Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”), requires that any construction contract in excess of $2,000 that is funded wholly or in part by federal funds include prevailing wage rate clauses. The laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for locality of project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) and the contractor or subcontractor must submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls). A random sample of seven construction contracts paid for wholly or in part by Education Stabilization Funds was selected for testing. Three of the seven construction contracts tested did not include the prevailing wage rate clause. Additionally, contractors did not submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board for six of the seven contracts tested. The Board did not have controls in place to ensure the Davis-Bacon Act wage rate requirements were included in construction contracts; therefore, the construction project contracts awarded during the fiscal year did not include prevailing wage rate clauses nor did the contractors submit weekly certified payrolls to the Board. As a result, the Board is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as it pertains to wage rate requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should comply with Title 29, U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 5, Sub-Part A Davis Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures (the “Davis-Bacon Act”) when using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds to fund construction contracts in excess of $2,000.00.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements.
Recommendation:
The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.