Audit 20299

FY End
2022-06-30
Total Expended
$914,450
Findings
6
Programs
3
Year: 2022 Accepted: 2023-03-30

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
24173 2022-002 Material Weakness - B
24174 2022-002 Material Weakness - B
24175 2022-003 Material Weakness - L
600615 2022-002 Material Weakness - B
600616 2022-002 Material Weakness - B
600617 2022-003 Material Weakness - L

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
93.959 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse $663,743 Yes 2
93.788 Opioid Str $223,207 Yes 1
21.019 Coronavirus Relief Fund $27,500 Yes 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
D2XUWUC531J1 Jessica Horne Auditee
2163612040 John R Wright Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: 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 Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, wherein certain types of expenditures may or may not be allowable or may be limited as to reimbursement. Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Organization has not elected to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (the Schedule) includes the federal award activity Cleveland Urban Minority Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Outreach Project, Inc. (a Non-profit) under programs of the federal government for the year ended June 30, 2022. The information on this schedule is prepared 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 the Organization, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net assets, or cash flows of the Organization.

Finding Details

2022-002 Indirect Cost Allocation Methodology Criteria: Based on 2 CFR Part 200 subpart E, Appendix IV, NPOs that receive Federal Awards are required to comply with the cost principles outlined in the Uniform Guidance when charging indirect costs to those awards. The criteria for NPO documentation of indirect cost allocation methodology include identifying the methods used to allocate indirect costs, documenting the basis for determining the allocation of each indirect cost, describing changes made to the methodology, accounting for differences between estimated and actual amounts, supporting the indirect cost rate(s) used, and demonstrating compliance with any specific limitations on indirect cost reimbursement imposed by the Federal Award. Condition: The management was not able to provide a documentation how they allocate indirect cost and expenses to the federal awards. Cause of Condition: This is the first time that Cleveland Umadaop is subject to Single Audit. The management has used an informal method to allocate indirect costs, which was not documented or if documented, may not meet the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Effect: If an organization's indirect cost allocation methodology is not properly documented, it may be difficult for the auditors to verify that the indirect costs allocated to a particular federal award are reasonable, necessary, and allocable. This may result in disallowed costs or findings in the audit report, which could impact the organization's ability to receive future federal awards. Questioned Cost: Not quantifiable We recommend that management should consider to document their indirect cost allocation methodology by doing the following: Develop a written policy: Develop a written policy that outlines the methodology used to allocate indirect costs. This policy should be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure that it remains current and accurate. Establish procedures: Establish procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. This can include maintaining detailed records of costs and the methodology used to allocate them. Train employees: Provide training to employees who are responsible for indirect cost allocation to ensure that they understand the policy and procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. Review documentation regularly: Review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process regularly to ensure that it is accurate and complete. Engage internal and external auditors: Engage internal and external auditors to review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process periodically to ensure that it complies with Uniform Guidance. Assign responsibility: Assign responsibility to specific individuals within the organization for documenting the indirect cost allocation process to ensure that it is a priority. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We consider the following materiality for consideration of material noncompliance for the following major program: 93.959 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $33,187 93.788 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $11,160.
2022-002 Indirect Cost Allocation Methodology Criteria: Based on 2 CFR Part 200 subpart E, Appendix IV, NPOs that receive Federal Awards are required to comply with the cost principles outlined in the Uniform Guidance when charging indirect costs to those awards. The criteria for NPO documentation of indirect cost allocation methodology include identifying the methods used to allocate indirect costs, documenting the basis for determining the allocation of each indirect cost, describing changes made to the methodology, accounting for differences between estimated and actual amounts, supporting the indirect cost rate(s) used, and demonstrating compliance with any specific limitations on indirect cost reimbursement imposed by the Federal Award. Condition: The management was not able to provide a documentation how they allocate indirect cost and expenses to the federal awards. Cause of Condition: This is the first time that Cleveland Umadaop is subject to Single Audit. The management has used an informal method to allocate indirect costs, which was not documented or if documented, may not meet the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Effect: If an organization's indirect cost allocation methodology is not properly documented, it may be difficult for the auditors to verify that the indirect costs allocated to a particular federal award are reasonable, necessary, and allocable. This may result in disallowed costs or findings in the audit report, which could impact the organization's ability to receive future federal awards. Questioned Cost: Not quantifiable We recommend that management should consider to document their indirect cost allocation methodology by doing the following: Develop a written policy: Develop a written policy that outlines the methodology used to allocate indirect costs. This policy should be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure that it remains current and accurate. Establish procedures: Establish procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. This can include maintaining detailed records of costs and the methodology used to allocate them. Train employees: Provide training to employees who are responsible for indirect cost allocation to ensure that they understand the policy and procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. Review documentation regularly: Review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process regularly to ensure that it is accurate and complete. Engage internal and external auditors: Engage internal and external auditors to review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process periodically to ensure that it complies with Uniform Guidance. Assign responsibility: Assign responsibility to specific individuals within the organization for documenting the indirect cost allocation process to ensure that it is a priority. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We consider the following materiality for consideration of material noncompliance for the following major program: 93.959 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $33,187 93.788 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $11,160.
2022-003 Accuracy of Federal Reports Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.514(c) requires NPOs to maintain records that support the allocation of indirect costs to each Federal Award. These Federal reports include all activity of the reporting period supported by the applicable accounting or performance records and are fairly presented in accordance with governing requirements. Condition: The management was not able to provide accurate supporting schedule to corroborate the reports submitted to the funding agency. Cause of Condition: This is the first time that Cleveland Umadaop is subject to Single Audit. The management may not have a complete understanding of the requirements for documenting the support that should corroborate the reports submitted to the agency or may not be aware of the risks associated with not documenting their supporting schedules. Effect: Failure to provide accurate supporting documentation that matches the federal reports could result in non-compliance with the terms and conditions of the Federal Award. This may lead to the suspension or termination of the award, and the management may be required to return any funds that were improperly spent or may fail to receive the maximum allowable reimbursement for indirect costs. Questioned Cost: Not quantifiable. Recommendation: To avoid these potential effects, we recommend that it is important for the management to ensure that their federal reports are accurate and supported by appropriate documentation. This can be achieved by implementing strong internal controls and processes for managing and documenting costs, and by regularly reviewing and reconciling financial records to ensure that they are consistent with the federal reports submitted. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We considered material noncompliance of 5% of the total awards expended for the program amounting to $33,187.
2022-002 Indirect Cost Allocation Methodology Criteria: Based on 2 CFR Part 200 subpart E, Appendix IV, NPOs that receive Federal Awards are required to comply with the cost principles outlined in the Uniform Guidance when charging indirect costs to those awards. The criteria for NPO documentation of indirect cost allocation methodology include identifying the methods used to allocate indirect costs, documenting the basis for determining the allocation of each indirect cost, describing changes made to the methodology, accounting for differences between estimated and actual amounts, supporting the indirect cost rate(s) used, and demonstrating compliance with any specific limitations on indirect cost reimbursement imposed by the Federal Award. Condition: The management was not able to provide a documentation how they allocate indirect cost and expenses to the federal awards. Cause of Condition: This is the first time that Cleveland Umadaop is subject to Single Audit. The management has used an informal method to allocate indirect costs, which was not documented or if documented, may not meet the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Effect: If an organization's indirect cost allocation methodology is not properly documented, it may be difficult for the auditors to verify that the indirect costs allocated to a particular federal award are reasonable, necessary, and allocable. This may result in disallowed costs or findings in the audit report, which could impact the organization's ability to receive future federal awards. Questioned Cost: Not quantifiable We recommend that management should consider to document their indirect cost allocation methodology by doing the following: Develop a written policy: Develop a written policy that outlines the methodology used to allocate indirect costs. This policy should be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure that it remains current and accurate. Establish procedures: Establish procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. This can include maintaining detailed records of costs and the methodology used to allocate them. Train employees: Provide training to employees who are responsible for indirect cost allocation to ensure that they understand the policy and procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. Review documentation regularly: Review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process regularly to ensure that it is accurate and complete. Engage internal and external auditors: Engage internal and external auditors to review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process periodically to ensure that it complies with Uniform Guidance. Assign responsibility: Assign responsibility to specific individuals within the organization for documenting the indirect cost allocation process to ensure that it is a priority. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We consider the following materiality for consideration of material noncompliance for the following major program: 93.959 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $33,187 93.788 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $11,160.
2022-002 Indirect Cost Allocation Methodology Criteria: Based on 2 CFR Part 200 subpart E, Appendix IV, NPOs that receive Federal Awards are required to comply with the cost principles outlined in the Uniform Guidance when charging indirect costs to those awards. The criteria for NPO documentation of indirect cost allocation methodology include identifying the methods used to allocate indirect costs, documenting the basis for determining the allocation of each indirect cost, describing changes made to the methodology, accounting for differences between estimated and actual amounts, supporting the indirect cost rate(s) used, and demonstrating compliance with any specific limitations on indirect cost reimbursement imposed by the Federal Award. Condition: The management was not able to provide a documentation how they allocate indirect cost and expenses to the federal awards. Cause of Condition: This is the first time that Cleveland Umadaop is subject to Single Audit. The management has used an informal method to allocate indirect costs, which was not documented or if documented, may not meet the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Effect: If an organization's indirect cost allocation methodology is not properly documented, it may be difficult for the auditors to verify that the indirect costs allocated to a particular federal award are reasonable, necessary, and allocable. This may result in disallowed costs or findings in the audit report, which could impact the organization's ability to receive future federal awards. Questioned Cost: Not quantifiable We recommend that management should consider to document their indirect cost allocation methodology by doing the following: Develop a written policy: Develop a written policy that outlines the methodology used to allocate indirect costs. This policy should be reviewed and updated periodically to ensure that it remains current and accurate. Establish procedures: Establish procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. This can include maintaining detailed records of costs and the methodology used to allocate them. Train employees: Provide training to employees who are responsible for indirect cost allocation to ensure that they understand the policy and procedures for documenting the allocation of indirect costs. Review documentation regularly: Review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process regularly to ensure that it is accurate and complete. Engage internal and external auditors: Engage internal and external auditors to review the documentation of the indirect cost allocation process periodically to ensure that it complies with Uniform Guidance. Assign responsibility: Assign responsibility to specific individuals within the organization for documenting the indirect cost allocation process to ensure that it is a priority. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We consider the following materiality for consideration of material noncompliance for the following major program: 93.959 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $33,187 93.788 - 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $11,160.
2022-003 Accuracy of Federal Reports Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.514(c) requires NPOs to maintain records that support the allocation of indirect costs to each Federal Award. These Federal reports include all activity of the reporting period supported by the applicable accounting or performance records and are fairly presented in accordance with governing requirements. Condition: The management was not able to provide accurate supporting schedule to corroborate the reports submitted to the funding agency. Cause of Condition: This is the first time that Cleveland Umadaop is subject to Single Audit. The management may not have a complete understanding of the requirements for documenting the support that should corroborate the reports submitted to the agency or may not be aware of the risks associated with not documenting their supporting schedules. Effect: Failure to provide accurate supporting documentation that matches the federal reports could result in non-compliance with the terms and conditions of the Federal Award. This may lead to the suspension or termination of the award, and the management may be required to return any funds that were improperly spent or may fail to receive the maximum allowable reimbursement for indirect costs. Questioned Cost: Not quantifiable. Recommendation: To avoid these potential effects, we recommend that it is important for the management to ensure that their federal reports are accurate and supported by appropriate documentation. This can be achieved by implementing strong internal controls and processes for managing and documenting costs, and by regularly reviewing and reconciling financial records to ensure that they are consistent with the federal reports submitted. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We considered material noncompliance of 5% of the total awards expended for the program amounting to $33,187.