Audit 310379

FY End
2023-06-30
Total Expended
$207.38M
Findings
20
Programs
77
Organization: County of Monterey (CA)
Year: 2023 Accepted: 2024-06-27

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
403213 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403214 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403215 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403216 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403217 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403218 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403219 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403220 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403221 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
403222 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979655 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979656 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979657 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979658 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979659 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979660 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979661 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979662 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979663 2023-001 Material Weakness - L
979664 2023-001 Material Weakness - L

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $26.99M Yes 0
93.778 Medical Assistance Program $15.32M Yes 0
93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families $12.75M Yes 0
14.239 Home Investment Partnerships Program $7.78M - 0
93.563 National Family Caregiver Support, Title Iii, Part E $7.24M - 0
93.659 Adoption Assistance $6.82M - 0
21.023 Emergency Rental Assistance Program $6.24M - 0
10.557 Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children $4.77M - 0
93.498 Provider Relief Fund $3.25M - 0
14.228 Community Development Block Grants/state's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii $3.13M Yes 0
93.224 Consolidated Health Centers (community Health Centers, Migrant Health Centers, Health Care for the Homeless, and Public Housing Primary Care) $3.08M Yes 0
93.778 Community Services Block Grant $2.97M Yes 0
93.323 Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases (elc) $2.91M - 0
93.667 Social Services Block Grant $2.82M - 0
93.137 Community Programs to Improve Minority Health Grant Program $2.51M - 0
93.959 Special Programs for the Aging_title Vii, Chapter 2_long Term Care Ombudsman Services for Older Individuals $2.45M Yes 0
14.218 Community Development Block Grants/entitlement Grants $2.32M - 0
11.307 Economic Adjustment Assistance $2.23M - 0
93.658 Foster Care_title IV-E $2.08M - 0
17.258 Wia Adult Program $1.62M Yes 1
17.259 Wia Youth Activities $1.12M Yes 1
93.268 Immunization Cooperative Agreements $932,237 - 0
93.354 Public Health Emergency Response: Cooperative Agreement for Emergency Response: Public Health Crisis Response $837,580 - 0
10.561 State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program $810,669 - 0
93.778 Child Support Enforcement $570,539 Yes 0
15.615 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund $539,246 - 0
16.575 Crime Victim Assistance $479,709 - 0
93.527 Affordable Care Act (aca) Grants for New and Expanded Services Under the Health Center Program $432,157 Yes 0
20.616 National Priority Safety Programs $417,451 - 0
93.556 Promoting Safe and Stable Families $361,997 - 0
93.918 Grants to Provide Outpatient Early Intervention Services with Respect to Hiv Disease $338,144 - 0
21.019 Coronavirus Relief Fund $328,604 - 0
93.090 Guardianship Assistance $318,153 - 0
93.958 Block Grants for Community Mental Health Services $306,888 Yes 0
93.092 Medical Assistance Program $283,306 - 0
93.391 Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (stlt) Health Department Response to Public Health Or Healthcare Crises $268,747 - 0
93.959 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part C_nutrition Services $265,973 Yes 0
93.917 Community Services Block Grant $265,753 - 0
93.569 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse $261,714 - 0
93.569 National Family Caregiver Support, Title Iii, Part E $245,344 - 0
93.069 Public Health Emergency Preparedness $245,124 - 0
93.052 Medicare Enrollment Assistance Program $208,696 - 0
93.045 Medicare Enrollment Assistance Program $201,809 - 0
93.136 Injury Prevention and Control Research and State and Community Based Programs $182,476 - 0
93.645 Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services Program $165,217 - 0
93.116 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse $157,923 - 0
10.560 State Administrative Expenses for Child Nutrition $143,725 - 0
10.411 Rural Housing Site Loans and Self Help Housing Land Development Loans $132,061 - 0
17.278 Wia Dislocated Worker Formula Grants $125,365 Yes 1
93.991 Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant $125,365 - 0
93.674 John H. Chafee Foster Care Program for Successful Transition to Adulthood $123,335 - 0
93.603 Adoption Incentive Payments $123,127 - 0
93.917 Medical Assistance Program $116,376 - 0
93.197 Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Projects_state and Local Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention and Surveillance of Blood Lead Levels in Children $108,703 - 0
97.067 Homeland Security Grant Program $101,196 - 0
93.889 National Bioterrorism Hospital Preparedness Program $99,005 - 0
93.045 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part D_disease Prevention and Health Promotion Services $96,162 - 0
93.053 Nutrition Services Incentive Program $92,966 - 0
93.150 Projects for Assistance in Transition From Homelessness (path) $90,150 - 0
93.324 State Health Insurance Assistance Program $78,977 - 0
16.775 Social Security Incentive Program $65,200 - 0
93.747 Elder Abuse Prevention Interventions Program $56,828 - 0
20.600 State and Community Highway Safety $56,017 - 0
93.052 State Health Insurance Assistance Program $50,176 - 0
93.426 Improving the Health of Americans Through Prevention and Management of Diabetes and Heart Disease and Stroke $45,708 - 0
20.205 Highway Planning and Construction $44,710 - 0
93.566 Refugee and Entrant Assistance_state Administered Programs $32,962 - 0
93.071 Medicare Enrollment Assistance Program $32,723 - 0
93.043 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part D_disease Prevention and Health Promotion Services $30,114 - 0
93.994 Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant to the States $28,950 - 0
93.917 Project Grants and Cooperative Agreements for Tuberculosis Control Programs $17,139 - 0
97.042 Emergency Management Performance Grants $14,390 - 0
93.044 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part B_grants for Supportive Services and Senior Centers $13,252 - 0
93.042 Special Programs for the Aging_title Vii, Chapter 2_long Term Care Ombudsman Services for Older Individuals $9,468 - 0
93.045 Special Programs for the Aging_title Iii, Part C_nutrition Services $6,703 - 0
93.041 Special Programs for the Aging_title Vii, Chapter 3_programs for Prevention of Elder Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation $4,661 - 0
10.025 Plant and Animal Disease, Pest Control, and Animal Care $2,629 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
VTLEG9VDVL48 Siomara Barajas Auditee
8317555303 Jeffrey Peek Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: Basic of Presentation Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. The accompnaying schedule of expenditures of federal awards presents the activity of all federal awards programs of the County of Monterey for the year ended June 30, 2023. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance).
Title: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements.
Title: Assistance Listing Numbers Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. The program titles and Assitance Listing Numbers were obtained from the federal or passthrough grantor.
Title: Indirect Cost Rate Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) required the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent deminimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate.
Title: Loans with continuing Compliance Requirements Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. Outstanding federally-funded program loans, with a continuing compliance requirement, carried balances as of June 30, 2023.
Title: Pass-Through Entities' Identifying Number Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. When federal awards were received from a pass-through entity, the schedule of expenditures of federal awards shows, if available, the identifying number assigned by the pass-through entity. When no identifying number is shown, the County determined that no identifying number is assigned from the program or the County was unable to obtain an identifying number from the pass-through entity.
Title: Department of Aging Federal/State Share Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the schedule are reported on the modified 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. Therefore, some accounts presented in the schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2 CFR 200.414. The California Department of Aging (CDA) required agencies that receive CDA funding to display state-funded expenditures discretely along with federal expenditures. The County expended the following state and federal amounts under these grants.

Finding Details

Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.
Three of seven reports selected for testwork did not agree to underlying supporting documentation of the expenditures. One report out of seven did not have a signature and therefore there was no evidence internal control procedures occurred. Two out of seven reports selected were not submitted due to management not understanding the close out process for grant reporting.