Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Education
Title: Education Stabilization Fund
FAL Number: 84.425D,U,W
Passthrough: New Mexico Public Education Department
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: APPENDIX II TO PART 200—CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR NON-FEDERAL ENTITY CONTRACTS UNDER
FEDERAL AWARDS
(D) Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 3141–3148). When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction
contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non-Federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon
Act (40 U.S.C. 3141–3144, and 3146–3148) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5, ‘‘Labor Standards
Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction’’). In accordance with the statute,
contractors must be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage
determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week.
The non-Federal entity must place a copy of the current prevailing wage determination issued by the Department of Labor in
each solicitation. The decision to award a contract or subcontract must be conditioned upon the acceptance of the wage
determination. The non-Federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency. The
contracts must also include a provision for compliance with the Copeland ‘‘AntiKickback’’ Act (40 U.S.C. 3145), as
supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 3, ‘‘Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or
Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States’’). The Act provides that each contractor
or subrecipient must be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of
public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he or she is otherwise entitled. The non-Federal entity must report all
suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency.
Condition: During our review of the requirements of Special Tests provisions of the Compliance Supplement and the District’s
implementation of controls related to compliance with these provisions for the Education Stabilization Fund, we identified the
following issues:
2 of the 5 contracts with companies providing construction or maintenance services for the District did not include the
required language relating to the Davis-Bacon Act or the Copeland “AntiKickback” Act or obtain the date wage rate
determinations.
2 of the 5 contracts tested for compliance with weekly payroll certifications did not have weekly certifications provided to
District whereby the contractor attested that all laborers were paid wages in rates to be in compliance with the prevailing
wage rate for the contractor’s employees.
In the prior year’s audit none of the contracts reviewed included the required language related to the Davis-Bacon Act or Copeland
“Antikickback” Act nor had the District obtained a wage determination decision from the State for the projects. One of the three
contracts tested did not have weekly payroll certifications.
Questioned Costs: Unknown
Cause: District personnel were unaware of requirement to include language in contracts regarding the Davis-Bacon Act or the
Copeland “AntiKickback” Act with companies providing construction or maintenance work for the District when Federal funds are
being used to pay for those services early in the school year. Additionally, District personnel were unaware of the $2,000 threshold
and had mistakenly been using a $60,000 threshold, which is a state threshold for wage rate determinations.
The District had been obtaining New Mexico Wage Rate Determinations for all projects with costs exceeding $60,000 and obtaining
weekly payroll certifications from those vendors, but had not been obtaining this for projects with costs in excess of $2,000. Those
obtaining these services for the District were not always aware that Federal funds were being used to pay for these projects. Many of the construction contracts entered into by the District come through companies with approved contracts with Cooperative
Educational Services. As such, the District has not been in the habit of creating an additional contract directly with the vendor
including the additional language which is necessary to be in compliance with Federal requirements when grant funds are used in
construction or maintenance projects.
A few months into the school year, District personnel over this area became aware of these requirements and began obtaining wage
rate determinations and weekly payroll certifications from the vendors.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal requirements when using grant funds to pay for construction or maintenance
projects in excess of $2,000. Noncompliance with these provisions could cause reimbursement of these funds to be questioned or
require the District to reimburse the granting agency for any costs incurred under these projects. Additionally, companies providing
these services may not know they are subject to particular wage rate determinations for the project which may cause them to bid or
quote amounts which do not provide for payment of required wages to the employees participating on those projects.
Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend that the District establish a practice of including the required language for the Davis-
Bacon Act and the Copeland “AntiKickback” Act in contracts with all companies which provide construction or maintenance
projects to the District. When companies are selected that have Cooperative Educational Services agreements, the District should
require an additional contract be signed by the company which includes these provisions. Additionally, we recommend that District
personnel be trained in identifying which funds fall under Federal regulations versus State regulations so that when purchase orders
are created and contracts are entered into that these individuals know they are including the proper requirements.
Responsible Official’s Plan:
Specific corrective action plan for finding:
The Purchasing Department is working with contracted law firm to review current contract to include the Davis Bacon
Act and the Copeland Compliance. The School District will offer training on EDGAR and CFR compliance including
Wage Rate/Davis Bacon Act Procurement, Construction, and Grants Staff.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
June 2024
Employee position(s) responsible for meeting the timeline
Grants Department, Construction Department, Purchasing Department, Finance Director
Schedule X
Federal Program Information:
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Education
Title: Impact Aid (Title VII of ESEA)
FAL Number: 84.041
Passthrough: N/A
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: Per the Compliance Supplement – Application for Impact Aid – Section 7003 (OMB No. 1810-0687) – Each year an LEA must
submit this application, which provides the following information: counts of federally connected children in various categories,
membership and average daily attendance data, and information on expenditures for children with disabilities. Please note: As a
result of the public health emergency related to the coronavirus, the Impact Aid Coronavirus Relief Act (Pub. L. No. 116-211)
provides LEAs the option for their fiscal year 2022 7003 application of using the same student count data from their fiscal year 2021
application or providing new student count data as prescribed in Section 7003. Membership and average attendance data should be
tested. The auditor should use professional judgment when determining which categories to test, taking into account the relative
materiality of the number of children reported in other categories.
Condition: During our review of information provided in the Impact Aid application we identified the following issues:
A student who was no longer in the special education program was still listed on the Impact Aid application as a
student with disabilities.
A student in the special education program did not have a current individual education program (IEP) in place at the
October survey date. The previous IEP had expired in September and the new IEP was not put in place until November
of the same year.
The Federal oversight agency had previously reviewed the application used for this audit and had found multiple errors
that had been corrected in consultation with the District. We had reviewed the corrected application.
There has been no change from the prior year’s audit as the District was able to use the same student data as the previous year because
of the COVID exceptions for applications.
Questioned Costs: $2,327
The District received $582,802 for 501 students. As two of those students did not meet application requirements the value of those
students was calculated as questionable (2 / 501 * $582,802 = $2,327).
Cause: There was not good inter-program communication to make sure special education students are properly accounted for on the
Impact Aid application.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal regulations related to internal control procedures and compliance requirements
in relation to the grant and could put funding in jeopardy or require the District to reimburse the program.
Auditor’s Recommendation: When completing the Impact Aid application, the students included on the special education portion of
the application should be reviewed by the special education department to make sure all students are properly accounted for as
students may move in or out of the program. Responsible official’s view:
Specific corrective action plan for the finding:
Student Services Department Data Records Clerk reviewed and audited files to ensure student information is up to
date in PowerSchool to ensure reliable, efficient, and timely data is being collected.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
Resolved
Employee positions(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Data Records Clerk and Student Support Services Director.
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Education
Title: Impact Aid (Title VII of ESEA)
FAL Number: 84.041
Passthrough: N/A
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: Title 34 Subtitle B Chapter III Part 300 Section 300.202 Use of Amounts
(a) General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act—
(1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part;
(2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with
disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and
(3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds.
Condition: During our review of information provided in the Impact Aid application we identified the following issues:
The District used Impact Aid funds to purchase goods and services which were unrelated to special education.
• The District purchased $946.00 in chlorine and Co2 for the swimming pools.
• The District purchased $69,001.67 in major bleeding first aid kits
Questioned Costs: $69,947.67 This is the value of the two purchases which were for items not related to special education needs.
Cause: The District did not ensure the funds expended were related to special education.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal regulations related to internal control procedures and compliance
requirements in relation to the grant and could put funding in jeopardy or require the District to reimburse the program.
Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend that all expenditures from the Impact Aid Special Education fund be related to special
education needs. We recommend that the special education supervisor be in the purchase order approval queue for all purchases
from this fund and that no approvals are made for any expenditures not related to special education students’ needs. Responsible official’s view:
Specific corrective action plan for the finding:
The district will implement controls of review for all expenses related to the Impact Aid- Special Education Fund. The
Financial Coordinators along with the Finance Director will ensure that proper budgets are authorized to Departments
in order to ensure that the correct funding is available. These two instances were due to lack of budget within the
Department that caused them to use the incorrect funding source at the time. The district will make sure to include the
Student Support Services Director within the review process and the district will provide additional training regarding
uses of funds.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
The district is already implementing this practice.
Employee positions(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Financial Specialist; Special Ed. Coordinator, Special Ed. Director; Grants Specialist; Financial Coordinator’s;
Finance Director
Grants Specialists, CPO, Finance Specialist, Purchasing Specialist, Federal Grants Coordinator, Federal Grants
Specialist
Federal Program Information:
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture
Title: USDA School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program
FAL Number: 10.553 and 10.555
Passthrough: New Mexico Public Education Department
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: §200.213 Suspension and debarment.
Non-federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders
12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, sub awards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred,
suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities.
§200.317 Procurements by states.
When procuring property and services under a Federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for
procurements from its non-Federal funds. The state will comply with §200.322 Procurement of recovered materials and ensure that
every purchase order or other contract includes any clauses required by section §200.326 Contract provisions. All other non-Federal
entities, including sub recipients of a state, will follow §§200.318 General procurement standards through 200.326 Contract
provisions.
§200.318 General procurement standards.
(a) The non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and
tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in this
part.
(b) Non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions,
and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders.
APPENDIX II TO PART 200—CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR NON-FEDERAL ENTITY CONTRACTS UNDER FEDERAL AWARDS
In addition to other provisions required by the Federal agency or non-Federal entity, all contracts made by the non-Federal
entity under the Federal award must contain provisions covering the following, as applicable.
(H) Debarment and Suspension (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689)—A contract award (see 2 CFR 180.220) must not be
made to parties listed on the government-wide exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the
OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR part 1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR part
1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ SAM Exclusions contains the
names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or
regulatory authority other than Executive Order 12549.
Condition: During our testing of single audit disbursements, we identified a vendor which would meet the requirement of verifying
that the vendor was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from receiving the contract which was funded through Federal
dollars. The vendor received more than $25,000 in payments from the District from Federal grant sources. The vendor is not currently
suspended or debarred from receiving Federal contracts; however, the District did not have proper internal controls in place to verify
this prior to the purchase.
The District did make improvement in this area for all new work during the year. However, these projects were completed in the
year under audit before the District became aware of the requirements above and could not retroactively cure the errors.
Cause: District personnel did not verify that vendors which meet the $25,000 thresholds are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise
excluded from participating in contracts funded through Federal awards due to a misunderstanding of staff personnel regarding this
requirement.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal regulations related to the grant and could put funding in jeopardy or require
the District to reimburse the program for improper grant distributions. Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the District establish a policy and implement procedures regarding large purchases related
to Federal grants to insure that no vendors who are suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participating in transactions
funded through Federal grants are used. As identified above, there are several methods in which the District can verify vendors are
not suspended or debarred. The District may have the vendor provide an annual certification that it is not currently suspended,
debarred, or otherwise prevented from receiving Federal dollars. In other occasions in which a single purchase is going to be made,
the purchasing procedures should include looking up the vendor on the GSA website, printing a copy of the verification, and placing
it in the file with the purchase order. The District has options, and it should establish what method is the least intrusive but also
effective in complying with the requirements of the Uniform Grant Guidance.
Responsible Official’s Plan:
Specific corrective action plan for finding:
The Grants Finance Department, Federal Grants Department, Operations Department along with the Purchasing
Department will review Vendors that are issued requisitions at each approval level to assist in catching $25K or more
for Suspension and Debarment. A printed document from SAM.GOV verifying eligibility for Requisitions over $25K
will be attached. Infinite Visions is set up to alert originators entering requisitions over $25,000 to contact Purchasing
or Grants Department to check the vendor in SAM.GOV to confirm the vendor is vetted to comply with federal
regulations.
At the initial setup of new vendors, the Purchasing Department will review vendors in SAM.GOV. A printed document
from SAM.GOV verifying eligibility of vendor will be attached to the vendor file.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
The process was implemented immediately upon awareness of the finding and we are hopeful that all issues have been
resolved by FY24.
Employee position(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Grants Specialists, CPO, Finance Specialists, Purchasing Specialist, Federal Grants Coordinator, Federal Grants
Specialist
Federal Program Information:
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture – US Department of Education
Title: USDA School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program
Impact Aid (Title VII of ESEA)
Education Stabilization Fund
FAL Number: 10.553 10.555 84.041 84.425D,U,W
Passthrough: New Mexico Public Education Department
Award Year: 2022
Criteria: Title 2 Chapter II Part 200.507
(c) Report submission for program-specific audits.
(1) The audit must be completed and the reporting required by paragraph (c)(2) or (c)(3) of this section submitted within the
earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor's report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period, unless a
different period is specified in a program-specific audit guide. Unless restricted by Federal law or regulation, the auditee
must make report copies available for public inspection. Auditees and auditors must ensure that their respective parts of the
reporting package do not include protected personally identifiable information.
Condition: The District did not submit its single audit report to the federal audit clearinghouse by March 31, 2023.
Cause: The District did not complete its 2021-2022 audit until May 5, 2023.
Effect: The District audit report was not submitted by the date required.
Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the District complete their audit by the date required and file the reporting package as
required.
Responsible Official’s Plan:
Specific corrective action plan for finding:
The Finance Director will make sure that the required reporting information is submitted to the federal audit
clearinghouse by the deadline of March 31st.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
March 31st of 2024 or earlier
Employee position(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Finance Director, Finance Coordinators and Financial Administrative Support Specialist
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Education
Title: Education Stabilization Fund
FAL Number: 84.425D,U,W
Passthrough: New Mexico Public Education Department
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: APPENDIX II TO PART 200—CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR NON-FEDERAL ENTITY CONTRACTS UNDER
FEDERAL AWARDS
(D) Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 3141–3148). When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction
contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non-Federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon
Act (40 U.S.C. 3141–3144, and 3146–3148) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5, ‘‘Labor Standards
Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction’’). In accordance with the statute,
contractors must be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage
determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors must be required to pay wages not less than once a week.
The non-Federal entity must place a copy of the current prevailing wage determination issued by the Department of Labor in
each solicitation. The decision to award a contract or subcontract must be conditioned upon the acceptance of the wage
determination. The non-Federal entity must report all suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency. The
contracts must also include a provision for compliance with the Copeland ‘‘AntiKickback’’ Act (40 U.S.C. 3145), as
supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 3, ‘‘Contractors and Subcontractors on Public Building or
Public Work Financed in Whole or in Part by Loans or Grants from the United States’’). The Act provides that each contractor
or subrecipient must be prohibited from inducing, by any means, any person employed in the construction, completion, or repair of
public work, to give up any part of the compensation to which he or she is otherwise entitled. The non-Federal entity must report all
suspected or reported violations to the Federal awarding agency.
Condition: During our review of the requirements of Special Tests provisions of the Compliance Supplement and the District’s
implementation of controls related to compliance with these provisions for the Education Stabilization Fund, we identified the
following issues:
2 of the 5 contracts with companies providing construction or maintenance services for the District did not include the
required language relating to the Davis-Bacon Act or the Copeland “AntiKickback” Act or obtain the date wage rate
determinations.
2 of the 5 contracts tested for compliance with weekly payroll certifications did not have weekly certifications provided to
District whereby the contractor attested that all laborers were paid wages in rates to be in compliance with the prevailing
wage rate for the contractor’s employees.
In the prior year’s audit none of the contracts reviewed included the required language related to the Davis-Bacon Act or Copeland
“Antikickback” Act nor had the District obtained a wage determination decision from the State for the projects. One of the three
contracts tested did not have weekly payroll certifications.
Questioned Costs: Unknown
Cause: District personnel were unaware of requirement to include language in contracts regarding the Davis-Bacon Act or the
Copeland “AntiKickback” Act with companies providing construction or maintenance work for the District when Federal funds are
being used to pay for those services early in the school year. Additionally, District personnel were unaware of the $2,000 threshold
and had mistakenly been using a $60,000 threshold, which is a state threshold for wage rate determinations.
The District had been obtaining New Mexico Wage Rate Determinations for all projects with costs exceeding $60,000 and obtaining
weekly payroll certifications from those vendors, but had not been obtaining this for projects with costs in excess of $2,000. Those
obtaining these services for the District were not always aware that Federal funds were being used to pay for these projects. Many of the construction contracts entered into by the District come through companies with approved contracts with Cooperative
Educational Services. As such, the District has not been in the habit of creating an additional contract directly with the vendor
including the additional language which is necessary to be in compliance with Federal requirements when grant funds are used in
construction or maintenance projects.
A few months into the school year, District personnel over this area became aware of these requirements and began obtaining wage
rate determinations and weekly payroll certifications from the vendors.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal requirements when using grant funds to pay for construction or maintenance
projects in excess of $2,000. Noncompliance with these provisions could cause reimbursement of these funds to be questioned or
require the District to reimburse the granting agency for any costs incurred under these projects. Additionally, companies providing
these services may not know they are subject to particular wage rate determinations for the project which may cause them to bid or
quote amounts which do not provide for payment of required wages to the employees participating on those projects.
Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend that the District establish a practice of including the required language for the Davis-
Bacon Act and the Copeland “AntiKickback” Act in contracts with all companies which provide construction or maintenance
projects to the District. When companies are selected that have Cooperative Educational Services agreements, the District should
require an additional contract be signed by the company which includes these provisions. Additionally, we recommend that District
personnel be trained in identifying which funds fall under Federal regulations versus State regulations so that when purchase orders
are created and contracts are entered into that these individuals know they are including the proper requirements.
Responsible Official’s Plan:
Specific corrective action plan for finding:
The Purchasing Department is working with contracted law firm to review current contract to include the Davis Bacon
Act and the Copeland Compliance. The School District will offer training on EDGAR and CFR compliance including
Wage Rate/Davis Bacon Act Procurement, Construction, and Grants Staff.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
June 2024
Employee position(s) responsible for meeting the timeline
Grants Department, Construction Department, Purchasing Department, Finance Director
Schedule X
Federal Program Information:
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Education
Title: Impact Aid (Title VII of ESEA)
FAL Number: 84.041
Passthrough: N/A
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: Per the Compliance Supplement – Application for Impact Aid – Section 7003 (OMB No. 1810-0687) – Each year an LEA must
submit this application, which provides the following information: counts of federally connected children in various categories,
membership and average daily attendance data, and information on expenditures for children with disabilities. Please note: As a
result of the public health emergency related to the coronavirus, the Impact Aid Coronavirus Relief Act (Pub. L. No. 116-211)
provides LEAs the option for their fiscal year 2022 7003 application of using the same student count data from their fiscal year 2021
application or providing new student count data as prescribed in Section 7003. Membership and average attendance data should be
tested. The auditor should use professional judgment when determining which categories to test, taking into account the relative
materiality of the number of children reported in other categories.
Condition: During our review of information provided in the Impact Aid application we identified the following issues:
A student who was no longer in the special education program was still listed on the Impact Aid application as a
student with disabilities.
A student in the special education program did not have a current individual education program (IEP) in place at the
October survey date. The previous IEP had expired in September and the new IEP was not put in place until November
of the same year.
The Federal oversight agency had previously reviewed the application used for this audit and had found multiple errors
that had been corrected in consultation with the District. We had reviewed the corrected application.
There has been no change from the prior year’s audit as the District was able to use the same student data as the previous year because
of the COVID exceptions for applications.
Questioned Costs: $2,327
The District received $582,802 for 501 students. As two of those students did not meet application requirements the value of those
students was calculated as questionable (2 / 501 * $582,802 = $2,327).
Cause: There was not good inter-program communication to make sure special education students are properly accounted for on the
Impact Aid application.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal regulations related to internal control procedures and compliance requirements
in relation to the grant and could put funding in jeopardy or require the District to reimburse the program.
Auditor’s Recommendation: When completing the Impact Aid application, the students included on the special education portion of
the application should be reviewed by the special education department to make sure all students are properly accounted for as
students may move in or out of the program. Responsible official’s view:
Specific corrective action plan for the finding:
Student Services Department Data Records Clerk reviewed and audited files to ensure student information is up to
date in PowerSchool to ensure reliable, efficient, and timely data is being collected.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
Resolved
Employee positions(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Data Records Clerk and Student Support Services Director.
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Education
Title: Impact Aid (Title VII of ESEA)
FAL Number: 84.041
Passthrough: N/A
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: Title 34 Subtitle B Chapter III Part 300 Section 300.202 Use of Amounts
(a) General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act—
(1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part;
(2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with
disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and
(3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds.
Condition: During our review of information provided in the Impact Aid application we identified the following issues:
The District used Impact Aid funds to purchase goods and services which were unrelated to special education.
• The District purchased $946.00 in chlorine and Co2 for the swimming pools.
• The District purchased $69,001.67 in major bleeding first aid kits
Questioned Costs: $69,947.67 This is the value of the two purchases which were for items not related to special education needs.
Cause: The District did not ensure the funds expended were related to special education.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal regulations related to internal control procedures and compliance
requirements in relation to the grant and could put funding in jeopardy or require the District to reimburse the program.
Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend that all expenditures from the Impact Aid Special Education fund be related to special
education needs. We recommend that the special education supervisor be in the purchase order approval queue for all purchases
from this fund and that no approvals are made for any expenditures not related to special education students’ needs. Responsible official’s view:
Specific corrective action plan for the finding:
The district will implement controls of review for all expenses related to the Impact Aid- Special Education Fund. The
Financial Coordinators along with the Finance Director will ensure that proper budgets are authorized to Departments
in order to ensure that the correct funding is available. These two instances were due to lack of budget within the
Department that caused them to use the incorrect funding source at the time. The district will make sure to include the
Student Support Services Director within the review process and the district will provide additional training regarding
uses of funds.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
The district is already implementing this practice.
Employee positions(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Financial Specialist; Special Ed. Coordinator, Special Ed. Director; Grants Specialist; Financial Coordinator’s;
Finance Director
Grants Specialists, CPO, Finance Specialist, Purchasing Specialist, Federal Grants Coordinator, Federal Grants
Specialist
Federal Program Information:
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture
Title: USDA School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program
FAL Number: 10.553 and 10.555
Passthrough: New Mexico Public Education Department
Award Year: 2023
Criteria: §200.213 Suspension and debarment.
Non-federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders
12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, sub awards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred,
suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities.
§200.317 Procurements by states.
When procuring property and services under a Federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for
procurements from its non-Federal funds. The state will comply with §200.322 Procurement of recovered materials and ensure that
every purchase order or other contract includes any clauses required by section §200.326 Contract provisions. All other non-Federal
entities, including sub recipients of a state, will follow §§200.318 General procurement standards through 200.326 Contract
provisions.
§200.318 General procurement standards.
(a) The non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and
tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in this
part.
(b) Non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions,
and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders.
APPENDIX II TO PART 200—CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR NON-FEDERAL ENTITY CONTRACTS UNDER FEDERAL AWARDS
In addition to other provisions required by the Federal agency or non-Federal entity, all contracts made by the non-Federal
entity under the Federal award must contain provisions covering the following, as applicable.
(H) Debarment and Suspension (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689)—A contract award (see 2 CFR 180.220) must not be
made to parties listed on the government-wide exclusions in the System for Award Management (SAM), in accordance with the
OMB guidelines at 2 CFR 180 that implement Executive Orders 12549 (3 CFR part 1986 Comp., p. 189) and 12689 (3 CFR part
1989 Comp., p. 235), “Debarment and Suspension.” https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM/ SAM Exclusions contains the
names of parties debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded by agencies, as well as parties declared ineligible under statutory or
regulatory authority other than Executive Order 12549.
Condition: During our testing of single audit disbursements, we identified a vendor which would meet the requirement of verifying
that the vendor was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from receiving the contract which was funded through Federal
dollars. The vendor received more than $25,000 in payments from the District from Federal grant sources. The vendor is not currently
suspended or debarred from receiving Federal contracts; however, the District did not have proper internal controls in place to verify
this prior to the purchase.
The District did make improvement in this area for all new work during the year. However, these projects were completed in the
year under audit before the District became aware of the requirements above and could not retroactively cure the errors.
Cause: District personnel did not verify that vendors which meet the $25,000 thresholds are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise
excluded from participating in contracts funded through Federal awards due to a misunderstanding of staff personnel regarding this
requirement.
Effect: The District is not in compliance with Federal regulations related to the grant and could put funding in jeopardy or require
the District to reimburse the program for improper grant distributions. Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the District establish a policy and implement procedures regarding large purchases related
to Federal grants to insure that no vendors who are suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participating in transactions
funded through Federal grants are used. As identified above, there are several methods in which the District can verify vendors are
not suspended or debarred. The District may have the vendor provide an annual certification that it is not currently suspended,
debarred, or otherwise prevented from receiving Federal dollars. In other occasions in which a single purchase is going to be made,
the purchasing procedures should include looking up the vendor on the GSA website, printing a copy of the verification, and placing
it in the file with the purchase order. The District has options, and it should establish what method is the least intrusive but also
effective in complying with the requirements of the Uniform Grant Guidance.
Responsible Official’s Plan:
Specific corrective action plan for finding:
The Grants Finance Department, Federal Grants Department, Operations Department along with the Purchasing
Department will review Vendors that are issued requisitions at each approval level to assist in catching $25K or more
for Suspension and Debarment. A printed document from SAM.GOV verifying eligibility for Requisitions over $25K
will be attached. Infinite Visions is set up to alert originators entering requisitions over $25,000 to contact Purchasing
or Grants Department to check the vendor in SAM.GOV to confirm the vendor is vetted to comply with federal
regulations.
At the initial setup of new vendors, the Purchasing Department will review vendors in SAM.GOV. A printed document
from SAM.GOV verifying eligibility of vendor will be attached to the vendor file.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
The process was implemented immediately upon awareness of the finding and we are hopeful that all issues have been
resolved by FY24.
Employee position(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Grants Specialists, CPO, Finance Specialists, Purchasing Specialist, Federal Grants Coordinator, Federal Grants
Specialist
Federal Program Information:
Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture – US Department of Education
Title: USDA School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program
Impact Aid (Title VII of ESEA)
Education Stabilization Fund
FAL Number: 10.553 10.555 84.041 84.425D,U,W
Passthrough: New Mexico Public Education Department
Award Year: 2022
Criteria: Title 2 Chapter II Part 200.507
(c) Report submission for program-specific audits.
(1) The audit must be completed and the reporting required by paragraph (c)(2) or (c)(3) of this section submitted within the
earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor's report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period, unless a
different period is specified in a program-specific audit guide. Unless restricted by Federal law or regulation, the auditee
must make report copies available for public inspection. Auditees and auditors must ensure that their respective parts of the
reporting package do not include protected personally identifiable information.
Condition: The District did not submit its single audit report to the federal audit clearinghouse by March 31, 2023.
Cause: The District did not complete its 2021-2022 audit until May 5, 2023.
Effect: The District audit report was not submitted by the date required.
Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the District complete their audit by the date required and file the reporting package as
required.
Responsible Official’s Plan:
Specific corrective action plan for finding:
The Finance Director will make sure that the required reporting information is submitted to the federal audit
clearinghouse by the deadline of March 31st.
Timeline for completion of corrective action plan:
March 31st of 2024 or earlier
Employee position(s) responsible for meeting the timeline:
Finance Director, Finance Coordinators and Financial Administrative Support Specialist