester 

Crockett 

Decatur 

Dyer 

Fayette 

Gibson 

Hardeman 

Hardin 

Haywood 

Henderson 

Henry 

Lake 

Lauderdale 

McNairy 

Obion 

Shelby 

Tipton 

Weakley
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

11 Delta Regional Authority

Non-Distressed List as of September 30, 2014 

Alabama (0) 

All counties in Alabama are 

designated as distressed 

Arkansas (4) 

Arkansas 

Prairie 

Pulaski 

Union 

Illinois (4) 

Hamilton 

Jackson 

White 

Williamson 

Kentucky (3) 

Ballard 

McCracken 

Union 

Louisiana (21) 

Acadia 

Ascension 

Assumption 

Cameron 

Desoto 

East Baton Rouge 

Iberia 

Jefferson 

LaFourche 

Natchitoches 

Orleans 

Ouachita 

Plaquemines 

Pointe Coupee 

Rapides 

St. Charles 

St. John the Baptist 

St. Landry 

St. Mary 

Webster 

West Baton Rouge 

 

Mississippi (4) 

DeSoto 

Hinds 

Madison 

Rankin 

Missouri (3) 

Cape Girardeau 

Scott 

Ste. Genevieve 

Tennessee (1) 

Madison 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

12 Delta Regional Authority

Organizational Structure of the Delta Regional Authority

The DRA Board is comprised of Governors from the eight states in the DRA region along with 

the Federal Co-Chairman, Christopher A. Masingill, who was appointed by President Obama and 

took office on July 13, 2010. The Governors annually appoint a States’ Co-Chairman, and in FY 

2014, Governor Phil Bryant of Mississippi was elected to serve as the sixth States’ Co-Chairman. 

The DRA statute requires the Board to hold an annual quorum meeting which compels the 

attendance of a majority of the states’ Governors. For all other DRA meetings, Governors may 

appoint a designee/alternate to serve in their absence. 

The relationship between the Federal Co-Chairman and Governors is a partnership where all 

board members share the fiduciary responsibility of the Authority. Moreover, the Board’s 

responsibilities are: to establish and approve investments for economic development to the 

region; assess the state of the region; facilitate and recommend interstate cooperation among 

region members; develop model legislation; support and train local development districts; and 

encourage private investment and cooperate with state economic development programs within 

the region. Board decisions require affirmation from the Federal Co-Chairman and a majority of 

participating Governors. 

An Alternate Federal Co-Chairman shall be appointed by the President; Michael G. Marshall 

took office in May 2010. 

The Federal Co-Chairman maintains an office within the DRA office and at the end of FY 2014 

employed four full-time federal employees. Additionally, the DRA office employs seven nonfederal employees who carry out the day-to-day operations within the following arenas: Finance 

and Administration; Economic and Community Development; Federal Affairs; and Public 

Engagement and Communication. 

The DRA organizational chart is as follows: 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

13 Delta Regional Authority

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

Staff Organizational Chart
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

14 Delta Regional Authority

Financial Management of the Delta Regional Authority 

The DRA utilizes the General Services Administration (GSA) for assistance in the management 

of DRA’s economic development obligations, disbursements, and the financial reporting of its 

federally-appropriated dollars. Because of the Authority’s relatively small size, the use of GSA 

has been very cost-effective. GSA has also assisted the Authority with the compliance of many 

federal-mandated requirements. State administrative funds, along with other funds, are held by 

banks located throughout the DRA Region and accounted for by the Chief Administrative 

Officer. 

 

DRA has just completed its twelfth year of compliance with the Accountability of Tax Dollars 

Act of 2002. Although this requirement was first mandated in FY 2003, DRA has consistently 

initiated several additional controls and agreed upon procedural audits to ensure the financial 

integrity of the Authority. 

Financial Highlights 

The following is a summary of the changes in assets, liabilities, revenues, expenditures and net 

position at September 30, 2014, as compared to the prior year: 

• Total assets decreased $1,936,986, or 6.09% in 2014 compared to decreased assets of 

$3,638,758, or -10.27% in 2013; 

• Total liabilities deceased by $823,996, or 27.12% in 2014 compared to an increase of 

$12,093, or 0.40% in 2013; 

• Net cost of operations decreased by $718,101, or 3.76% in 2014 compared to an 

increase of $699,271, or 3.80% in 2013; 

• Financing sources of operations decreased by $647,899, or 3.39% in 2014 compared 

to an increase of $697,970, or 3.79% in 2013; and 

• Net position decreased again in 2014 by $1,112,990, or 3.87% as compared to the 

decrease of $3,650,851, or -11.26% in 2013. 

Overview of the Financial Statements 

The Management’s Discussion and Analysis introduces DRA’s principal statements. The 

principal statements include: (1) balance sheets, (2) statements of net cost, (3) statements of 

changes in net position, (4) statements of resources (budgetary and non-budgetary), and (5) notes 

to financial statements. DRA also includes in this report additional information to supplement 

the principal statements. 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

15 Delta Regional Authority

Balance Sheets – The balance sheet is a summary of assets, liabilities and net position for each 

Fiscal Year. It includes assets in possession or managed by the entity exclusive of items subject 

to stewardship reporting (assets), amounts owed by the entity (liabilities), and amounts which 

comprise the difference (net position). 

Condensed Balance Sheets

 

2012 2013 2014 

Total Assets $ 35,439,364 $ 31,800,606 $ 29,863,620 

 

Total Liabilities $ 3,026,551 $ 3,038,644 $ 2,214,648 

Net Position 

 Unexpended appropriations/state funds 32,442,603 28,792,490 27,610,036 

 Cumulative results of operations (29,790) (30,528) 38,936 

 

Total Net Position 32,412,813 28,761,962 27,648,972 

 

Total Liabilities and Net Position $ 35,439,364 $ 31,800,606 $ 29,863,620 

Total assets decreased $1,936,986, or 6.09% in 2014 compared to decreased assets of 

$3,638,758, or -10.27% in 2013. The FY 2014 decrease is attributed to a decrease in operational 

funding as compared to the higher FY 2013 decrease which was due to a sequestered sum of 

$587,423 and rescission of $23,354. 

Total liabilities decreased by $823,996, or 27.12% in 2014 compared to an increase of $12,093, 

or 0.40% in 2013 FY 2013 were due to the delays in Congressional appropriations, sequestration 

and decreased revenue thus causing delays in the grant awards. 

Statements of Net Cost – The statements of net cost are designed to show separately the 

components of the net cost of the reporting entity’s operations for the period. The net cost of 

operations is the gross cost incurred by the reporting entity less any exchange revenue earned 

from its activities. The gross cost of a program consists of the full cost of the outputs produced 

by that program plus any non-production costs that can be assigned to the program (nonproduction costs are costs linked to events other than the production of goods and services). The 

net cost of a program consists of gross cost less related exchange revenues. By disclosing the 

gross and net cost of the entity’s programs, the statements of net cost provide information that 

can be related to the outputs and outcomes of the programs and activities. 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

16 Delta Regional Authority

Condensed Statements of Net Cost

 

2012 2013 2014 

Program Costs 

Intergovernmental gross costs $ 371,042 $ 174,094 $ 236,133 

Net costs with the public 18,037,695 18,933,914 18,153,774 

Total Program Costs 18,408,737 19,108,008 18,389,907 

 

Net Cost of Operations $ 18,408,737 $ 19,108,008 $ 18,389,907 

Net cost of operations decreased by $718,101, or 3.76% in 2014 compared to an increase of 

$699,271, or 3.80% in 2013; The FY 2013 increase is due to decrease in revenue with a slight 

increase in program cost and a small portion can be attributed to increased operating expenses. 

Statements of Changes in Net Position – The statements of changes in net position report the 

change in net position during the reporting period. Net position is affected by changes to its two 

components: cumulative results of operations and unexpended appropriations. The statement 

format is designed to display both components of net position separately to enable the user to 

better understand the nature of changes to net position as a whole. 

Condensed Statements of Changes in Net Position 

2012 2013 2014 

Cumulative 

Results of 

Operations 

Unexpended 

Appropriations/ 

Funds 

Cumulative 

Results of 

Operations 

Unexpended 

Appropriations/ 

Funds 

Cumulative 

Results of 

Operations 

Unexpended 

Appropriations/ 

Funds 

 

Beginning Balance $ (30,353) $ 35,611,087 $ (29,790) $ 32,442,603 $ (30,528) $ 28,792,490 

 

Budgetary Financing Sources 14,965,015 (3,288,015) 14,491,512 (3,425,289) 13,308,090 (1,119,675) 

 (Uses) 

Other Financing Sources (Uses) 3,444,285 119,531 4,615,758 (224,824) 5,151,281 (62,779) 

 

Total Financing Sources (Uses) 18,409,300 (3,168,484) 19,107,270 (3,650,113) 18,459,371 (1,182,454) 

 

Net Cost of Operations 18,408,737 - 19,108,008 - 18,389,907 - 

 

Net Change 563 (3,168,484) (738) (3,650,113) 69,464 (1,182,454) 

 

Ending Balance $ (29,790) $ 32,442,603 $ (30,528) $ 28,792,490 $ 38,936 $ 27,610,036 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

17 Delta Regional Authority

Financing sources decreased by $647,899, or 3.39% in 2014 compared to an increase of 

$697,970, or 3.79% in 2013; The FY 2014 decrease was the result of decrease financing sources 

as compared to the increase in Rural Community Advance Program (RCAP) financing sources in 

FY13 noted above in the RCAP net cost of operations. 

Net position decreased again in 2014 by $1,112,990, or 3.87% as compared to the decrease of 

$3,650,851, or -11.26% in 2013 as a continued result of sequestration, the decrease in revenue 

and an increase in program costs and other costs, as previously mentioned. 

Statements of Resources (Budgetary and Non-Budgetary) – The statements of resources 

(budgetary and non-budgetary) and related disclosures provide information about how budgetary 

resources were made available, as well as their statuses at the end of the period. It is the only 

financial statement predominantly derived from an entity’s budgetary general ledger in 

accordance with budgetary accounting rules, which are incorporated into generally accepted 

accounting principles (GAAP) in the United States of America for the federal government. 

Condensed Statements of Resources (Budgetary and Non-Budgetary)

 

2012 2013 2014 

 

Total Resources (Budgetary and 

 Non-Budgetary Resources) $ 22,649,555 $ 20,027,555 $ 18,864,246

 

Total Status of Budgetary Resources 19,223,813 15,626,804 13,745,593

 

Total, Unpaid Obligated Balance, Net, 

 End of Year 34,061,487 30,836,627 29,079,776

 

Net Outlays 13,536,831 14,520,605 14,070,545

The declining trend in Budgetary Resources has continued through FY 2014. DRA has 

experienced decreases since FY 2012 which are attributable to an increase in administrative and 

grant expenses, thereby reducing available resources and increasing obligation activity to reappropriate and better utilize available funding. 

Notes to Financial Statements – The notes to financial statements are an integral part of the 

financial statements. The notes explain some of the information in the financial statements and 

provide more detailed data. 
Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2014

18 Delta Regional Authority

Limitations of the Financial Statements

The principal financial statements have been prepared to report the financial position and results 

of operations of the entity, pursuant to the requirements of 31 U.S.C. 3515(b). While the 

statements have been prepared from the books and records of the entity in accordance with 

GAAP for federal entities and the formats prescribed by the President’s Office of Management 

and Budget, the statements are, in addition to the financial reports, used to monitor and control 

budgetary resources, which are prepared from the same books and records. 

The statements should be read with the realization that those are for a component unit of the U.S. 

Government, a sovereign entity. 

Contacting DRA’s Financial Management

This financial report is designed to fulfill the obligations of DRA as it relates to the 

Accountability for Tax Dollars Act of 2002. The report details the financial position of DRA as 

of September 30, 2014 and 2013, and demonstrates DRA’s proper accountability for all the 

monies and appropriations received. 

If you have any questions about this report or need additional information, please contact the 

Delta Regional Authority via telephone by calling (662) 624-8600 or mail by directing inquiries 

to: 

Delta Regional Authority 

236 Sharkey Avenue 

Suite 400 

Clarksdale, Mississippi 38614 
SECTION 2 - PERFORMANCE SECTION
DRA Performance Report 2014

19 Delta Regional Authority

INTRODUCTION 

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (“GPRA”) requires all federal agencies 

to submit a report to Congress on actual program results at the end of each Fiscal Year along 

with its audited financial statements outlined in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

Circular No. A-136. This report includes the following: 

• Overview of the Delta Regional Authority; 

• Summary of results on the following DRA programs and policy effort: 

o Funding Programs 

 States’ Economic Development Assistance Program (SEDAP) 

 Rural Community Advance Program (RCAP) 

o Policy and Program Efforts 

 Affordable Care Act (ACA) Outreach and Enrollment Strategy 

 Delta Doctors Program 

 Delta Leadership Institute (DLI) 

 Healthy Delta Initiative 

 Rural Health IT Revolving Loan Fund 

 Innovative Readiness Training Program (IRT) 

 Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG) 

 Reimagining the Delta Workforce 
DRA Performance Report 2014

20 Delta Regional Authority

FY 2014 States’ Economic Development Assistance Program 

To better serve the DRA region, the Authority – under Chairman Chris Masingill’s leadership – 

has both realigned and reprioritized the goals of DRA’s investment program, now known as the 

States’ Economic Development Assistance Program (SEDAP). SEDAP’s current focus is on 

project development and management. Following the Chairman’s example, staff members now 

play a more active role in developing funded projects, building relationships, and connecting 

applicants and project developers to other funding sources thereby helping to complete needed 

projects. This approach is more holistic in nature and allows the Authority to be responsive to 

fluid economic development opportunities. SEDAP is now providing flexible funding solutions 

for the region. 

Clearly, economic development has always been an integral part of the process for each of the 

SEDAP applications received by the DRA. The Authority is now better positioned to fill this role 

as a project developer rather than simply a funding source for economic and community 

development. Chairman Masingill is actively engaged in developing the necessary tools and 

resources to help achieve the Authority’s goals for this program. 

The Authority’s 2014 SEDAP compliments the economic development activities taking place in 

the Region. From top to bottom, the entire program is crafted with the economic developer in 

mind. Highlights of the program include: 

Updated Automated Application Website -- A web-based portal, found on www.dra.gov, 

allows applicants to fill out and submit applications for DRA investment programs. After release 

of the awards the site provides back-office support and tools for the management of constituent 

portfolios. Each of the DRA partner groups (DRA staff, DRA board, LDDs, and 

applicants/awardees) will have a customized web presence to assist in monitoring application 

and project activity. Transparency and accountability are enhanced through the utilization of this 

technology. DRA is currently working with a new website design team to upgrade and enhance 

the application portal and back-office capabilities. This new website will be functional in early 

2015, in time for the next funding cycle. 

Critical Development Projects -- These projects include investment(s) of $300M or more from 

public and/or private sources and - other than for technology-related projects - for which 350 or 

more jobs created and/or retained. Some developers refer to these projects as “super projects” 

because of the significant economic impact brought to an area. 

Emergency/Contingency (E/C) Account -- Funds set aside for projects defined separately as 

emergencies related to natural disasters, fire, or unforeseen/unexpected developments that 

present a health and/or safety risk to communities; or contingency projects that fall outside the 

normal scope and/or timeline of the annual investment program. This funding program allows 

DRA the flexibility to act quickly to assist with needed investments in order to help restore a 

community or secure an economic development projects. 
DRA Performance Report 2014

21 Delta Regional Authority

10.4%

89.6%

Non-Distressed Distressed

Expedited Process -- One of several funding pathways, the “Expedited Process” will be initiated 

by the state when an immediate need exists for an economic development prospect project. A 

“prospect” would be a company committed to creating and/or retaining jobs in a community. 

Upon the request of the state, DRA will act quickly to complete the necessary review, eligibility 

determination, and award documentation delivery so as to meet the unique circumstances of the 

project. 

Federal Priority Eligibility Criteria -- Investment priorities established by the Authority, 

which have been adopted from the President’s administration. Currently the four federal 

priorities for DRA investment are: 1) Innovation and Small Business, 2) Regional Approach, 3) 

Multiple Funding Partners, and 4) Emergency Funding Need. The first priority focuses on job 

creation and/or retention and together with the other priorities these represent the primary 

objectives of the SEDAP program. Every funded project should meet at least one of these four 

federal criteria. 

Priority Status Designation -- An eligible project that meets at least one goal or priority from 

each of the three additional areas of investment focus: 1) Federal Priorities (set by the 

administration), 2) Regional Development Plan goals, and 3) DRA State Plan goals and/or 

priorities. Projects meeting these requirements are given first consideration during the project 

selection process and have the best chance of receiving a SEDAP award. 

Governors’ project recommendations, which are in line with Chairman Masingill’s and the 

President’s priorities, demonstrate the Authority’s continued emphasis of the four funding 

priority areas: 

• Basic Public Infrastructure 

• Transportation Infrastructure 

• Business Development - emphasis on entrepreneurship 

• Workforce Development 

Figure 3. Share of SEDAP funding by federal priority Figure 4. Share of SEDAP funding by distress status 

38.9%

61.1%

Business & Workforce Development

Basic Public & Transporation
DRA Performance Report 2014

22 Delta Regional Authority

As seen in figures 3 and 4, basic public and transportation infrastructure project investments 

totaled $5,776,580 (61.1 percent of SEDAP investments) and funding for distressed counties and 

parishes was $8,463,215 (89.6 percent of investments) for Fiscal Year 2014. The total project 

funding allocation is $9,448,618. SEDAP funds leveraged $16,047,962 in additional project 

funding, a ratio of 1.7 to 1, and $3,530,000 in private investment, a ratio of .4 to 1. For the FY 

2014 SEDAP funding cycle the following is projected: 

• 862 jobs will be created 

• 698 jobs will be retained 

• 8,564 families will receive improved water and sewer 

• 50 individuals will be trained for jobs 

Over the program’s 13 years DRA has invested $128,636,623 to 862 projects in the eight-state 

region for total project costs of $825,729,841. Total project cost includes $697,093,218 in other 

federal, state, and local funds, a ratio of 5.4 to 1 in additional leveraged funds. Private investment 

totals $2,026,346,351, a ratio of 15.8 to 1. Since inception, the DRA Federal Grant and States’ 

Economic Development Assistance Programs have accomplished the following: 

• 9,714 jobs created 

• 8,488 jobs retained 

• 28,047 families received improved water and sewer 

• 5,529 individuals trained for jobs 

Once all projects are completed the following is projected: 

• 13,264 jobs created 

• 9,585 jobs retained 

• 33,114 families received improved water and sewer 

• 19,806 individuals trained for jobs 

The job creation and retention numbers above are guaranteed, to a large extent, through the 

execution of the DRA Private Entity Participation Agreement. The Participation Agreement was 

developed to demonstrate the private entity’s commitment to creating and/or retaining jobs and 

injecting capital investment into a funded project. Congress intends for DRA to track certain 

metrics such as jobs created, jobs retained, families affected, and people trained. DRA also tracks 

private leveraged investment in addition to the other public investment (other project funds). 

When DRA reports to Congress the results of the prior fiscal years, there is an increased level of 

confidence in the metrics being reported due to this agreement. In the case of a project that 

benefits a private entity by allowing the entity to expand or locate a facility, DRA asks the 

private partner to show its commitment by agreeing to this legal document. In the event the 

private partner withdraws or does not meet its commitment, it is required to refund a percentage 

of the project investment to DRA as a “claw-back.” 
DRA Performance Report 2014

23 Delta Regional Authority

Rural Community Advancement Program (RCAP) 

Beginning in 2003, Congress designated a portion of U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural 

Development - Rural Community Advancement Program (RCAP) funds for use by Delta 

Regional Authority within the same program. There are numerous programs in the RCAP 

umbrella, all of which are eligible with DRA funding. To-date, DRA has funded three types of 

RCAP projects: 

1. Rural Business Opportunity Grants-RBOG 

2. Rural Business Enterprise Grants-RBEG 

3. Community Facility Grants 

Over the last eleven years, DRA has successfully applied for more than $25 million in RCAP 

funding, which supported 230 projects. Traditionally, each year DRA allocates a portion of the 

RCAP dollars to fund various programmatic as well as region-wide projects determined by the 

Federal Co-Chairman. Examples of funded projects include: Local Development District (LDD) 

training, Operation JumpStart, Delta Leadership Institute, and the Workforce Development 

Capacity Building and Technical Assistance project. 

The remaining portion of RCAP funding is used to fund projects submitted to DRA by each State 

Director of Rural Development. These projects are typically approved projects by Rural 

Development, but were left unfunded due to fiscal year budget constraints. 

Internal meetings were held to upgrade to RCAP with the intent to streamline and improve 

administrative processes thereby placing greater emphasis on project development and 

management. Consequently, DRA will conduct site visits with more frequency. 

Affordable Care Act Outreach and Enrollment Strategy 

Overview 

Beginning in the summer of 2013, the Delta Regional Authority (DRA) created an innovative 

action plan to facilitate Affordable Care Act outreach and enrollment in the Delta region. In 

advance of the start of the first open enrollment period under the ACA, DRA took proactive 

steps to help uninsured families and individuals learn about, and gain access, new health 

insurance options that would soon become available. 

DRA rolled these initial ACA efforts into the existing Innovative Readiness Training Military 

Clinic program, a now six-year partnership program with the Department of Defense, which 

brings military medical personnel to underserved communities to provide free healthcare to 

residents individuals who would otherwise have little to no access to quality health care. In the 

summer of 2013, DRA began promoting the ACA by providing health care resources that 
DRA Performance Report 2014

24 Delta Regional Authority

included basic enrollment information and tools such as the HHS hotline, healthcare.gov, and 

Federally Qualified Health Center locations. 

In more recent months, as “Navigators,” “Assistors,” and “Certified Application Counselors” 

have come onto the scene, DRA has transitioned from simply providing resources, to actually 

bringing in-person assistors on site to every IRT mission, in order to provide patients with inperson counseling on their insurance options as well as the option to enroll for health coverage 

on the spot. 

By incorporating these new efforts into the existing IRT medical program, DRA has worked to 

ensure that IRT patients not only gain access to a one-time visit with a doctor, but also gain 

access to resources that can help improve their long-term health. 

Since beginning the ACA outreach and enrollment efforts, DRA has provided nearly 22,000

health resource cards to individuals interested in learning more about their health coverage 

options through the ACA. 

In some instances, DRA has partnered to join efforts with the US Department of Defense (DOD), 

the US Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services 

Administration (HHS/HRSA), the US Small Business Administration (SBA), Enroll America, 

and others. 

Approaches 

1. DRA created and distributed resource cards designed to encourage uninsured individuals 

to take advantage of the HHS hotline number, as well as healthcare.gov, and other 

channels through which patients can gain access to health insurance coverage through the 

Health Insurance Exchanges. By calling the HHS hotline, individuals can get in touch 

with a “Navigator” who can provide information and assistance on how to enroll through 

the exchanges. To date, DRA has distributed nearly 22,000 resource cards to IRT 

patients and other Delta residents.

2. DRA encouraged patients to provide their basic contact information, which DRA 

collected and channeled to the best sources of assistance, such as Enroll America, HRSA, 

and HRSA-funded Federally Qualified Health Centers. Collected contact information 

was provided to Navigators, In-Person Assistors (IPAs), and Certified Application 

Counselors (CACs), who could get in touch with patients to provide more information. 

3. DRA provided handouts that directed patients to Federally Qualified Health Centers 

(FQHCs) in or near the communities where patients can receive treatment at a lower cost 

(based on a sliding scale, as determined by income) regardless of their insurance 

coverage status. This resource, which was developed by DRA with consult from 
DRA Performance Report 2014

25 Delta Regional Authority

HHS/HRSA, was used by military care providers to refer patients who needed follow-up 

care to an affordable clinic in their area. 

4. In 2013, DRA worked with the US Small Business Administration (SBA) to hold 

educational ACA seminars for small business owners and employees to help each group 

understand how the ACA will affect each and how business owners can provide 

insurance to employees. DRA worked with SBA representatives in Washington, DC, as 

well as with SBA Regional Administrators and District Directors in each IRT state in 

2013 in order to set up the seminars concurrently with IRT. 

5. Beginning in early 2014, DRA began coordinating with Federally Qualified Health 

Centers, Primary Care Associations, and Navigator grantees/consortiums to bring 

Navigators, Assistors and Certified Applications Counselors on-site to provide 

information and enroll individuals for health coverage on-the-spot during IRT missions. 

Delta Doctors Program 

In an attempt to increase the number of doctors serving Delta residents, the Delta Regional 

Authority implemented the Delta Doctors program in 2003. The program allows foreign 

physicians who are trained in this country to work in medically underserved areas for three years. 

Most choose to stay far longer once a patient base is developed. Those in the Delta Doctors 

program do not take jobs away from U.S.-born physicians. Instead, Delta Doctors provide 

services in areas where otherwise there would be a shortage of physicians. 

This year has been extremely busy with Delta Doctor Applications, the graph below shows 

applications to the program have more than doubled since FY 2012 and have easily outpaced 

those of FY 2013. In an effort to expand the knowledge of the DRA Delta Doctors program, in 

FY 2014 staff educated and informed groups around the region about the Delta Doctors 

programs policy and procedures. 
DRA Performance Report 2014

26 Delta Regional Authority

Below is a chart showing the complete breakdown by state for FY2014 of applications granted 

and pending. 

Total Delta Doctors applications granted since the start of the program state by state: 

75

56

33

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DELTA DOCTOR APPLICATIONS

Delta Doctor Applications

2012 2013 2014

6

2

8

1

17

8

12

10

1100

5

022

ALABAMA ARKANSAS ILLINOIS KENTUCKY LOUISIANA MISSISSIPPI MISSOURI TENNESSEE

Granted Pending
DRA Performance Report 2014

27 Delta Regional Authority

Delta Leadership Institute (DLI) 

DRA’s Delta Leadership Institute (DLI) is designed to improve the decisions made by leaders 

across the region by broadening their understanding of regional issues, creating a corps of 

leaders with a regional and national perspective. The motivation for the creation of this 

Executive Academy and Delta Leadership Network under the Delta Leadership umbrella was, in 

fact, to have an “army” of well-informed community leaders who understand not only their 

issues but the Region’s issues. To that end, those leaders who have participated in and continue 

to participate in the Delta Leadership Network (DLN) become the voice of the Region and for 

the Authority. The Delta Leadership Institute is a body of fellows and alumni leaders who have 

participate in a year-long Executive Academy program and continue to communicate in order to 

foster and strengthen cross-cultural, inter-governmental bonds in the region. 

Completing its ninth year – the Delta Leadership Institute rounded out an academy that was 

made possible through a three-entity collaboration by the DRA Board in July of 2013. FY 2014 

saw fifty world-class fellows representing eight states, which met seven times over the course of 

the year in Oxford, MS; New Orleans, LA; Memphis, TN; Cape Girardeau, MO; Paducah, KY; 

Washington, DC; and Little Rock, AR. The focus was on everyday systemic issues facing the 

10

18

51

10

35

79

54

73

TOTAL 

Delta Doctors from FY2004-FY2014

Alabama Arkansas Illinois Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi Missouri Tennessee
DRA Performance Report 2014

28 Delta Regional Authority

Delta region and looked at ways to bring regional solutions to community problems like building 

a strong civic infrastructure for sustained economic growth, furthering good governance, quality 

infrastructure, adequate schools and quality health care services all working together toward 

sustainable community and regional growth. 

Final assessment of the Executive Academy and the Institute showed that the participant 

experience was both extremely positive and valuable. 

The workshops, case studies, and field 

experiences were assessed along four 

dimensions and used to create an overall 

mean: 

The highest-rated Executive Academy across all 

dimensions was the Washington, D.C. Executive 

Academy, with an overall mean of 8.71. The overall 

mean for each academy is listed below: 

• Knowledge of the speaker 

• Speaker’s ability to communicate 

• Active participation 

• Value of the subject matter 

• Washington, D.C. Executive Academy – 8.71 

• Oxford Executive Academy – 8.62 

• Cape Girardeau Executive Academy – 8.45 

• Little Rock Executive Academy – 8.36 

• Memphis Executive Academy – 8.30 

• Paducah Executive Academy – 8.24 

• New Orleans Executive Academy – 7.95 

Thoughts on Leadership When respondents were asked if their thoughts on leadership had 

changed as a result of the Delta Leadership Institute, the vast majority stated that their thoughts 

had either been changed or reinforced as a result of the Delta Leadership Institute program. The 

following statements are emblematic of the responses: 

“Leaders have to be the catalyst for change or improvement in a community or a region. 

Leadership is not necessarily just an individual trait, but can be accomplished by a group of 

leaders. I am looking forward to connecting with the DLN and keeping involved with improving 

our region.” 

“I see a ray of hope and I saw some people develop better attitudes as time went on. I think that 

this class is just the beginning of getting these leaders to take action. I am not sure what the 

Alumni will do to influence collaboration to make things happen, but there is great potential in 

this group. My thoughts on leadership changed in that I more strongly see my own responsibility 

as a leader.” 

“This experience has definitely expanded my idea of leadership. I've learned that leadership 

doesn't necessarily mean being a one-woman show, it actually involves working with others to 

get the job done.” 
DRA Performance Report 2014

29 Delta Regional Authority

Community Implementation When respondents were asked if they had introduced or 

implemented any initiatives as a result of the executive academy sessions, an overwhelming 

77.3% have introduced or implemented an initiative in their communities as a result of the Delta 

Leadership Institute. The following statements are emblematic of the responses: 

“I am trying to implement a youth entrepreneurship education program into the elementary 

schools. Part of my area has Junior Achievement, but that is not exactly what I would like to do. 

Part of my region also has the CEO program for High School seniors. I think that 

entrepreneurship education is lacking in the elementary age and junior high age kids.” 

“I have introduced our local critical access hospital administrator to Delta Doctors initiative 

and hope to use that to attract health care professionals to our community.” 

“I am working in Missouri to reinvigorate the Missouri Rural Partnership. This rural council 

has a federal designation, but has been dormant for years due to lack of leadership and an 

inability to find a niche or purpose. I think the Partnership can be a valuable resource and 

clearinghouse for all community and economic development agencies, organizations and 

professionals working in Missouri. I am working with the University of Missouri Extension to 

revive the Partnership.” 

Expectations and Projections for FY15 Entering Year 2 of the three-entity collaboration with 

Arkansas State University, University of Louisiana Monroe, and University of Mississippi, there 

was an internal restructuring of the how the University of Mississippi would continue to play a 

role in the execution of the program and logistics. In July, all three institutes indicated their 

continued interest in participating in the program and began planning for the 2014-2015 

Executive Academy as well as the next phase of the Delta Leadership Network. 

The application period for the upcoming DLI Executive Academy was open early July through 

Monday, July 28th. 2014-2015 Executive Academy accepted participants were notified on 

August 26th, and orientation was held in Oxford, MS September 21-24. 

As planning for future sessions continues, we will hold the second session focusing on public 

health and healthcare November 11-13 in Marion, IL. 2014-2015 sessions will also be held in 

New Orleans, LA; Memphis, TN; Washington, DC; and Point Clear, AL. 

Healthy Delta Initiative 

In August of 2013, the DRA announced a Healthy Delta Initiative investment of more than 

$800,000 to implement five Healthy Workforce Challenge programs in Alabama, Arkansas, 

Illinois, Louisiana and Missouri. Chairman Masingill or Mike Marshall personally visited all 

five programs to see the DRA investment at work. All five programs have recently wrapped up 

their one-year projects, and we anticipate a report by the end of the year on the progress made on 

all five initiatives. In 2014, the DRA also wrapped up the Rural Health IT Revolving Loan 
DRA Performance Report 2014

30 Delta Regional Authority

Fund that was established to encourage providers who have not yet made the transition to 

electronic health records to do so in advance of the federal timetable for implementation. 

 

As mentioned, the DRA continues health-related work through the Delta Doctors program and 

the incredible provision of free health care services and Affordable Care Act enrollment outreach 

that occurred during this year’s Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) program. The Delta Data 

Initiative remains active and available to assist organizations in the region with the 

county/parish, state and regional data needed to present a compelling case when applying for 

grants and other funding opportunities. 

Since its inception, the DRA has directly invested more than $12 million in improving health 

across the 8-state region. This investment has leveraged more than $81 million in public and $16 

million in private sector dollars. Over the past 3 funding cycles The DRA has invested nearly $4 

million in health projects across region, with the most recent projects directed at strengthening 

the health care workforce. The overall DRA health footprint is significant in a region that 

remains burdened by the nation’s highest rates of chronic disease. 

In the coming months, the DRA’s Healthy Delta Initiative will continue to transition into a 

greater policy and advocacy role due to current and future federal funding limitations. In this 

new role, the DRA will continue to work on health through ongoing collaborations, outreach 

capacity and partnerships in the existing program areas. 

DRA Healthy Workforce Challenge 

 

In August of 2013, the DRA joined HRSA in announcing twelve new recipients of the Delta 

States Rural Development Network Grant Program, and five new DRA Healthy Workforce 

Challenge awardees. The DRA Healthy Workforce Challenge investment totals more than 

$800,000 devoted to improving workforce health. The five selected awardees include the 

following programs: 

Program Name Location Amount Awarded

The Tombigbee Healthcare Authority Demopolis, Alabama $163,145

ARcare Augusta, Arkansas $170,518

Southern Illinois University Center for 

Rural Health and Social Service 

Development 

Carbondale, Illinois $187,500

North Louisiana Regional Alliance Delhi, Louisiana $139,433

Mississippi County Health Department Charleston, Missouri $158,345

DRA Healthy Workforce Challenge projects involved the development of programs that work 

with local business and industry to incentivize healthy living through behavior change in the 

workplace. The Delta region struggles with some of the highest rates of health disparities and 

chronic disease in the country. Delta area businesses pay a high cost in overall workforce 
DRA Performance Report 2014

31 Delta Regional Authority

productivity, including high rates of workforce absences and a surge in health related expenses. 

Healthier workforces promise to provide significant cost savings and a productivity boost to 

local businesses. 

 

At minimum, Healthy Workforce Challenge programs were required to include a focus on 

smoking cessation, weight loss, exercise programs such as documentable activity logs, regular 

health checks and overall healthy living. The programs were encouraged to include new ways to 

encourage employees to take advantage of existing business incentives designed to influence 

healthy living in the workplace or create new incentives. 

The DRA is in the process of evaluating the Healthy Workforce Challenge program outcomes, in 

anticipation of sharing and replicating best practices throughout the region. 

 
DRA Performance Report 2014

32 Delta Regional Authority

Rural Health IT Revolving Loan Fund 

 

In late 2012, the DRA collaborated with USDA to create an innovative revolving loan fund to 

assist health care providers working in Health Provider Shortage or Medically Underserved 

Areas of the Delta to make the transition to electronic health records. This program provided 

interest free loans of up to $7,500 to small health care provider offices throughout the Delta 

region to be used to install and adopt electronic health records systems. Applicants were 

required to be eligible to receive meaningful use incentives, as defined by the HITECH Act, and 

had to agree to repay the DRA upon receipt of these federal incentives. 

 

The DRA provided revolving loans to providers in Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee. 

Providers from all eight states were encouraged to apply for this program as a way to help their 

offices meet the upfront costs of making the federally required transition to electronic health 

records. 

Background 

Through its Healthy Delta Initiative (HDI), the DRA continues to highlight the importance of 

health to the region as a whole. The growing incidence of chronic disease in the region poses a 

threat to the lives, livelihoods, productivity, and economic vitality of the Delta. Within DRA 

states, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that more than 3.3 million people suffer 

from diabetes. Improving health outcomes by addressing the toll of chronic disease through 

prevention and behavior change promises to strengthen workforce productivity and spur 

economic development throughout Delta communities. 

The Healthy Delta Initiative began in fiscal year 2011 to tackle the toll of chronic disease 

through stakeholder meetings with Governors, state Health and Human Service directors, and 

local community leaders. DRA then expanded its approach to strengthening health outcomes for 

the Delta region and met with White House staff, the United States Surgeon General, and 

regional directors of federal agencies that share its concerns for the health of Delta citizens. 

Since 2011, HDI has consistently convened rural health advocacy organizations and rural health 

government agencies to develop strategic partnerships throughout the Delta region. These 

collaborations have yielded opportunities for more than 400 health care professional to receive 

technical assistance in how to access federal funding for programs that strengthen the health of 

the Delta. The HDI is currently exploring additional collaborations with federal partners geared 

to increase the number of applicants from the region, and grow the capacity of those who apply. 
DRA Performance Report 2014

33 Delta Regional Authority

Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) 

In its sixth year of partnership, the Delta Regional Authority and the Department of Defense are 

bringing the Innovative Readiness Training program to the Delta region through three medical 

missions across two states: Arkansas, Louisiana and Illinois. As of the final summer mission in 

Arkansas, in FY 2014, these missions have now served over 50,000 stakeholders in the Delta 

Regional Authority footprint. 

These medical missions provide quality medical care by licensed medical professionals, serving 

in reserve forces, to residents of rural communities that otherwise have little to no access to 

quality health care. Again this year, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 

through the Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA) joined the partnership to 

provide information and resources to patients regarding upcoming opportunities to enroll in 

health insurance. HRSA Administrator Mary Wakefield visited the Arkansas Care mission where 

she was able to see first-hand the impacts these missions are making in the region. 

Below are graphs from three of the missions in FY2014 reporting number of patients seen and 

most importantly the services requested so that we can plan accordingly for future missions in 

the region. 

Arkansas Care 2014 

From July 25 to August 2 the 3274th Army Hospital out of Fort Bragg, NC coordinated the 

largest IRT mission DRA has been involved with since partnering with DOD. 

 
DRA Performance Report 2014

34 Delta Regional Authority

TOTAL PATIENT ENCOUNTERS 

At each clinic DRA and HRSA partnered on site with navigators to talk with those stakeholders 

taking advantage of the clinic services about their healthcare options. In addition to extra access 

to healthcare services DRA partnered with the Arkansas Workforce Boards in the region. The 

Workforce Boards had materials and staff attend the clinics to be there as an additional education 

resource for those who may be looking to get back into the workforce or who want more skilled 

training. 

 

MEDICAL, 

1364

NUTRITION

DENTAL, 278

1791

OPTOMETR

Y, 2697

0

200

400

600

Fri,

25Jul

Sat,

26Jul

Sun,

27Jul

Mon,

28Jul

Tue,

28Jul

Wed,

30Jul

Thu,

31Jul

Fri,

1Aug

Sat,

2Aug

Number of Patients 

Seen

Duty Day

MEDICAL NUTRITION DENTAL OPTOMETRY
DRA Performance Report 2014

35 Delta Regional Authority

Northern Louisiana Care 2014 

July 7-17 an IRT mission was held in Winnsboro, LA at the Horace G. White learning Center 

Southern Illinois Care 2014 

Southern Care was the first IRT health mission to serve southern Illinois and had the potential to 

reach thousands of community members in need of medical services. 

Southern Illinois TOTALS JUN 2014 

Medical Care 

 CHILD (6-18) ADULT (18-59) SENIOR (60+) TOTAL 

PATIENTS 43 349 118 510 

EXAMS 42 344 112 498 

PRESCRIPTIONS 18 354 64 436 

REFERRALS 6 112 29 147 

EDUCATION 31 267 89 387 

PT RESCHEDULES 0 3 0 3 

TOTAL 140 1429 412 1981 

Combined Statistics TOTALS JUN 2014 

Dental Care 

 CHILD (6-18) ADULT (18-59) SENIOR (60+) TOTAL 

PATIENTS 101 1269 253 1623 

EXAMS 107 1046 214 1367 

CLEANINGS 93 561 96 750 

EXTRACTIONS 14 1485 339 1838 

PRESCRIPTIONS 4 740 129 873 

EDUCATION 104 878 221 1203 

PT RESCHEDULES 0 2 0 2 

TOTAL 423 5981 1252 7656 
DRA Performance Report 2014

36 Delta Regional Authority

Combined Statistics TOTALS JUN 2014 

Optometry Care 

 CHILD (6-18) ADULT (18-59) SENIOR (60+) TOTAL 

PATIENTS 110 585 203 898 

EXAMS 104 544 191 839 

GLASSES 72 578 194 844 

REFERRALS 1 15 19 35 

EDUCATION 65 425 145 635 

PRESCRIPTIONS 23 192 64 279 

MEDICATIONS 2 27 17 46 

PT RESCHEDULES 9 64 21 94 

TOTAL 386 2430 854 3670 

Between June 16-27, reservists with the Southern IL Care mission served more than 3,000 

people with upwards of 10,000 individual procedures, including tooth extractions, eye exams, 

and eyeglass fittings, valued at more than $1.2 million in community impact. 

 
DRA Performance Report 2014

37 Delta Regional Authority

Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG) 

Jobs for America’s Graduates, Inc. (JAG) is the nation’s largest and, arguably, the most 

successful school-to-work system for at-risk and disadvantaged youth. JAG focuses on keeping 

students in school through graduation, equipping each with the academic and technical skills 

necessary to improve their employability, which is parallel to DRA’s commitment to invest in 

strategies that boost employment and educational success. 

The program substantially exceeded the goals that were set, and the work was able to be carried 

out in ways that helped to assure the core goal of the grant – the expansion of Jobs for America's 

Graduates services to high risk youth in the Delta Regional Authority’s service area. 

Phase III Partnership between the DRA and JAG: 

For Phase III of the partnership to boost both employment and education outcomes for 

high-risk youth, it is proposed that: 

A. A total of $350,000 to support the opening of 14 new JAG schools at $20,000 per 

school in the DRA service area within the seven states where JAG has long-standing 

and proven operations and $60,000 to the JAG National Organization. That $60,000 

will provide: 

1. $60,000 for JAG oversight and support for the implementation of the 12 new 

schools with monitoring, evaluation, technical assistance, training, and other 

assistance to the affiliated schools. 

2. A selection process managed by Jobs for America's Graduates to establish a set of 

criteria and invite as many of the JAG states within the DRA service area (as 

approved by the DRA) to submit proposals from new schools for review and 

approval. The criteria for DRA funding will include, but not be limited to: 

• A commitment to fully fund a staff member with their matching resources in 

the school to be dedicated to the implementation of the JAG Model in that 

school, with whatever additional financial and other resources are required 

beyond a $20,000 financial commitment from the DRA . 

• Letters of support and commitment by the schools to meet all the requirements 

for successful implementation based on the proven JAG Model criteria. 

• Identification of anticipated future financial resources to support the 

continuation of the program in future school years. 
DRA Performance Report 2014

38 Delta Regional Authority

• Recommendation by and a commitment from the JAG State Affiliate to 

provide extra oversight and support to assure the successful implementation 

and follow-on funding for the next school year. 

B. A $10,000 commitment to the 2014 JAG National Training Seminar, held in July 

2014. As with the previous grant in Phase I, these funds would be used for: 

1. Assuring the participation of the maximum number of JAG Affiliate staff 

participants from the new DRA-supported JAG schools in the DRA service area. 

2. Creating a special training program for those staff from the Delta Regional 

Authority service areas, focused on meeting the particular employment and 

education success challenges in the service area of the Delta Regional Authority 

at the National Training Seminar. This program would begin a day earlier than 

the National Training Seminar, with a follow-up session during NTS. 

Representatives from the DRA with special expertise would participate in that 

special training event and would focus on the particular challenges of high-risk 

youth in the DRA service area, especially how to secure employment leading to 

good careers. 

3. Matching support would come from the registration fees and travel/lodging paid 

for by the JAG state organizations in the participating states, in keeping with the 

overall theme of this request of seeking matching and leveraging funding support. 

Anticipated Outcomes of Phase III 

A. It is anticipated that the outcomes from the Phase III Proposal will include: 

1. Engaging a wide range of schools in the seven states in the DRA service area 

where JAG has operations, to fully inform each about the success of the JAG 

programs in the states, as consideration is given to participate in JAG. 

2. Engaging state leadership, including Governors and state education and workforce 

systems, to recognize the commitment of the Delta Regional Authority and to 

highlight the one-time-only matching grant strategy, with its proven success over 

the past 30 years of Jobs for America's Graduates. As part of that process, other 

state resources will be sought that could be attractive in expanding the program in 

the DRA service area. 

3. Serving an additional 450 or more high-risk youth in the DRA service area, who 

would have the opportunity to participate in the JAG program and benefit from 

the dramatic improvements in graduation, employment, and college attendance 

rates that JAG has demonstrated for more than 30 years. Total youth to be served 

in the 20-22 schools from Phases II and III in the 2014-2015 school year would be 

850. 
DRA Performance Report 2014

39 Delta Regional Authority

4. Creating mechanisms to sustain the JAG program in the 14 new schools from 

other sources for the 2014-15 school year and beyond. Based on the track record 

of Jobs for America's Graduates over the past 30 years, it is anticipated that at 

least 2,000 more high-risk youth will be served by the JAG program in the DRA 

service area as a result of this proposed grant over the following four years from 

the end of Phase III in 2015. 

Reimagining the Delta Workforce

The Delta Regional Authority partnered with Ted Abernathy and the Southern Growth Policy 

Board to produce the Reimagining the Delta Workforce Report. From this report it was 

determined that there was a need to educate stakeholders and to build a competitive, technical 

assistance and capacity building and implementation investment program which will allow rural 

communities and parishes to develop a connected workforce system on the local level among the 

business/industry and education systems. To provide the stakeholders with the information that is 

needed to move workforce forward the Delta Regional Authority held Reimagining the Delta 

Workforce Summits in each of the eight states: 

• Chatom, AL 

• Pine Bluff, AR 

• Carterville, IL 

• Cadiz, KY 

• Thibodaux, LA 

• Clarksdale, MS 

• Poplar Bluff, MO 

• Dyersburg, TN
DRA Performance Report 2014

40 Delta Regional Authority

By participating in workforce development system planning sessions, participants experienced 

the development of a more connected, comprehensive workforce system among education 

systems and business and industry sectors. 

Additionally, the end result will include a well-educated and highly skilled workforce thus 

resulting in increased jobs, improved quality of lives, and rebuilt communities. Program 

development and recommendations are based on findings in the DRA commissioned report, 

Reimagining Workforce Development. Such recommendations include: 

• Reimagining readiness- Applicants should demonstrate plans to strengthen connections 

between education and job skills, rethink the value of credentials in the workplace, 

expose students to the work world, and take technology to scale. 

• Reengaging adult learners and disconnected youth - Applicants should demonstrate 

plans to target adults who lack a degree or credentials, assist dislocated workers to rejoin 

the workforce, and recover disconnected youth. 

• Realigning relationships and resources - Applicants should demonstrate plans to create 

continuity in education and workforce development, align and track data across the 

education and workforce pipeline, and engage businesses in a meaningful way. 

• Ramp up - Applicants should demonstrate plans to take new workforce development 

plans to scale upon program completion. 

The Authority sees the benefits of engaging in workforce development planning by the 

increased number of quality jobs and careers that can be attained, improvement to quality of 

life and the rebuilding of communities. 
SECTION 3 - FINANCIAL SECTION
Independent Auditor’s Report 

Federal and State Co-Chairs 

 and Members of the Board 

Delta Regional Authority 

Clarksdale, Mississippi 

Report on the Financial Statements 

We have audited the accompanying financial statements of Delta Regional Authority (the 

Authority) as of and for the years ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, and the related notes to 

the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Authority’s basic financial statements 

listed in the table of contents. 

Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements 

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements 

in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this 

includes the design, implementation and maintenance of internal control relevant to the 

preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, 

whether due to fraud or error. 

Auditor’s Responsibility 

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We 

conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United 

States of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government 

Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 14-02, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial 

Statements. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable 

assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. 

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and 

disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s 

judgment, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial 

statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor 

considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial 

statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not 

for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control.
 

42 

Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness 

of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by 

management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. 

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a 

basis for our audit opinion. 

Opinion 

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, 

the financial position of Delta Regional Authority as of September 30, 2014 and 2013, and its net 

cost and the changes in its financial position and its resources (budgetary and non-budgetary) for 

the years then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United 

States of America. 

Required Supplementary Information 

Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the 

management's discussion and analysis listed in the table of contents be presented to supplement 

the basic financial statements. Such information, although not part of the basic financial 

statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be 

an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate 

operational, economic or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the 

required supplementary information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in 

the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of 

preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management's 

responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements and other knowledge we obtained 

during our audits of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any 

assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient 

evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance. 

Other Information 

Our audits were performed for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial 

statements as a whole. The information presented in Section 2 – Performance Section, the 

combining financial statements, schedule of expenditures and schedule of grants made, as listed 

in the table of contents, is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is not a required part 

of the basic financial statements. Such information has not been subjected to the auditing 

procedures applied in the audits of the basic financial statements, and accordingly, we do not 

express an opinion or provide any assurance on it. 

Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards 

In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated 

November 17, 2014, on our consideration of the Authority’s internal control over financial 
 

43 

reporting and our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts 

and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is to describe the scope of 

our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that 

testing, and not to provide an opinion on the internal control over financial reporting or on 

compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government 

Auditing Standards in considering the Authority’s internal control over financial reporting and 

compliance. 

Jackson, Mississippi 

November 17, 2014 
BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2014 2013

ASSETS

Intragovernmental

Fund balance with Treasury 28,464,058 $ 30,309,027 $ 

Cash 895,454 863,244

Interfund receivable 31,943 - 

Receivables 472,165 628,335 

TOTAL ASSETS 29,863,620 $ 31,800,606 $ 

LIABILITIES

Intragovernmental payable 251,904 $ 235,501 $ 

Accounts payable 163,859 31,266 

Grants and other payables 1,798,885 2,771,877 

TOTAL LIABILITIES 2,214,648 3,038,644

NET POSITION

Unexpended appropriations/state funds 27,610,036 28,792,490 

Cumulative results of operations 38,936 (30,528) 

TOTAL NET POSITION 27,648,972 28,761,962 

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET POSITION 29,863,620 $ 31,800,606 $ 

See Notes to Financial Statements

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

BALANCE SHEETS

SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 AND 2013

44
2014 2013

PROGRAM COSTS

Economic Development

Intragovernmental gross costs 236,133 $ 174,094 $ 

Less intragovernmental earned revenue - - 

Intragovernmental net costs 236,133 174,094

Gross costs with the public 18,153,774 18,933,914

Less earned revenues from the public - - 

Net costs with the public 18,153,774 18,933,914

TOTAL NET PROGRAM COSTS 18,389,907 19,108,008 

NET COST OF OPERATIONS 18,389,907 $ 19,108,008 $ 

See Notes to Financial Statements

YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 AND 2013

STATEMENTS OF NET COST

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

45
2014

Cumulative Unexpended Cumulative Unexpended

Results Appropriations/ Results Appropriations/

of Operations Funds of Operations Funds

NET POSITION, BEGINNING BALANCE (30,528) $ 28,792,490 $ (29,790) $ 32,442,603 $ 

BUDGETARY FINANCING SOURCES (USES)

Appropriations received - 12,000,000 - 11,677,000

Other adjustments (recessions, etc.) - - - (610,777) 

Appropriations used 13,308,090 (13,119,675) 14,491,512 (14,491,512) 

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)

Cost of operations absorbed by member states and others - 1,177,135 - 1,111,371 

Cost of operations absorbed by RCAP - 3,877,917 - 3,252,971 

Imputed financing from costs absorbed by others 33,450 - 26,592 - 

Disbursements of RCAP funds 3,896,313 (3,896,313) 3,324,684 (3,324,684) 

Disbursements of funds provided by member states and others 1,221,518 (1,221,518) 1,264,482 (1,264,482) 

TOTAL FINANCING SOURCES (USES) 18,459,371 (1,182,454) 19,107,270 (3,650,113) 

NET COST OF OPERATIONS 18,389,907 - 19,108,008 - 

NET CHANGE 69,464 (1,182,454) (738) (3,650,113) 

NET POSITION, ENDING BALANCE 38,936 $ 27,610,036 $ (30,528) $ 28,792,490 $ 

See Notes to Financial Statements

2013

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION

YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 AND 2013

46
2014

Federal State and Other

 Rural Community 

Assistance Program Eliminations Combined

Budgetary and

Budgetary Non-Budgetary Non-Budgetary Non-Budgetary Non-Budgetary

BUDGETARY RESOURCES

Unobligated balance, beginning of year 459,310 $ 694,319 $ (35,299) $ - $ 1,118,330 $ 

Recoveries of prior year obligations 690,042 - - - 690,042 

Budget authority

Appropriations received 12,000,000 - - - 12,000,000 

Spending authority from offsetting collections

Collected - 1,177,957 3,877,917 - 5,055,874 

Permanently not available - - - - - 

TOTAL RESOURCES (BUDGETARY AND NON-BUDGETARY) 13,149,352 $ 1,872,276 $ 3,842,618 $ - $ 18,864,246 $ 

STATUS OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES

Obligations incurred

Direct 12,941,779 $ - $ - $ - $ 12,941,779 $ 

Unobligated balances/unexpended funds

Apportioned 207,573 - - - 207,573 

Unexpended funds - 649,936 (53,695) - 596,241 

TOTAL STATUS OF BUDGETARY RESOURCES 13,149,352 $ 649,936 $ (53,695) $ - $ 13,745,593 $ 

CHANGE IN OBLIGATED BALANCES

Obligated balance, net, beginning of year 29,849,717 $ 20,796 $ 966,114 $ - $ 30,836,627 $ 

Obligations incurred 12,941,779 1,221,518 3,896,313 - 18,059,610 

Gross outlays (13,844,969) (1,219,116) (4,062,334) - (19,126,419) 

Recoveries of prior year unpaid obligations, actual (690,042) - - - (690,042) 

Obligated balance, net, end of year

Undelivered orders 27,038,982 - - - 27,038,982 

Accounts payable 1,217,503 23,198 800,093 - 2,040,794 

TOTAL UNPAID OBLIGATED BALANCE, NET,

END OF YEAR 28,256,485 $ 23,198 $ 800,093 $ - $ 29,079,776 $ 

NET OUTLAYS

Gross outlays 13,844,969 $ 1,219,116 $ 4,062,334 $ - $ 19,126,419 $ 

Offsetting collections - (1,177,957) (3,877,917) (5,055,874) - 

TOTAL NET OUTLAYS 13,844,969 $ 41,159 $ 184,417 $ - $ 14,070,545 $ 

See Notes to Financial Statements

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

STATEMENTS OF RESOURCES (BUDGETARY AND NON-BUDGETARY)

YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 AND 2013

47
2013

 Federal State and Other

 Rural Community 

Assistance Program Eliminations Combined 

Budgetary and

Budgetary Non-Budgetary Non-Budgetary Non-Budgetary Non-Budgetary

$ 659,015 652,423 $ 36,414 $ - $ 1,347,852 $ 

 - 3,249,138 - - 3,249,138 

 - 11,677,000 - - 11,677,000 

 1,299,786 - 3,252,971 (188,415) 4,364,342 

 - (610,777) - - (610,777) 

$ 1,958,801 14,967,784 $ 3,289,385 $ (188,415) $ 20,027,555 $ 

$ - 14,508,474 $ - $ - $ 14,508,474 $ 

 - 459,310 - - 459,310 

 694,319 - (35,299) - 659,020 

$ 694,319 14,967,784 $ (35,299) $ - $ 15,626,804 $ 

$ - 33,044,329 $ 1,017,158 $ - $ 34,061,487 $ 

 1,264,482 14,508,474 3,324,684 - 19,097,640 

 (1,243,686) (14,453,948) (3,375,728) - (19,073,362) 

 - (3,249,138) - - (3,249,138) 

 - 28,094,642 - - 28,094,642 

 20,796 1,755,075 966,114 2,741,985 - 

$ 20,796 29,849,717 $ 966,114 $ - $ 30,836,627 $ 

$ 1,243,686 14,453,948 $ 3,375,728 $ - $ 19,073,362 $ 

 (1,299,786) - (3,252,971) (4,552,757) - 

$ (56,100) 14,453,948 $ 122,757 $ - $ 14,520,605 $ 

48
 

49

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY 

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 

September 30, 2014 and 2013 

NOTE 1 – NATURE OF OPERATIONS AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT 

ACCOUNTING POLICIES 

Reporting Entity 

The Delta Regional Authority (DRA or the Authority) is a federal-state partnership serving a 252 

county/parish area in an eight-state region. Led by a federal co-chairman and the governors of 

each participating state, DRA is designed to remedy severe and chronic economic distress by 

stimulating economic development and fostering partnerships that will have a positive impact on 

the region’s economy. DRA helps economically distressed communities take advantage of other 

federal and state programs focused on basic infrastructure development and transportation 

improvements, business development and job training services. 

The Authority is a party to allocation transfers with other federal agencies as a transferring 

(parent) entity. Allocation transfers are legal delegations by one department of its authority to 

obligate budget authority and outlay funds to another department. A separate fund account 

(allocation account) is created in the U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) as a subset of the 

parent fund account for tracking and reporting purposes. All allocation transfers of balances are 

credited to this account, and subsequent obligations and outlays incurred by the child entity are 

charged to this allocation account as they execute the delegated activity on behalf of the parent 

entity. Generally, all financial activity related to these allocation transfers (e.g., budget 

authority, obligations, outlays) is reported in the financial statements of the parent entity from 

which the underlying legislative authority, appropriations and budget apportionments are 

derived. The Authority allocates funds, as the parent, to the United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA). 

Basis of Presentation 

These basic statements have been prepared from the accounting records of DRA in accordance 

with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) and the 

form and content for entity financial statements specified by the President’s Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) in OMB Circular No. A-136, Financial Reporting 

Requirements, as amended. GAAP, for federal entities, are standards prescribed by the Federal 

Accounting Standards Advisory Board (FASAB), which has been designated as the official 

accounting standards setting body for the federal government by the American Institute of 

Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 

OMB Circular No. A-136 requires agencies to prepare basic statements, which include a balance 

sheet, statement of net cost, statement of changes in net position and statement of resources 
 

50

(budgetary and non-budgetary). The balance sheets present, as of September 30, 2014 and 2013, 

amounts of future economic benefits owned or managed by DRA (assets), amounts owed by 

DRA (liabilities), and amounts which comprise the difference (net position). The statements of 

net cost report the full cost of the program, both direct and indirect costs of the output, and the 

costs of identifiable supporting services provided by other segments within DRA and other 

reporting entities. The statements of resources (budgetary and non-budgetary) report an 

agency’s budgetary activity. 

 

Management of Financial Records 

Federal appropriations are managed for DRA by the General Services Administration (GSA). 

Using the government-wide standard general ledger system (SGL), accounting transactions are 

initiated at DRA and ultimately entered into the accounting records by GSA. These transactions 

are designated in the financial statements as “federal.” 

As described in Note 3, DRA invoices and receives funds from the various member states to be 

used to pay administrative costs. This process meets the requirement of originating legislation 

which stipulates that “IN GENERAL.- Administrative expenses of the Authority (except for the 

expenses of the federal co-chairperson, including expenses of the alternate and staff of the 

federal co-chairperson, which shall be paid solely by the federal government) shall be paid 

(A) by the federal government, in an amount equal to 50% of the administrative expenses; and 

(B) by the states in the region participating in the Authority, in an amount equal to 50% of the 

administrative expenses. The funds received from the states are maintained in a local bank 

account, and transactions are initiated and managed by the DRA staff. These transactions are 

designated in the financial statements as ‘State’.” 

Basis of Accounting 

Transactions are recorded on both the accrual and budgetary basis. Under the accrual basis of 

accounting, revenues are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized when a liability is 

incurred, without regard to receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary accounting facilitates 

compliance with legal constraints on, and control of, the use of federal funds. 

The accompanying balance sheets, statements of net cost and statements of changes in net 

position have been prepared on an accrual basis. The statements of resources (budgetary and 

non-budgetary) have been prepared in accordance with budgetary accounting rules. 

Use of Estimates 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make 

estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities and disclosure 

of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported 

amounts of revenues, expenses and other changes in net position during the reporting period. 

Actual results could differ from those estimates. 
 

51

Revenues and Other Financing Sources 

DRA is a federal agency and receives appropriations. Other financing sources for DRA consist 

of imputed financing sources which are costs financed by other federal entities on behalf of 

DRA, as required by Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standard (SFFAS) No. 5, 

Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government. DRA also had a reimbursable agreement 

with the United States Department of Transportation (DOT) during fiscal years 2014 and 2013. 

Cash 

At September 30, 2014 and 2013, cash consisted of deposit accounts with several financial 

institutions. At September 30, 2014, the Authority’s cash accounts were not fully insured. 

General Property and Equipment 

Substantially all of the facilities and equipment used by DRA are under an operating lease. Any 

potentially capitalizable equipment purchased by DRA has been immaterial and has been 

expensed as incurred. 

Compensated Absences 

The Authority’s policies permit employees to accumulate annual and sick leave benefits that may 

be realized as paid time off. Expense and the related liability are recognized as annual leave 

benefits are earned. Sick leave benefits expected to be realized as paid time off are recognized as 

expense when the time off occurs, and no liability is accrued for such benefits employees have 

earned but not yet realized. The maximum accrual of annual leave is 240 hours, and there is no 

maximum accumulation of sick leave. Compensated absence liabilities for annual leave are 

computed using the regular pay and termination pay rates in effect at the balance sheet date, plus 

an additional amount for compensation-related payments such as Social Security, Medicare taxes 

and retirement computed using rates in effect at that date. 

Reclassifications 

Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2013 financial statements to conform to the 2014 

financial statement presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on net costs. 
 

52

NOTE 2 – FUND BALANCE WITH TREASURY 

DRA’s fund balance with Treasury comes from appropriations and the reimbursable agreement 

with DOT. A summary of DRA’s fund balance with Treasury follows. 

 

2014 2013

Fund balance with Treasury

Appropriated fund 28,464,058 $ $ 30,309,027

Status of fund balance with Treasury

Unobligated balance

Available 207,573 $ 459,310 $ 

Unavailable - - 

Obligated balance not yet disbursed 28,256,485 29,849,717

$ 28,464,058 $ 30,309,027

NOTE 3 – FUNDS RECEIVED AS ASSESSMENTS FROM MEMBER STATES 

Funds received as assessments from the various member states are maintained in a bank account 

separate from all other cash. These assessments are included with cash in the accompanying 

balance sheets. The states are required, by originating legislation, to pay 50% of the 

administrative costs of DRA. Amounts billed to the states are calculated at the beginning of each 

fiscal year and are based on the states’ 50% assessment of DRA administrative costs. The 

following table indicates funds on hand received from member states. 

2014 2013

Balance of state funds on hand, 

beginning of year $ 228,047 185,810 $ 

Current year billed to and received from states 807,603 722,729 

Total available from states 993,413 $ $ 950,776

Balance of state funds on hand, 

end of year $ 421,119 $ 185,810
 

53

NOTE 4 – LIABILITIES COVERED AND NOT COVERED BY BUDGETARY RESOURCES 

Liabilities not covered by budgetary resources are liabilities for which congressional action 

(DRA appropriation bill) is needed before budgetary resources can be provided. Liabilities of 

DRA are classified as liabilities covered or not covered by budgetary resources (DRA state 

assessments, transfers/grants from other agencies) and are as follows: 

2014 2013

Liabilities not covered by budgetary resources

Leave liability (federal) 33,542 $ 34,844 $ 

Leave liability (state) 25,959 25,959

Other payables (state) 43,813 24,588

Deferred inflows from grants (RCAP) 90,766 275,792

Grants payable (RCAP) 691,606 690,322 

Total liabilities not covered by budgetary resources 885,686 1,051,505

Liabilities covered by budgetary resources

Accounts payable 140,360 6,678

Grants payable 915,988 1,728,836

Payroll and leave liability 40,549 16,124

Intragovernmental payable 232,065 235,501

Total liabilities covered by budgetary resources 1,328,962 1,987,139

Total liabilities $ 2,214,648 $ 3,038,644
 

54

NOTE 5 – GRANTS AND OTHER PAYABLES 

A summary of grants and other payables at September 30 follows. 

2014 2013

Federal

Accrued funded payroll and leave - current 18,330 $ 12,333 $ 

Accrued unfunded leave - noncurrent 33,542 34,844

Grants payable 915,988 1,728,836 

Total federal 967,860 1,776,013 

State and Other

Accrued leave 25,959 29,750 

 Other payables 22,694 - 

Total state and other 48,653 29,750 

Rural Community Assistance Program 

Deferred inflows of grant funds 90,766 275,792

Grants payable 691,606 690,322 

Total Rural Community Assistance Program 782,372 966,114 

$ 2,771,877 1,798,885 $ 

NOTE 6 – APPORTIONMENT CATEGORIES OF OBLIGATIONS INCURRED 

The direct obligations are obligations incurred against amounts apportioned under category A 

and category B on the latest Standard Form (SF) 132. The reimbursable obligations are those 

incurred against the reimbursable agreements with Treasury. A summary of these obligations at 

September 30 follows. 

 

2014 2013

Direct - category A - $ 1,448,313 $ 

Direct - category B 12,941,779 13,060,161

Total obligations 12,941,779 $ $ 14,508,474
 

55

NOTE 7 – EXPLANATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LIABILITIES NOT 

COVERED BY BUDGETARY RESOURCES ON THE BALANCE SHEETS AND THE 

CHANGE IN COMPONENTS REQUIRING OR GENERATING RESOURCES IN THE 

FUTURE PERIODS 

Liabilities not covered by budgetary resources totaled $885,686, and the decrease in components 

requiring resources in future periods totaled $1,302 at September 30, 2014. Liabilities not 

covered by budgetary resources totaled $1,051,504, and the increase in components requiring 

resources in future periods totaled $50,052 at September 30, 2013. The changes are the net 

increase/decrease of future funded expenses for annual leave and represent the difference 

between appropriations of annual funds for the prior and current annual funds. Accrued funded 

payroll liability is covered by budgetary resources and is included in the net cost of operations. 

Whereas, the unfunded leave liability includes the expense related to the increase in annual leave 

liability for which the budgetary resources will be provided in a subsequent period. 

NOTE 8 – OPERATING LEASES 

DRA leases its primary operating facilities, including substantially all furniture and fixtures used, 

under a 15-year operating lease arrangement with Coahoma County, Mississippi. DRA also 

leases space for the Washington D.C. office from State Services Organization, Inc. under a 6- 

year operating lease arrangement. 

Future minimum lease payments at September 30, 2014, were: 

 

 

2015 110,694 $ 

2016 111,883 

2017 84,175 

2018 56,494 

2019 57,765 

After 5 years 19,470 

$ 440,481

The lease with Coahoma County may be terminated by DRA should DRA fail to receive funding 

from the United States, the existence of DRA be terminated, or should the governing body of 

DRA choose to move DRA’s office outside Coahoma County, Mississippi. However, the lease 

with State Services Organization, Inc. may also be terminated for the above reasons, and DRA 

will be liable for four months of base rent upon early termination of the lease agreement. Rental 

expense was $132,589 and $127,721 for the years ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, 

respectively. 
 

56

NOTE 9 – PENSION PLANS 

Plan Description 

The Authority contributes to a defined contribution 401(k) plan covering all non-federal 

employees. Retirement expense is recorded for the amount of the Authority’s required 

contributions, determined in accordance with the terms of the plan. The plan is administered by 

Advanced Data Processing, Inc. The plan provides retirement and death benefits to plan 

members and their beneficiaries. Benefit provisions are contained in the Plan Document and 

were established and can be amended by action of the Authority’s governing body. 

Additionally, the Authority’s federal employees participate in the Federal Employees’ 

Retirement System (FERS), a cost-sharing, multiple-employer defined benefit pension plan. 

FERS provides retirement and disability benefits, annual cost-of-living adjustments and death 

benefits to the plan members and beneficiaries. 

Funding Policy 

Contribution rates for the Authority for the defined contribution 401(k) plan expressed as a 

percentage of covered payroll were 13.8% and 14.3% for the years ended September 30, 2014 

and 2013, respectively. Contributions made by the Authority amounted to $57,795 and $64,514 

for the years ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. 

FERS covered employees are required to contribute 0.80% of their annual covered salary, and 

the Authority was required to contribute 11.2% of annual covered payroll through September 30, 

2013. For the year ended September 30, 2014, FERS covered employees make contributions 

based on their year of hire ranging from 0.8% to 4.4%, and the employer contribution ranges 

from 11.9% to 20.8%. Contribution rates for employees participating in the FERS plan 

expressed as a percentage of covered payroll were 13.6% and 11.9% for the years ended 

September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The Authority’s contributions to FERS for the years 

ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 were $73,263 and $63,595, respectively, which equaled the 

required contributions for each year. 

NOTE 10 – RISK MANAGEMENT 

The Authority is exposed to various risks of loss related to torts; theft of, damage to and 

destruction of assets; business interruption; errors and omissions; employee injuries and 

illnesses; natural disasters and employee health and accident benefits. Commercial insurance 

coverage is purchased for claims arising from such matters other than those related to errors and 

omissions and natural disasters. Settled claims have not exceeded this commercial coverage in 

any of the three preceding years. 
 

57

NOTE 11 – RECONCILIATION OF NET COST OF OPERATIONS (PROPRIETARY) TO 

BUDGET 

2014 2013

RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES

BUDGETARY RESOURCES OBLIGATED

Obligations incurred 12,941,779 $ 14,508,474 $ 

Less spending authority from offsetting collections and recoveries (690,042) (3,249,138) 

Net obligations 12,251,737 11,259,336 

OTHER RESOURCES

Imputed financing from costs absorbed by others 33,450 26,592 

Cost of operations absorbed by member states and others 1,221,518 1,264,482

Cost of operations absorbed by RCAP 3,896,313 3,324,684 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES 17,403,018 15,875,094 

RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ITEMS NOT PART

OF THE NET COST OF OPERATIONS

Change in budgetary resources obligated for goods,

services and benefits ordered but not yet provided 1,056,354 3,232,176 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE NET

COST OF OPERATIONS 18,459,372 19,107,270 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE 

ACQUISITION OF ASSETS (68,163) (4,314) 

COMPONENTS REQUIRING OR GENERATING

RESOURCES IN FUTURE PERIODS

Increase (decrease) in annual leave liability (1,302) 5,052 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE NET

COST OF OPERATIONS 18,389,907 $ 19,108,008 $ 
 

58

NOTE 12 – EXPLANATION OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE STATEMENT OF 

BUDGETARY RESOURCES AND THE BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES 

GOVERNMENT 

Budgetary resources made available to DRA include current appropriations, unobligated 

appropriations and recoveries of prior year obligations. For FY 2013, no material differences 

exist between the amounts on the statement of budgetary resources and the amounts in the FY 

2014 President’s budget, which are rounded to the nearest million. As the FY 2016 President’s 

budget is not yet available, comparison between the statement of budgetary resources and the 

actual FY 2014 data in the FY 2016 budget cannot be performed. 

 
OTHER INFORMATION
 Rural Community 

Federal State and Other Assistance Program Elimination

ASSETS

Intragovernmental

Fund balance with Treasury 28,464,058 $ - $ - $ - $ 

Cash - 561,583 333,871 - 

Interfund receivable 31,943 - - - 

Receivables 1,714 40,456 429,995 - 

.

TOTAL ASSETS 28,497,715 $ 602,039 $ 763,866 $ - $ 

LIABILITIES

Intragovernmental payable 251,904 $ - $ - $ - $ Interfund transfers 82,480 (99,948) 17,468 - Accounts payable 142,740 3,398 17,721 - Grants and other payables 967,860 48,653 782,372 - 

TOTAL LIABILITIES 1,444,984 (47,897) 817,561 - 

NET POSITION

Unexpended appropriations/state funds 27,013,795 649,936 (53,695) - Cumulative results of operations 38,936 - - - 

TOTAL NET POSITION 27,052,731 649,936 (53,695) - 

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET POSITION 28,497,715 $ 602,039 $ 763,866 $ - $ 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

COMBINING BALANCE SHEET

SEPTEMBER 30, 2014 

59
State Rural Community 

Federal and Other Assistance Program Eliminatio

ASSETS

Intragovernmental

Fund balance with Treasury 30,309,027 $ - $ - $ - $ 

Cash - 486,330 376,914 - 

Receivables 4,314 258,535 553,901 (188,4

 

TOTAL ASSETS 30,313,341 $ 744,865 $ 930,815 $ (188,4

$ 

LIABILITIES

Intragovernmental payable 235,501 $ - $ - $ - $ Accounts payable 10,470 20,796 - - Grants and other payables 1,776,013 29,750 966,114 - 

TOTAL LIABILITIES 2,021,984 50,546 966,114 - 

NET POSITION

Unexpended appropriations/state funds 28,321,885 694,319 (35,299) (188,4

 

Cumulative results of operations (30,528) - - - 

TOTAL NET POSITION 28,291,357 694,319 (35,299) (188,4

 

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET POSITION 30,313,341 $ 744,865 $ 930,815 $ (188,4

$ 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

COMBINING BALANCE SHEET

SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 

60
State Rural Community 

Federal and Other Assistance Program Eliminatio

PROGRAM COSTS

Economic Development

Intragovernmental gross costs 236,133 $ - $ - $ - $ 

Less intragovernmental earned revenue - - - - 

Intragovernmental net costs 236,133 - - - 

Gross costs with the public 13,035,943 1,221,518 3,896,313 - Less earned revenues from the public - - - - 

Net costs with the public 13,035,943 1,221,518 3,896,313 - TOTAL NET PROGRAM COSTS 13,272,076 1,221,518 3,896,313 - 

NET COST OF OPERATIONS 13,272,076 $ 1,221,518 $ 3,896,313 $ - $ 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET COST

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014

61
 State Rural Community 

Federal and Other Assistance Program Elimination

PROGRAM COSTS

Economic Development

Intragovernmental gross costs 174,094 $ - $ - $ 

$ 

Less intragovernmental earned revenue - - - 

 

Intragovernmental net costs 174,094 - - 

 

Gross costs with the public 14,344,748 1,264,482 3,324,684 

 

Less earned revenues from the public - - - 

Net costs with the public 14,344,748 1,264,482 3,324,684 

 

TOTAL NET PROGRAM COSTS 14,518,842 1,264,482 3,324,684 

 

NET COST OF OPERATIONS 14,518,842 $ 1,264,482 $ 3,324,684 $ 

$ 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

COMBINING STATEMENT OF NET COST

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2013

62
Federal 

Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative 

Results Unexpended Results Unexpended Results Unexpended Results Unexpended 

of Operations Appropriations of Operations State Funds of Operations RCAP Funds of Operations Funds 

NET POSITION, BEGINNING BALANCE (30,528) $ 28,321,885 $ - $ 694,319 $ - $ (35,299) $ - $ (188,415) $ 

BUDGETARY FINANCING SOURCES (USES)

Appropriations received - 12,000,000 - - - - - - 

Other adjustments (recisions, etc.) - - - - - - - - 

Appropriations used 13,308,090 (13,308,090) - - - - - 188,415 

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)

Cost of operations absorbed by member states

and others - - - 1,177,135 - - - - 

Cost of operations absorbed by RCAP - - - - - 3,877,917 - - 

Imputed financing from costs absorbed by others 33,450 - - - - - - - 

Disbursements of RCAP funds - - - - 3,896,313 (3,896,313) - - 

Disbursements of funds provided by member states

and others - - 1,221,518 (1,221,518) - - - - 

TOTAL FINANCING SOURCES (USES) 13,341,540 (1,308,090) 1,221,518 (44,383) 3,896,313 (18,396) - 188,415 

NET COST OF OPERATIONS 13,272,076 - 1,221,518 - 3,896,313 - - - 

NET CHANGE 69,464 (1,308,090) - (44,383) - (18,396) - 188,415 

NET POSITION, ENDING BALANCE 38,936 $ 27,013,795 $ - $ 649,936 $ - $ (53,695) $ - $ - $ 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014

State and Other

 Rural Community Assistance 

Program Eliminations

63
Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative 

Results Unexpended Results Unexpended Results Unexpended Results Unexp

of Operations Appropriations of Operations State Funds of Operations RCAP Funds of Operations Fun

NET POSITION, BEGINNING BALANCE (29,790) $ 31,747,174 $ - $ 659,015 $ - $ 36,414 $ - $ 

$ 

BUDGETARY FINANCING SOURCES (USES)

Appropriations received - 11,677,000 - - - - - 

 

Other adjustments (recessions, etc.) - (610,777) - - - - - 

 

Appropriations used 14,491,512 (14,491,512) - - - - - 

 

OTHER FINANCING SOURCES (USES)

Cost of operations absorbed by member states

and others - - - 1,299,786 - - - (1

 

Cost of operations absorbed by RCAP - - - - - 3,252,971 - 

 

Imputed financing from costs absorbed by others 26,592 - - - - - - 

 

Disbursements of RCAP funds - - - - 3,324,684 (3,324,684) - 

 

Disbursements of funds provided by member states

and others - - 1,264,482 (1,264,482) - - - 

TOTAL FINANCING SOURCES (USES) 14,518,104 (3,425,289) 1,264,482 35,304 3,324,684 (71,713) - (1

 

NET COST OF OPERATIONS 14,518,842 - 1,264,482 - 3,324,684 - - 

NET CHANGE (738) (3,425,289) - 35,304 - (71,713) - (1

 

NET POSITION, ENDING BALANCE (30,528) $ 28,321,885 $ - $ 694,319 $ - $ (35,299) $ - $ (1

$ 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN NET POSITION

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2013

State and Other

 Rural Community Assistance 

Federal Program Eliminations

64
DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

 State Rural Community 

Federal and Other Assistance Program Elim

RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIESBUDGETARY RESOURCES OBLIGATED

Obligations incurred 12,941,779 $ - $ - $ 

$ 

Less spending authority from offsetting collections and recoveries 690,042 - - 

Net obligations 12,251,737 - - 

 

OTHER RESOURCES

Imputed financing from costs absorbed by others 33,450 - - 

 

Cost of operations absorbed by member states and others - 1,221,518 - 

 

Cost of operations absorbed by RCAP - - 3,896,313 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES 12,285,187 1,221,518 3,896,313 

 

RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ITEMS NOT PART OF THE

NET COST OF OPERATIONS

Change in budgetary resources obligated for goods,

services and benefits ordered but not yet provided 1,056,354 - - 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE NET COST 

OF OPERATIONS 13,341,541 1,221,518 3,896,313 

 

RESOURCES THAT FINANCE THE ACQUISITION OF ASSETS (68,163) - - 

 

COMPONENTS REQUIRING OR GENERATING RESOURCES IN 

FUTURE PERIODS

Decrease in annual leave liability (1,302) - - 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE NET COST OF 

OPERATIONS 13,272,076 $ 1,221,518 $ 3,896,313 $ 

$ 

COMBINING RECONCILIATION OF NET COST OF OPERATIONS (PROPRIETARY) TO BUDGET

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014

65
DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

 State Rural Community 

Federal and Other Assistance Program El

RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIESBUDGETARY RESOURCES OBLIGATED

Obligations incurred 14,508,474 $ - $ - $ 

$ 

Less spending authority from offsetting collections and recoveries 3,249,138 - - 

Net obligations 11,259,336 - - 

 

OTHER RESOURCES

Imputed financing from costs absorbed by others 26,592 - - 

 

Cost of operations absorbed by member states - 1,264,482 - 

 

Cost of operations absorbed by others - - 3,324,684 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ACTIVITIES 11,285,928 1,264,482 3,324,684 

 

RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE ITEMS NOT PART OF THE

NET COST OF OPERATIONS

Change in budgetary resources obligated for goods,

services and benefits ordered but not yet provided (3,232,176) - - 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE NET COST 

OF OPERATIONS 14,518,104 1,264,482 3,324,684 

 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE 

ACQUISITION OF ASSETS - (4,314) - 

 

COMPONENTS REQUIRING OR GENERATING RESOURCES IN 

FUTURE PERIODS

Increase in annual leave liability 5,052 - - 

TOTAL RESOURCES USED TO FINANCE THE NET COST OF 

OPERATIONS 14,518,842 $ 1,264,482 $ 3,324,684 $ 

$ 

COMBINING RECONCILIATION OF NET COST OF OPERATIONS (PROPRIETARY) TO BUDGE

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2013

66
Description Federal Funds 

 State and Other 

Funds 

 Rural Community 

Assistance Program 

Grants, subsidies and contributions 11,323,202 $ - $ 3,896,31

$ 

Consulting and other services 546,387 318,826 - Employee benefits 272,513 58,460 - Personnel services 722,738 247,518 - Seminars and meetings - 73,491 - Travel and transportation of persons 201,135 64,985 - Rent, communications and utilities 107,403 277,421 - Supplies and materials 30,813 38,100 - Printing and reproduction 62,386 109,859 - Office expense 5,499 32,858 - 

$ 1,221,518 13,272,076 $ 3,896,31

$ 

NOTE TO SCHEDULE 1. The federal funds column of the schedule of expenditures has been prepared on the cash basis. Therefore, some amounts presmay differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements.

YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014

SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

Paid From

 67
Funding Priorities - Public Law 100-460: Sec. 382C.(b) (2) (A)-(D), 

(7 U.S.C. 2009 aa, as amended)

DRA Total Funding DRA Total Funding DRA 

Obligated Project Funds Priority % Obligated Project Funds Priority % Obligated 

 A. Basic Public Infrastructure 2,310,502 $ 36,494,129 $ 45.3% 2,915,806 $ 649,450,560 $ 32.0% 3,048,01

$ 

 B. Transportation Infrastructure 1,090,506 13,003,704 21.4% 2,035,412 70,517,811 22.3% 2,937,90

 

 C. Business Development 1,626,951 19,612,093 31.9% 2,883,616 226,731,630 31.6% 1,999,03

 

 D. Work Development 74,001 1,871,819 1.5% 1,276,885 6,997,425 14.0% 1,045,90

 

 E. Other - - 0.0% - - 0.0% - 

$ 70,981,745 5,101,960 $ 100.0% $ 953,697,426 9,111,719 $ 100.0% $ 

9,030,85

DRA State State DRA State State DRA 

Obligated Allocation % Obligated Allocation % Obligated 

State Allocations

Alabama - $ 1,007,128 $ 10.7% 979,248 $ 979,248 $ 10.9% 1,013,55

$ 

Arkansas 1,409,639 1,409,639 14.9% 1,415,326 1,415,326 15.8% 1,336,72

 

Illinois 744,740 744,740 7.9% 706,184 706,148 7.9% 810,57

 

Kentucky 867,003 867,005 9.2% 839,893 839,894 9.4% 850,17

 

Louisiana 1,696,438 1,596,439 16.9% 1,644,478 1,644,478 18.4% 1,734,43

 

Mississippi 226,590 1,386,207 14.7% 1,342,547 1,342,557 15.0% 1,161,31

 

Missouri - 1,088,953 11.5% 1,039,830 1,039,830 11.5% 1,093,87

 

Tennessee 157,550 1,348,507 14.3% 994,213 994,215 11.0% 1,030,20

 

$ 5,101,960 9,448,618 $ 100.0% $ 8,961,719 8,961,696 $ 100.0% $ 9,030,85

 

* Grant obligation process for 2014 not completed as of audit report date.

2014 2013 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

SCHEDULES OF GRANTS MADE*

YEARS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014, 2013 AND 2012

2014 2013 

68
Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control 

Over Financial Reporting and on Compliance and 

Other Matters Based on an Audit of the Financial Statements 

Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards 

Federal and State Co-Chairs 

 and Members of the Board 

Delta Regional Authority 

Clarksdale, Mississippi 

We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States 

of America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing 

Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of 

Delta Regional Authority (the Authority), which comprise the balance sheet as of September 30, 

2014, and the related statements of net cost, changes in net position, and resources (budgetary 

and nonbudgetary) for the year then ended, and the related notes to the financial statements, and 

have issued our report thereon dated November 17, 2014.

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting 

Management of the Authority is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal 

control over financial reporting (internal control). In planning and performing our audit, we 

considered the Authority’s internal control to determine the audit procedures that are appropriate 

in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements, but 

not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority’s internal 

control. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority’s 

internal control. 

A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow 

management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to 

prevent or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a 

deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable 

possibility that a material misstatement of the Authority’s financial statements will not be 

prevented or detected and corrected on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or 

a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet 

important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. 

Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph 

of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be 

material weaknesses. Given these limitations, during our audit, we did not identify any
70 

deficiencies in internal control that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above. 

However, material weaknesses may exist that have not been identified. 

Compliance and Other Matters 

As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the Authority’s financial statements are 

free of material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of 

laws, regulations, contracts and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct 

and material effect on the determination of financial statement amounts and certain other laws 

and regulations specified in OMB Bulletin No. 14-02. However, providing an opinion on 

compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit and, accordingly, we do not 

express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or 

other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards or OMB 

Bulletin No. 14-02. 

We noted certain matters that we reported to the Authority’s management in a separate letter 

dated November 17, 2014. 

Purpose of this Report 

The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control and 

compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of 

the Authority’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral part of an audit 

performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the Authority’s 

internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other 

purpose. 

Jackson, Mississippi 

November 17, 2014