1 / 27

Finance & Record Keeping for ERDF Projects

Finance & Record Keeping for ERDF Projects. Alison Ogilvie Michelle Depper-Westwood University of Wolverhampton . Introductions. Alison Ogilvie – Project Support Team Leader - ERDF queries, project support, monitoring compliance Michelle Depper-Westwood – Project Accountant

zalman
Download Presentation

Finance & Record Keeping for ERDF Projects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Finance & Record Keeping for ERDF Projects Alison Ogilvie Michelle Depper-Westwood University of Wolverhampton

  2. Introductions • Alison Ogilvie – Project Support Team Leader - ERDF queries, project support, monitoring compliance • Michelle Depper-Westwood – Project Accountant - Claims, finance queries, monitoring compliance

  3. Funding Guidance Notes • Not definitive – a working document. • First point of call for queries. • Especially helpful for the claim, consult it each time to minimise queries and delays processing at UoW. • Version control.

  4. Belt and Braces – Be Audit Ready • The public Match Funder/Lead Applicant (UoW) - Monitoring Visits • AWM (PEV/Article 13 PAV/Article 16) – All projects will receive. • KPMG – annual and independent • Potentially – ODPM / Brussels Remember – if AWM themselves are audited and your project is selected for sample you will also be audited at this point.

  5. Article 13 PAV (Article 4) • All projects will receive at least once • Considered a ‘Monitoring’ visit • Check systems are in place • Sample paperwork and records • File structures and finance systems • Problems can be rectified after visit – a light touch cKTP received our PAV on June 7th 2010. No partner actions due to a non-output claim being selected as sample.

  6. Evidence • All hard copies must be originals – copies not accepted for audit purposes (originals with partners – copies to us with claim). Certified copies are accepted in exceptional circumstances • Timesheets – originals, genuinely signed, genuine figures and dates – accurate hourly rates • Full, clear audit trail up to the point of defrayal from University bank account • Electronic records backed up regularly • Procurement – ensure regulations are followed as per guidelines issued.

  7. Files & Archives • Clear file structure & signposting • Easy access for future audits – ideally one file per claim submitted as well as general project files. • Ensure all files clearly state not to be destroyed until after 2025 at the earliest – subject to change. • Archiving – responsibility of partner & UoW • Project’s responsibility while running

  8. Marketing • Keep all press releases and cuttings. • Remember to keep copies of any adverts and job descriptions (Manpower plan) • Website info must be kept, old pages archived • Logos – don’t get caught out! • An audit can include any invoice which may mean a marketing purchase (e.g. promotional items), therefore, ensure a sample is available.

  9. Outputs and Results • KTP – TSB vs ERDF needs • Use the Tasking Output Definitions issued by AWM for ERDF alongside the evidence table (both included in Guidance Notes) • Output = KTP – all paperwork needs to be accurate and compliant • Extra paperwork has been minimised but we will be checking your systems and methods of keeping the evidence required for all outputs and results.

  10. Corrective Action • Document any errors you may notice, do not try to cover them – tell us! • Show what you have done to address any such errors • Keep file-notes, revisit at set times • Keep risk register up to date

  11. Classic KTP – Programme Funding Overview • £24.3m to deliver 210 Classic KTP’s • Funding profile: • £12.2m ERDF • £3.5m AWM Single Pot • £6.0m TSB • £2.6m University match

  12. TSB Funded KTP’s – Background Information • Core funded KTP’s via TSB are based on the ‘standard’ KTP budget of £86,500 plus overheads. • The funding model for standard KTP’s: • Generally – 60% TSB, 40% SME contribution. • Quarterly electronic claims, via KTP Portal.

  13. TSB Standard Funding model

  14. ERDF Funded KTP’s • Core funded Classic KTP’s via TSB and ERDF. • Based around the ERDF eligible costs of the ‘standard’ KTP model of £86,500 – although this may vary, particularly for those based on FEC costing • Not all TSB eligible costs are ERDF eligible. (e.g. – Overheads 46% on staff costs)

  15. ERDF Funded KTP’s ERDF TSB Non ERDF eligible costs: 46% overheads, £21k notional academic cost TSB & ERDF eligible costs: Associate employment cost, Associate non-employment costs

  16. ERDF Funded KTP’s

  17. ERDF Funded KTP’s ERDF TSB ERDF only eligible costs: Timesheeted Academic costs, Timesheeted support staff costs, AWM audited overheads Non ERDF eligible costs: 46% overheads, £21k notional academic cost TSB & ERDF eligible costs: Associate employment cost, Associate non-employment costs

  18. ERDF Funded KTP’s

  19. Partner Budgets • Eligible costs for ERDF programme, are split into two budgets: • Project Management budget. • Project Delivery budget. • Opportunity to reprofile coming up but is dependant upon overheads

  20. Project Management Budget • The Local Management budget covers the local costs of administering the ERDF KTP’s. • The budget is split into two areas: • Staff costs • Other costs • Funded via ERDF, university allocated HEIF, & own university resources

  21. Project Delivery Budget • The Delivery budget covers expenditure incurred for the delivery of each KTP, the budget is split into two areas: • Staffing costs – Associates • Other costs – attributable to delivery • A third possible area is that of Overheads, up to max 20% (subject to ERDF methodology and audit)

  22. Claim structure - TSB • TSB claims – via TSB portal, for TSB eligible elements of spend • TSB claims – no claim is made to TSB for management expenditure, only expenditure based on the budget headings in your contract with TSB. • TSB funding = Cash contribution to the ERDF project, but does not have to be reported to ERDF

  23. Claim structure - ERDF • ERDF Partner claims – monthly claims, based on ERDF eligible, defrayed expenditure. • Fully supported claims – copies of evidence required for all items of expenditure claimed. Supported by bank statements and BACs schedules where necessary. • 5 working days from month end to submit the claim.

  24. ERDF Claims • Expenditure and evidence examples: • Download from payroll system: • Name, Basic pay, eer’s NI, eer’s Pension, Total • Copy invoice, print out from finance system, showing date paid and payment method. • Copy bank statement and BACs schedule for each item claimed.

  25. Overheads • Max 20% of direct costs • Methodology for determining project-related indirect costs – must be audited by AWM • Overhead rate unique for each university on a project by project basis • Time consuming and rates coming out low • Need to retain all supporting documentation until 2025! • Replace overheads with academic timesheets?

  26. Useful Links • www.advantagewm.co.uk • www.innovateuk.org • www.ktponline.org

  27. Key Contacts Marc Fleetham 01902 824128 (KTP) Clare Mackinnon 01902 824004 (KTP) Alison Ogilvie 01902 323774 (ERDF queries) Michelle Depper-Westwood 01902 323791 (Finance)

More Related