FAC Explorer

Audit 290646

FY End
2022-06-30
Total Expended
$8.20M
Findings
4
Programs
5
Organization: Boone County Fiscal Court (KY)
Year: 2022 Accepted: 2024-02-15
Auditor: Dean Dorton Allen Ford PLLC

Organization Exclusion Status:

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
369453 2022-004 Significant Deficiency - LM
369454 2022-004 Significant Deficiency - LM
945895 2022-004 Significant Deficiency - LM
945896 2022-004 Significant Deficiency - LM

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $106,285 Yes 1
20.205 Highway Planning and Construction $73,493 - 0
97.042 Emergency Management Performance Grants $51,247 - 0
14.228 Community Development Block Grants/state's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii $10,500 - 0
16.606 State Criminal Alien Assistance Program $1,542 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
WFWZSDV1H194 Robert Notton Auditee
8593343147 Stephanie Allgeyer Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: BOONE COUNTY ASSISTED HOUSING DEPARTMENT Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the “Schedule”) includes the federal award activity of the County under programs of the federal government for the year ended June 30, 2022. 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 the County, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net position, or cash flows of the County. 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: The County has elected not to use the 10 percent de Minimis indirect cost rate allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Expenditures reported on the Boone County Assisted Housing Department’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards were not included on the County’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. A separate Uniform Guidance audit was conducted on the Boone County Assisted Housing Department’s Financial Statements and therefore are excluded.

Finding Details

Finding 2022-004
Finding 2022-004 Reporting and Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds [AL #21.027] Criteria: Per CFR 200.331 “a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition: When submitting required quarterly reports, the County improperly identified two entities as being subrecipients instead of contractors. Cause: The reporting guidance was not clear on the definition of subrecipient vs contractor and therefore resulted in a misunderstanding. Effect: The two entities could potentially be identified as subrecipients and therefore subject to single audit when they should not be. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: Those responsible for the Federal awards did not have a clear understanding of the difference between subrecipient and contractor. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the County review the requirements for determining whether a disbursement qualifies as a payment to a subrecipient or a contractor and ensure all those that administer Federal funding have an understanding of the terms. Additionally, we recommend the County ensure they are aware of all compliance requirements surrounding subrecipient monitoring. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The guidance was unclear when reporting began in 2021. The delineation is now understood and will be corrected in the next quarterly report to the Treasury Department.
Finding 2022-004
Finding 2022-004 Reporting and Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds [AL #21.027] Criteria: Per CFR 200.331 “a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition: When submitting required quarterly reports, the County improperly identified two entities as being subrecipients instead of contractors. Cause: The reporting guidance was not clear on the definition of subrecipient vs contractor and therefore resulted in a misunderstanding. Effect: The two entities could potentially be identified as subrecipients and therefore subject to single audit when they should not be. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: Those responsible for the Federal awards did not have a clear understanding of the difference between subrecipient and contractor. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the County review the requirements for determining whether a disbursement qualifies as a payment to a subrecipient or a contractor and ensure all those that administer Federal funding have an understanding of the terms. Additionally, we recommend the County ensure they are aware of all compliance requirements surrounding subrecipient monitoring. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The guidance was unclear when reporting began in 2021. The delineation is now understood and will be corrected in the next quarterly report to the Treasury Department.
Finding 2022-004
Finding 2022-004 Reporting and Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds [AL #21.027] Criteria: Per CFR 200.331 “a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition: When submitting required quarterly reports, the County improperly identified two entities as being subrecipients instead of contractors. Cause: The reporting guidance was not clear on the definition of subrecipient vs contractor and therefore resulted in a misunderstanding. Effect: The two entities could potentially be identified as subrecipients and therefore subject to single audit when they should not be. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: Those responsible for the Federal awards did not have a clear understanding of the difference between subrecipient and contractor. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the County review the requirements for determining whether a disbursement qualifies as a payment to a subrecipient or a contractor and ensure all those that administer Federal funding have an understanding of the terms. Additionally, we recommend the County ensure they are aware of all compliance requirements surrounding subrecipient monitoring. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The guidance was unclear when reporting began in 2021. The delineation is now understood and will be corrected in the next quarterly report to the Treasury Department.
Finding 2022-004
Finding 2022-004 Reporting and Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds [AL #21.027] Criteria: Per CFR 200.331 “a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition: When submitting required quarterly reports, the County improperly identified two entities as being subrecipients instead of contractors. Cause: The reporting guidance was not clear on the definition of subrecipient vs contractor and therefore resulted in a misunderstanding. Effect: The two entities could potentially be identified as subrecipients and therefore subject to single audit when they should not be. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: Those responsible for the Federal awards did not have a clear understanding of the difference between subrecipient and contractor. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the County review the requirements for determining whether a disbursement qualifies as a payment to a subrecipient or a contractor and ensure all those that administer Federal funding have an understanding of the terms. Additionally, we recommend the County ensure they are aware of all compliance requirements surrounding subrecipient monitoring. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The guidance was unclear when reporting began in 2021. The delineation is now understood and will be corrected in the next quarterly report to the Treasury Department.