financial condition analysis made easy:

Financial Condition Analysis Made Easy:

Using CAFR information to make financial decisions.

ASPA Region 4 – October 2, 2009By Larry D. Burks, MPA

Larry D. Burks, MPA 2

Financial Condition Analysis

The following is a description of the four levels of solvency and the indicator ratios associated with each type of solvency.

Adopted from the financial condition analysis of states conducted by Wang, et al. (2006).

Also described by Wang in Financial Management in the Public Sector: Tools, Applications, and Cases (2006, pp. 148-171).

CAFRs using accrual based accounting are used for calculating solvency ratios.


STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES


STATEMENT OF NET ASSETS

Management’s Discussion and Analysis

will assist in evaluating financial condition of a government

this section may explain noticeable changes or trends indicated by the FCA solvency ratios


Cash Solvency

• related to liquidity and effective cash management

• indicates a government’s ability to generate sufficient resources to pay its current liabilities

• a larger value in the solvency ratios indicates a larger amount of assets are available to cover liabilities, thus a higher level of cash solvency

• Cash Ratio and Current Ratio are the two common measures


Cash Ratio

• (Cash + Cash Equivalents + Investments) / Current Liabilities

• measures ratio of cash, cash equivalents and investments to current liabilities

• indicates ability to cover current liabilities and relates directly to short-term financial conditions

• can also provide long-term indicators of cash solvency


Onawa Iowa - Cash Ratio

1.70

1.90

2.10

2.30

2.50

2.70

2.90

3.10

3.30

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008


Cash Ratio

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

Onawa 2.34 2.22 2.18 3.05 2.52

Orange City 0.97 1.04 1.12 0.94 1.11

Hawarden 0.84 0.41 1.07 1.31 0.98

Sioux Center 3.55 5.63 6.60 7.15 4.57

Sergeant Bluff 2.65 1.97 2.01 1.59 2.48

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008


Current Ratio

• Current Assets / Current Liabilities

• measures the ratio of current assets to current liabilities

• ratio is an indication of a government’s ability to meet short-term financial obligations with current assets


Current Ratio

0.001.002.003.004.005.006.007.008.009.00

10.0011.00

Onawa 3.33 3.36 3.40 4.38 3.91

Orange City 2.44 2.58 2.83 2.41 2.76

Hawarden 1.39 1.08 2.88 3.10 2.71

Sioux Center 5.07 7.35 8.34 9.71 6.81

Sergeant Bluff 4.06 2.96 2.97 2.23 3.43

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008


Budget Solvency

• indicates a government’s ability to generate enough revenues to fund and maintain a certain level of services

• indicators used to determine budget solvency are highly associated and higher ratios indicate a higher levels of budget solvency

• measurements include Operating Ratio and Surplus (Deficit) Per Capita


Operating Ratio

• Total Revenues/Total Expenditures • measures the ratio of total revenues to total

expenses • operating ratios greater than 1.00 indicates a

budget surplus – less than 1.00 a deficit • important to the short-term financial condition • can provide feedback and opportunities to make

corrections to prevent deficits over the long-term


Operating Ratio

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

1.400

1.600

Onawa 1.377 1.302 1.169 1.137 1.128

Orange City 1.031 0.807 1.095 1.069 1.117

Hawarden 0.991 0.948 1.018 0.997 0.990

Sioux Center 1.177 1.117 1.137 1.177 1.123

Sergeant Bluff 1.192 1.368 1.128 1.121 1.300

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008


Surplus (Deficit) Per Capita

• Total Surpluses (Deficits) / Population

• measures the amount of a government’s surplus (or defect) per resident

• provides information regarding spending levels per resident

• deficits indicate a lack of funds, a needed increase in revenues, and room for service improvements


Surplus (Deficit) Per Capita

$(700.00)

$(500.00)

$(300.00)

$(100.00)

$100.00

$300.00

$500.00

$700.00

$900.00

Onawa $442.05 $374.91 $228.89 $191.15 $183.86

Orange City $66.24 $(538.44) $240.29 $177.03 $322.51

Hawarden $(26.95) $(158.24) $58.48 $(27.16) $(33.64)

Sioux Center $506.58 $370.28 $531.46 $668.17 $528.34

Sergeant Bluff $242.07 $506.96 $187.60 $191.38 $461.91

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008



POPULATION


Long Run Solvency

• indicates future resource availability of governments

• determined largely by current long-term obligations or liabilities

• combination of the 3 ratios used have both positive and negative relationships – Net Asset Ratios have a negative association with

Long-term Liability ratios and Long-term Liability Per Capita

– both liability ratios have a positive relationship


Net Asset Ratio

• Net Assets / Total Assets • measures the portion of net assets compared to total

assets • larger ratio indicates a higher level of long-run solvency • determines what percentage of total assets is paid for

and what percentage of total assets is still classified as a liability

• indicator provides a clear picture of a government’s future spending and ability

• indicates ability to overcome emergencies and down cycles in the economy


Net Asset Ratio

0.450

0.500

0.550

0.600

0.650

0.700

0.750

0.800

0.850

Onawa 0.744 0.781 0.792 0.824 0.815

Orange City 0.636 0.568 0.580 0.617 0.592

Hawarden 0.617 0.620 0.713 0.721 0.728

Sioux Center 0.756 0.762 0.782 0.768 0.769

Sergeant Bluff 0.723 0.744 0.709 0.709 0.730

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008


Long-term Liability Ratio

• Long-term Liabilities / Total Assets • measures a government’s ability to pay off

long-term debt by comparing long-term liabilities to total assets

• higher ratio indicates lower level of ability to pay off long-term debt or a strain on future resources

• higher ratio indicates increasing levels of long-term obligation


Long-term Liability Ratio

0.000

0.050

0.100

0.150

0.200

0.250

0.300

0.350

0.400

Onawa 0.136 0.120 0.107 0.098 0.089

Orange City 0.347 0.345 0.326 0.265 0.314

Hawarden 0.194 0.193 0.202 0.199 0.181

Sioux Center 0.204 0.206 0.184 0.200 0.191

Sergeant Bluff 0.208 0.170 0.203 0.160 0.317

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008


Long-term Liability Per Capita

• Long-term Liabilities / Population • measures the amount of long-term liability

per resident • analyst can determine the level of debt

incurred in relation to the population • higher levels of debt per person, indicates

a declining level of long-term solvency – also suggests declining levels of service

delivery as a whole over the long-term


Long-term Liability Per Capita

$-

$500.00

$1,000.00

$1,500.00

$2,000.00

$2,500.00

$3,000.00

Onawa $696.03 $645.65 $596.89 $548.37 $524.99

Orange City $2,663.03 $2,573.35 $2,508.63 $1,986.96 $2,603.17

Hawarden $1,895.33 $1,817.58 $1,681.09 $1,644.74 $1,472.57

Sioux Center $1,922.68 $2,020.29 $1,888.30 $2,348.83 $2,323.64

Sergeant Bluff $1,151.53 $1,007.53 $1,310.85 $1,050.32 $1,203.52

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008



POPULATION


Service Solvency

• measures government’s ability to pay and sustain existing service levels

• Tax Per Capita ratio and Revenue Per Capita ratio measure tax burden and revenue burden of residents

• Expenditure Per Capita ratio is an indication of the cost of services per resident

• all three indicators will show lower levels of service solvency as the indicator figures increase


Tax Per Capita

• Taxes / Population • measures the relationship between taxes paid

per resident of the population • provides a calculation to determine how much

tax burden per resident in a state is collected to cover liabilities and expenses

• useful to monitor increases and decreases in tax revenue

• illustrates the costs of running government and providing services to each taxpayer


Tax Per Capita

$250.00

$300.00

$350.00

$400.00

$450.00

$500.00

$550.00

$600.00

Onawa $390.99 $434.79 $426.28 $459.82 $412.59

Orange City $358.80 $387.55 $485.28 $517.99 $531.13

Hawarden $390.31 $401.26 $442.19 $476.77 $496.94

Sioux Center $470.56 $489.12 $511.18 $562.85 $576.95

Sergeant Bluff $382.72 $350.61 $389.79 $435.07 $460.21

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008



POPULATION


Revenue Per Capita

• Total Revenues / Population • measures taxes but includes all other revenues

such as fees and fines • provides a calculation determining how much

total revenue was collected per resident of a government to cover liabilities and expenses

• illustrates the increases and decreases in revenue collection

• trends can help analyst predict a government’s ability to provide services to its community or find a cause and effect relationship


Revenue Per Capita

$-$500.00

$1,000.00$1,500.00$2,000.00$2,500.00$3,000.00$3,500.00$4,000.00$4,500.00$5,000.00$5,500.00

Onawa $1,663.48 $1,691.01 $1,697.80 $1,742.58 $1,789.92

Orange City $2,228.19 $2,256.38 $2,766.88 $2,733.29 $3,086.66

Hawarden $2,153.17 $2,305.22 $2,567.40 $2,505.48 $3,320.92

Sioux Center $3,369.40 $3,541.55 $4,402.47 $4,436.17 $4,821.69

Sergeant Bluff $1,504.08 $1,886.04 $1,658.45 $1,752.27 $1,999.88

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008



POPULATION


Expenditure Per Capita

• Total Expenses / Population • measures resident’s burden in relation to a

government’s total expenses• also provides an indication of how well services

are managed • the higher the contribution per resident, the

lower the service solvency level • can provide information to find causes of

changes and provide solutions to correct a situation if needed


Expenditure Per Capita

$-$500.00

$1,000.00$1,500.00$2,000.00$2,500.00

$3,000.00$3,500.00$4,000.00

$4,500.00$5,000.00

Onawa $1,208.48 $1,298.44 $1,452.39 $1,533.07 $1,586.23

Orange City $2,161.95 $2,794.82 $2,526.58 $2,556.26 $2,764.15

Hawarden $2,961.15 $3,040.12 $3,215.09 $3,226.27 $3,354.54

Sioux Center $2,862.83 $3,171.27 $3,871.02 $3,767.99 $4,262.65

Sergeant Bluff $1,262.02 $1,379.08 $1,470.84 $1,563.22 $1,537.97

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008



POPULATION


CONTACTSLarry D. Burks, [email protected]

Dr. Jeffery [email protected]

Jim [email protected]

Bruce R. [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]




financial condition analysis made easy:

Economy & Finance

longterm larry

current assets larry

economy larry

ratio of current assets

common measures larry

current liabilities

total assets higher

positive relationship