Audit 15646

FY End
2023-05-31
Total Expended
$10.47M
Findings
2
Programs
14
Year: 2023 Accepted: 2024-02-05
Auditor: Forvis LLP

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Contacts

Name Title Type
GMLPVCKVCNS3 Julie O'Neal Auditee
5736632313 Ally Jackson Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: Note 1: Basis of Presentation Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the Schedule) includes the federal award activity of Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, under programs of the federal government for the year ended May 31, 2023. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, results of operations, changes in net assets or cash flows of Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care.
Title: Note 4: Federal Loan Programs Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The federal loan programs listed subsequently are administered by Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, and balances and transactions relating to these programs are included in Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Cares, financial statements. Loans outstanding at the beginning of the year and loans made during the year are included in the federal expenditures presented in the Schedule. The balance of loans outstanding at May 31, 2023, consists of: Assistance Listing Number 10.768, Program Name Business and Industry Loans, Outstanding Balance at May 31, 2022 $1,537,518 and Assistance Listing Number 10.768, Program Name Community Facilities Loans and Grants, Outstanding Balance at May 31, 2022 $10,471
Title: Note 5: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (Unaudited) Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Big Springs Medical Association, Inc., d/b/a Missouri Highlands Health Care, did not receive any donated PPE from a federal source during the year ended May 31, 2023.

Finding Details

Provider Relief Fund and American Rescue Plan (ARP) Rural Distribution – Assistance Listing No. 93.498 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Criteria or Specific Requirement – Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Pub. L. No. 116-136, 134 Stat. 563 and Pub. L. No. 116-139, 134 Stat. 622 and 623) and Reporting (45 CFR 75.342) Condition – Within the Provider Relief Fund Reporting Portal for Period 4, the Organization reported other Provider Relief Fund (PRF) expenses and lost revenues calculated using option iii. The option iii narrative stated that management "evened out any one-time journal entries made in one quarter that should have been spread evenly throughout a year." Additionally, the narrative stated "After backing these items out, we felt like we had an apples-to-apples comparison to get a true picture of our lost revenue." However, instead of spreading incentive revenue out over the period to which it related, it was excluded from all reporting periods within the lost revenues calculation. Questioned Costs – Unknown Context – The Period 4 PRF report was tested. Management excluded all incentive revenue from patient service revenue but did not state that it was doing so in the narrative supporting its option iii lost revenues calculation. Effect – Lost revenues attributable to coronavirus, as reported in the Period 1 PRF report, were overstated. Cause – As permitted by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, management revised the option iii lost revenues calculation for Period 4 to better allocate significant one-time adjustments to patient service revenue among the quarterly reporting periods. The narrative describing management's methodology was not adequately updated to reflect the exclusion of incentive revenue for all periods within the calculation. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Yes, see Finding 2022-003. Recommendation –The Organization should strengthen controls surrounding the preparation of financial reports required to be prepared and submitted for federal grants to ensure they are prepared using complete and accurate financial information. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Management agrees with this finding, as our narrative did not specifically list out and specify the backing out of incentive revenue completely from our Option iii calculation. However, when the narrative discusses “backing these items out”, our intent was for incentive revenue to be included in that grouping, but that was never implied in the narrative implicitly. Our incentive revenues can be greatly delayed in receiving and knowing about, therefore it would have inflated lost revenues to leave 2019 incentive revenue if we had none for the following years we were comparing to. Therefore we feel it was justified to take the incentive revenue out of the calculation completely to keep it the same for all years being compared. For that reason, because the narrative did not match our actual calculation is the reason for this finding.
Provider Relief Fund and American Rescue Plan (ARP) Rural Distribution – Assistance Listing No. 93.498 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Criteria or Specific Requirement – Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Pub. L. No. 116-136, 134 Stat. 563 and Pub. L. No. 116-139, 134 Stat. 622 and 623) and Reporting (45 CFR 75.342) Condition – Within the Provider Relief Fund Reporting Portal for Period 4, the Organization reported other Provider Relief Fund (PRF) expenses and lost revenues calculated using option iii. The option iii narrative stated that management "evened out any one-time journal entries made in one quarter that should have been spread evenly throughout a year." Additionally, the narrative stated "After backing these items out, we felt like we had an apples-to-apples comparison to get a true picture of our lost revenue." However, instead of spreading incentive revenue out over the period to which it related, it was excluded from all reporting periods within the lost revenues calculation. Questioned Costs – Unknown Context – The Period 4 PRF report was tested. Management excluded all incentive revenue from patient service revenue but did not state that it was doing so in the narrative supporting its option iii lost revenues calculation. Effect – Lost revenues attributable to coronavirus, as reported in the Period 1 PRF report, were overstated. Cause – As permitted by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, management revised the option iii lost revenues calculation for Period 4 to better allocate significant one-time adjustments to patient service revenue among the quarterly reporting periods. The narrative describing management's methodology was not adequately updated to reflect the exclusion of incentive revenue for all periods within the calculation. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Yes, see Finding 2022-003. Recommendation –The Organization should strengthen controls surrounding the preparation of financial reports required to be prepared and submitted for federal grants to ensure they are prepared using complete and accurate financial information. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Management agrees with this finding, as our narrative did not specifically list out and specify the backing out of incentive revenue completely from our Option iii calculation. However, when the narrative discusses “backing these items out”, our intent was for incentive revenue to be included in that grouping, but that was never implied in the narrative implicitly. Our incentive revenues can be greatly delayed in receiving and knowing about, therefore it would have inflated lost revenues to leave 2019 incentive revenue if we had none for the following years we were comparing to. Therefore we feel it was justified to take the incentive revenue out of the calculation completely to keep it the same for all years being compared. For that reason, because the narrative did not match our actual calculation is the reason for this finding.