Compliance
Title IV Audit Prep: A Student Sample You Can Actually Reproduce
When the OIG or your Single Audit asks how you pulled the sample, “we picked some files” is not an answer. ApolloSRM draws a seeded, repeatable sample from your real Title IV population, sizes it defensibly, and flags the findings that repeat from one year to the next.
ApolloSRM assembles the financial-aid audit package for you: a defensibly sized student sample drawn the same way every time (the same population and the same seed give you the same files, in the same order), a related-party note, and a repeat-findings history that catches any finding that already turned up in an earlier year. The SF-SAC data gets assembled here. We do not transmit it to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse; that stays your submission.
Why a repeatable sample matters
The first thing a sharp auditor asks about a sample is how you drew it and whether you can draw it again. If you cannot reproduce it, they do not trust it, and “we exported to a spreadsheet and eyeballed it” is an open invitation for them to pull their own, larger sample. The answer that holds up is a documented method anyone can run twice over a known population and get the same result both times.
How the draw works
ApolloSRM ranks your Title IV award population by a hash of the seed and the student ID and takes the first N. Because the ranking is deterministic, the same population and seed always return the same files in the same order, so an auditor can rerun your exact work paper. The sample size starts from a defensible default, a percentage floor with a cap, that you can override. It is a sensible starting point, not a figure we pretend is fixed in regulation. The population is your real awards for the year, never a list we invented.
Repeat findings are the ones that sting
A finding that turns up two years running is a very different conversation than a one-time slip, because it suggests the corrective action never took hold. ApolloSRM flags any finding whose reference appeared in an earlier award year and shows you the prior years, so you walk into the engagement already knowing which items will draw fire. The engagement and findings register keep the whole package in one place, related-party footnote included.
What this buys you
Audit prep usually means a frantic week reconstructing how you chose files. Here the sample is reproducible, the size is defensible, and the repeat findings are visible before the auditor finds them. Think of it as running the flight check before the launch rather than reading the incident report after it. The engagement turns into a conversation about your controls instead of your spreadsheet.
Ready to fly your school on one platform?
Go for launch, start free →