Audit 314776

Criteria: 49 CFR Part 18.36 requires grant recipients to follow the procurement standards established by their state and their own policies as long as those standards meet federal requirements. The County’s procurement standards meet Federal and State requirements. Also, in compliance with the guidance set forth in the grant agreements and with the OMB A-102 Common Rule (which applies to grants and cooperative agreements) Attachment 1 (d), all recipients are required, during the procurement process, to ensure vendors are not cited as suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participation in federally funded contracts. This can be accomplished by checking www.sam.gov maintained by the General Services Administration, collecting a certification from the entity, or adding a clause or condition to the contract with the vendor. Condition: During our testing of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (“CSLFRF”), it was discovered that the County did not document its verification of whether its major contractor was noted as excluded on the federal government’s suspension and debarred lists and did not include the appropriate language in the contract with that contractor. Possible Effects: The County could unintentionally enter into a noncompliant contract and be forced to reimburse the federal government for all expenditures made with a debarred or suspended contractor. Based on a review of the excluded parties listing, the contractor in this case was not included as suspended or debarred. Context: The major contractor used with CSLFRF funds was not noted as having the proper suspension and debarment certification in its contract and there was no documentation of the County’s review of the excluded party listing. Cause: The County did not obtain suspension and debarment certifications from the contractor or document that a review of suspended and debarred vendors had occurred. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish procedures to document its process of verification of a contractor’s suspension and debarment status prior to engagement, and also periodically perform and document a review of the listing of suspended and debarred vendors.

Criteria: 49 CFR Part 18.36 requires grant recipients to follow the procurement standards established by their state and their own policies as long as those standards meet federal requirements. The County’s procurement standards meet Federal and State requirements. Also, in compliance with the guidance set forth in the grant agreements and with the OMB A-102 Common Rule (which applies to grants and cooperative agreements) Attachment 1 (d), all recipients are required, during the procurement process, to ensure vendors are not cited as suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participation in federally funded contracts. This can be accomplished by checking www.sam.gov maintained by the General Services Administration, collecting a certification from the entity, or adding a clause or condition to the contract with the vendor. Condition: During our testing of the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (“DWSRF”), it was discovered that the County did not document its verification of whether its major contractor was noted as excluded on the federal government’s suspension and debarred lists and did not include the appropriate language in the contract with that contractor. Possible Effects: The County could unintentionally enter into a noncompliant contract and be forced to reimburse the federal government for all expenditures made with a debarred or suspended contractor. Based on a review of the excluded parties listing, the contractor in this case was not included as suspended or debarred. Context: The major contractor used with DWSRF funds was not noted as having the proper suspension and debarment certification in its contract and there was no documentation of the County’s review of the excluded party listing. Cause: The County did not obtain suspension and debarment certifications from the contractor or document that a review of suspended and debarred vendors had occurred. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish procedures to document its process of verification of a contractor’s suspension and debarment status prior to engagement, and also periodically perform and document a review of the listing of suspended and debarred vendors.

Criteria: 49 CFR Part 18.36 requires grant recipients to follow the procurement standards established by their state and their own policies as long as those standards meet federal requirements. The County’s procurement standards meet Federal and State requirements. Also, in compliance with the guidance set forth in the grant agreements and with the OMB A-102 Common Rule (which applies to grants and cooperative agreements) Attachment 1 (d), all recipients are required, during the procurement process, to ensure vendors are not cited as suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participation in federally funded contracts. This can be accomplished by checking www.sam.gov maintained by the General Services Administration, collecting a certification from the entity, or adding a clause or condition to the contract with the vendor. Condition: During our testing of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (“CSLFRF”), it was discovered that the County did not document its verification of whether its major contractor was noted as excluded on the federal government’s suspension and debarred lists and did not include the appropriate language in the contract with that contractor. Possible Effects: The County could unintentionally enter into a noncompliant contract and be forced to reimburse the federal government for all expenditures made with a debarred or suspended contractor. Based on a review of the excluded parties listing, the contractor in this case was not included as suspended or debarred. Context: The major contractor used with CSLFRF funds was not noted as having the proper suspension and debarment certification in its contract and there was no documentation of the County’s review of the excluded party listing. Cause: The County did not obtain suspension and debarment certifications from the contractor or document that a review of suspended and debarred vendors had occurred. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish procedures to document its process of verification of a contractor’s suspension and debarment status prior to engagement, and also periodically perform and document a review of the listing of suspended and debarred vendors.

Criteria: 49 CFR Part 18.36 requires grant recipients to follow the procurement standards established by their state and their own policies as long as those standards meet federal requirements. The County’s procurement standards meet Federal and State requirements. Also, in compliance with the guidance set forth in the grant agreements and with the OMB A-102 Common Rule (which applies to grants and cooperative agreements) Attachment 1 (d), all recipients are required, during the procurement process, to ensure vendors are not cited as suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participation in federally funded contracts. This can be accomplished by checking www.sam.gov maintained by the General Services Administration, collecting a certification from the entity, or adding a clause or condition to the contract with the vendor. Condition: During our testing of the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (“DWSRF”), it was discovered that the County did not document its verification of whether its major contractor was noted as excluded on the federal government’s suspension and debarred lists and did not include the appropriate language in the contract with that contractor. Possible Effects: The County could unintentionally enter into a noncompliant contract and be forced to reimburse the federal government for all expenditures made with a debarred or suspended contractor. Based on a review of the excluded parties listing, the contractor in this case was not included as suspended or debarred. Context: The major contractor used with DWSRF funds was not noted as having the proper suspension and debarment certification in its contract and there was no documentation of the County’s review of the excluded party listing. Cause: The County did not obtain suspension and debarment certifications from the contractor or document that a review of suspended and debarred vendors had occurred. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish procedures to document its process of verification of a contractor’s suspension and debarment status prior to engagement, and also periodically perform and document a review of the listing of suspended and debarred vendors.