Audit 17864

FY End
2022-09-30
Total Expended
$180.22M
Findings
20
Programs
56
Organization: City of Jacksonville (FL)
Year: 2022 Accepted: 2023-09-27

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
26281 2022-007 Material Weakness - ABHLN
26282 2022-007 Material Weakness - ABHLN
26283 2022-006 Material Weakness Yes ABG
26284 2022-006 Material Weakness Yes ABG
26285 2022-008 Material Weakness - ABCGHL
26286 2022-008 Material Weakness - ABCGHL
26287 2022-004 Material Weakness Yes ABEHLN
26288 2022-005 Material Weakness - ABIL
26289 2022-009 Material Weakness - ABCGL
26290 2022-009 Material Weakness - ABCGL
602723 2022-007 Material Weakness - ABHLN
602724 2022-007 Material Weakness - ABHLN
602725 2022-006 Material Weakness Yes ABG
602726 2022-006 Material Weakness Yes ABG
602727 2022-008 Material Weakness - ABCGHL
602728 2022-008 Material Weakness - ABCGHL
602729 2022-004 Material Weakness Yes ABEHLN
602730 2022-005 Material Weakness - ABIL
602731 2022-009 Material Weakness - ABCGL
602732 2022-009 Material Weakness - ABCGL

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $88.42M Yes 1
21.023 Emergency Rental Assistance Program $29.44M Yes 1
20.205 Highway Planning and Construction $6.72M - 0
93.914 Hiv Emergency Relief Project Grants $6.18M - 0
97.083 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (safer) $4.50M Yes 1
21.019 Coronavirus Relief Fund $4.23M Yes 0
14.231 Emergency Solutions Grant Program $3.00M Yes 1
14.239 Home Investment Partnerships Program $2.67M - 0
14.241 Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids $2.52M - 0
14.228 Community Development Block Grants/state's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii $2.19M - 0
14.218 Community Development Block Grants/entitlement Grants $2.13M Yes 1
93.137 Community Programs to Improve Minority Health Grant Program $1.29M - 0
10.558 Child and Adult Care Food Program $1.08M - 0
93.104 Comprehensive Community Mental Health Services for Children with Serious Emotional Disturbances (sed) $1.00M - 0
93.563 Child Support Enforcement $986,309 - 0
16.817 Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation Program $898,123 - 0
93.686 Ending the Hiv Epidemic: A Plan for America Ryan White Hiv/aids Program Parts A and B (b) $828,844 - 0
93.045 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part C_nutrition Services $734,800 - 0
93.243 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services_projects of Regional and National Significance $593,064 - 0
45.310 Grants to States $467,070 - 0
16.034 Coronavirus Emergency Supplemental Funding Program $424,806 - 0
66.001 Air Pollution Control Program Support $374,441 - 0
94.011 Foster Grandparent Program $367,790 - 0
97.036 Disaster Grants - Public Assistance (presidentially Declared Disasters) $362,334 - 0
93.044 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part B_grants for Supportive Services and Senior Centers $259,576 - 0
17.805 Homeless Veterans Reintegration Project $240,040 - 0
16.922 Equitable Sharing Program $213,587 - 0
97.111 Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant Program (rcpgp) $195,974 - 0
16.833 National Sexual Assault Kit Initiative $186,647 - 0
16.123 Community-Based Violence Prevention Program $185,265 - 0
16.575 Crime Victim Assistance $166,127 - 0
16.021 Justice Systems Response to Families $146,392 - 0
14.401 Fair Housing Assistance Program_state and Local $134,803 - 0
16.529 Education, Training, and Enhanced Services to End Violence Against and Abuse of Women with Disabilities $126,994 - 0
66.818 Brownfields Assessment and Cleanup Cooperative Agreements $124,496 - 0
97.039 Hazard Mitigation Grant $120,711 - 0
93.086 Healthy Marriage Promotion and Responsible Fatherhood Grants $94,909 - 0
93.053 Nutrition Services Incentive Program $93,405 - 0
97.091 Homeland Security Biowatch Program $88,386 - 0
97.044 Assistance to Firefighters Grant $81,672 - 0
16.736 Transitional Housing Assistance for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Stalking, Or Sexual Assault $81,095 - 0
21.016 Equitable Sharing $80,234 - 0
94.016 Senior Companion Program $75,911 - 0
94.002 Retired and Senior Volunteer Program $75,098 - 0
16.738 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program $74,649 - 0
66.034 Surveys, Studies, Research, Investigations, Demonstrations, and Special Purpose Activities Relating to the Clean Air Act $65,520 - 0
16.606 State Criminal Alien Assistance Program $35,135 - 0
16.582 Crime Victim Assistance/discretionary Grants $27,477 - 0
20.600 State and Community Highway Safety $22,856 - 0
97.067 Homeland Security Grant Program $16,337 - 0
97.042 Emergency Management Performance Grants $13,926 - 0
20.301 Railroad Safety $8,595 - 0
16.710 Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Grants $5,474 Yes 1
93.568 Low-Income Home Energy Assistance $3,097 - 0
97.056 Port Security Grant Program $2,767 - 0
97.029 Flood Mitigation Assistance $450 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
HMGLC26EUPC4 Marcia Saulo Auditee
9042555261 April Shuping Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedules of expenditures of federal awards and state financial assistance includes certain federal and state grant activity of the City of Jacksonville, Florida (the City) for the year ended September 30, 2022. The schedules do not include the federal and state grant activity of the Citys discretely presented component units the JEA, Jacksonville Port Authority, and the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, which received approximately $44.8 million, and $54.8 million, respectively. Federal and state grant activity for the discretely presented component units is reported on separately. Because the Schedules present only a selected portion of the operations of the City, they are not intended to and do not present the financial position, changes in net position or cash flows of the City. The Citys reporting entity is defined in Note 1 of the Citys basic financial statements.The schedules are presented using the modified accrual basis of accounting for grants which are accounted for in governmental funds and on the accrual basis of accounting for grants which are accounted for in proprietary funds. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles in Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. The information in these schedules is presented in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance, Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations and Chapter 10.500, Rules of the Auditor General. Therefore, some amounts presented in these schedules may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The auditee did not use the de minimis cost rate.

Finding Details

Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, reporting, and special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subpart D and sections 570.200 through .710, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the April 30, 2021 Quick Guide, CDBG-CV PPR Tieback Flexibilities, Title I of the Housing Community Development Act (HCDA) of 1974, as amended (Pub. L. No. 93-383) (42 USC 5301), 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), 31 USC 1552, Section III.B.7 of CDBG-CV Notice, Section 110(a) of the HCD Act, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, and reporting requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Weekly payroll reports were not reviewed as part of the special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements compliance requirement, resulting in material noncompliance. Cause: Internal controls over financial reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate, allowable costs, cost principles, and period of performance compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Wage rate requirements were not complied with. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure wage rate requirement compliance is prioritized when applicable. We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, reporting, and special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subpart D and sections 570.200 through .710, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the April 30, 2021 Quick Guide, CDBG-CV PPR Tieback Flexibilities, Title I of the Housing Community Development Act (HCDA) of 1974, as amended (Pub. L. No. 93-383) (42 USC 5301), 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), 31 USC 1552, Section III.B.7 of CDBG-CV Notice, Section 110(a) of the HCD Act, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, and reporting requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Weekly payroll reports were not reviewed as part of the special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements compliance requirement, resulting in material noncompliance. Cause: Internal controls over financial reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate, allowable costs, cost principles, and period of performance compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Wage rate requirements were not complied with. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure wage rate requirement compliance is prioritized when applicable. We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching. The related compliance requirements are set in 2 CFR sections 200.330, .331, .501(h), .514(c), and subpart E, 24 CFR Part 576, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of monthly subrecipient reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Timesheet approvals were not documented in all instances to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles. Cause: Internal controls over monthly subrecipient report review for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching compliance requirements and timesheet reviews and approvals were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Subrecipients may not have met required matching compliance requirements. Time could be charged to the grant that is not allowable. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching. The related compliance requirements are set in 2 CFR sections 200.330, .331, .501(h), .514(c), and subpart E, 24 CFR Part 576, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of monthly subrecipient reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Timesheet approvals were not documented in all instances to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles. Cause: Internal controls over monthly subrecipient report review for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching compliance requirements and timesheet reviews and approvals were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Subrecipients may not have met required matching compliance requirements. Time could be charged to the grant that is not allowable. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Title I, Part Q, Pub. L. No. 103-322, 34 USC 10381 et seq., federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial and drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. Cause: Internal controls over financial, drawdown, and progress reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Title I, Part Q, Pub. L. No. 103-322, 34 USC 10381 et seq., federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial and drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. Cause: Internal controls over financial, drawdown, and progress reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.332 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, beneficiary eligibility, period of performance, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, and special tests and provisions. The related compliance requirements are set in Section 501 of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Subrecipient monitoring controls related to periodic subrecipient reports and the final subrecipient expenditure reports, financial reporting, period of performance, and special tests and provisions for funding reallocations were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Cause: Control activities were performed informally and without clear documentation. Effect: Individuals who are not eligible to receive the services funded by this grant may incorrectly be served by the subrecipient entities, allowable costs or cost principles may not have been followed by subrecipient entities, or subrecipients may not have been properly monitored for other compliance requirements. Expenditures could be made outside of the period of performance, amounts in the financial reports could be incorrect, funding reallocation requirements could be missed. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.332 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, reporting, and suspension and debarment. The related compliance requirements are set in 2 CFR Part 200 sections 200.514(c), 200.212, 200.318(h), 180.300 and subpart E; 48 CFR section 52.209-6; 31 CFR section 19.300; sections 602 and 603 of the Social Security Act as added by section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2 as codified at 42 USC 802 and 803 and 31 CFR Part 35, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Controls related to calculation and reporting of lost revenue were not effective and the amount calculated as base year revenue was incorrectly reported. Controls related to reporting of other grant expenditures were not effective and certain amounts were missing from the financial reports. Controls related to ensuring contractors were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded pursuant to 31 CFR section 19.300 were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Cause: Base year calculation of revenue was performed using interim financial information and was not reconciled to final audited reports. Base year calculation of revenue was not clearly documented. Subsequent year revenue calculations were performed by a consultant who was not engaged to review the base year calculation. Controls over such calculations were not effective. Review of financial reports was not sufficient to ensure all grant expenditures were reported. Suspension and debarment controls were not evidenced with clear documentation; checklists are maintained but were not completed in all cases. Effect: Calculation of lost revenue was incorrectly reported. Expenditures related to the provision of government services related to such lost revenue did not exceed the actual lost revenue. Certain other grant expenditures were erroneously excluded from the financial reports. Procurement of contractors risks including those who were suspended or debarred; however none such were identified. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, matching/level of effort, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), Section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-498, as amended (15 USC Sec. 2229a) and Section 4013 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. No internal controls were identified related to the level of effort requirement. Cause: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports, progress reports, and level of effort were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, level of effort, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, matching/level of effort, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), Section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-498, as amended (15 USC Sec. 2229a) and Section 4013 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. No internal controls were identified related to the level of effort requirement. Cause: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports, progress reports, and level of effort were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, level of effort, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, reporting, and special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subpart D and sections 570.200 through .710, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the April 30, 2021 Quick Guide, CDBG-CV PPR Tieback Flexibilities, Title I of the Housing Community Development Act (HCDA) of 1974, as amended (Pub. L. No. 93-383) (42 USC 5301), 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), 31 USC 1552, Section III.B.7 of CDBG-CV Notice, Section 110(a) of the HCD Act, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, and reporting requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Weekly payroll reports were not reviewed as part of the special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements compliance requirement, resulting in material noncompliance. Cause: Internal controls over financial reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate, allowable costs, cost principles, and period of performance compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Wage rate requirements were not complied with. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure wage rate requirement compliance is prioritized when applicable. We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, reporting, and special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subpart D and sections 570.200 through .710, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the April 30, 2021 Quick Guide, CDBG-CV PPR Tieback Flexibilities, Title I of the Housing Community Development Act (HCDA) of 1974, as amended (Pub. L. No. 93-383) (42 USC 5301), 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), 31 USC 1552, Section III.B.7 of CDBG-CV Notice, Section 110(a) of the HCD Act, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, period of performance, and reporting requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Weekly payroll reports were not reviewed as part of the special tests and provisions ? wage rate requirements compliance requirement, resulting in material noncompliance. Cause: Internal controls over financial reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate, allowable costs, cost principles, and period of performance compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Wage rate requirements were not complied with. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure wage rate requirement compliance is prioritized when applicable. We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching. The related compliance requirements are set in 2 CFR sections 200.330, .331, .501(h), .514(c), and subpart E, 24 CFR Part 576, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of monthly subrecipient reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Timesheet approvals were not documented in all instances to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles. Cause: Internal controls over monthly subrecipient report review for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching compliance requirements and timesheet reviews and approvals were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Subrecipients may not have met required matching compliance requirements. Time could be charged to the grant that is not allowable. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching. The related compliance requirements are set in 2 CFR sections 200.330, .331, .501(h), .514(c), and subpart E, 24 CFR Part 576, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of monthly subrecipient reports to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Timesheet approvals were not documented in all instances to ensure compliance with allowable costs, cost principles. Cause: Internal controls over monthly subrecipient report review for allowable costs, cost principles, and matching compliance requirements and timesheet reviews and approvals were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Subrecipients may not have met required matching compliance requirements. Time could be charged to the grant that is not allowable. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Title I, Part Q, Pub. L. No. 103-322, 34 USC 10381 et seq., federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial and drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. Cause: Internal controls over financial, drawdown, and progress reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 as amended by the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Title I, Part Q, Pub. L. No. 103-322, 34 USC 10381 et seq., federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of financial and drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. Cause: Internal controls over financial, drawdown, and progress reports were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, period of performance, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.332 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, beneficiary eligibility, period of performance, reporting, subrecipient monitoring, and special tests and provisions. The related compliance requirements are set in Section 501 of Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Subrecipient monitoring controls related to periodic subrecipient reports and the final subrecipient expenditure reports, financial reporting, period of performance, and special tests and provisions for funding reallocations were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Cause: Control activities were performed informally and without clear documentation. Effect: Individuals who are not eligible to receive the services funded by this grant may incorrectly be served by the subrecipient entities, allowable costs or cost principles may not have been followed by subrecipient entities, or subrecipients may not have been properly monitored for other compliance requirements. Expenditures could be made outside of the period of performance, amounts in the financial reports could be incorrect, funding reallocation requirements could be missed. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.332 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, reporting, and suspension and debarment. The related compliance requirements are set in 2 CFR Part 200 sections 200.514(c), 200.212, 200.318(h), 180.300 and subpart E; 48 CFR section 52.209-6; 31 CFR section 19.300; sections 602 and 603 of the Social Security Act as added by section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2 as codified at 42 USC 802 and 803 and 31 CFR Part 35, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Controls related to calculation and reporting of lost revenue were not effective and the amount calculated as base year revenue was incorrectly reported. Controls related to reporting of other grant expenditures were not effective and certain amounts were missing from the financial reports. Controls related to ensuring contractors were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded pursuant to 31 CFR section 19.300 were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. Cause: Base year calculation of revenue was performed using interim financial information and was not reconciled to final audited reports. Base year calculation of revenue was not clearly documented. Subsequent year revenue calculations were performed by a consultant who was not engaged to review the base year calculation. Controls over such calculations were not effective. Review of financial reports was not sufficient to ensure all grant expenditures were reported. Suspension and debarment controls were not evidenced with clear documentation; checklists are maintained but were not completed in all cases. Effect: Calculation of lost revenue was incorrectly reported. Expenditures related to the provision of government services related to such lost revenue did not exceed the actual lost revenue. Certain other grant expenditures were erroneously excluded from the financial reports. Procurement of contractors risks including those who were suspended or debarred; however none such were identified. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, matching/level of effort, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), Section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-498, as amended (15 USC Sec. 2229a) and Section 4013 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. No internal controls were identified related to the level of effort requirement. Cause: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports, progress reports, and level of effort were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, level of effort, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.
Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 in general and 2 CFR section 200.306 require non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal awards, including the requirements for allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, matching/level of effort, and reporting. The related compliance requirements are set in 24 CFR Part 570 Subparts D and E, Appendices III-V11, and sections 200.330, .331, and .501(h), Section 34 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-498, as amended (15 USC Sec. 2229a) and Section 4013 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, Pub. L. No. 117-2, federal awarding agency regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements which also covers allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, and matching requirements were not documented in a manner that is reperformable. No internal controls were identified related to review of progress reports to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. No internal controls were identified related to the level of effort requirement. Cause: Internal controls related to review of drawdown reports, progress reports, and level of effort were not evidenced with clear documentation. Effect: Financial reports may not be accurate; allowable costs, cost principles, cash management, level of effort, matching, and reporting compliance requirements may not be met due to lack of reperformable internal controls. Progress reports may not be accurate. Recommendation: We recommend that the City ensure that all controls for grants be documented in written procedures which should include the name or title of the positions responsible for each control (preparation, review, reconciliation, etc.) and that the performance of the controls be documented in a clear, reperformable manner including the name and date of each responsible individual and which specific control they performed over compliance for the grant.