Audit 315826

FY End
2023-12-31
Total Expended
$10.27M
Findings
78
Programs
13
Organization: Colorado Legal Services, INC (CO)
Year: 2023 Accepted: 2024-07-24

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
479294 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
479295 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
479296 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
479297 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
479298 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
479299 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
479300 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
479301 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
479302 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
479303 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
479304 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
479305 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
479306 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
479307 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
479308 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
479309 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
479310 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
479311 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
479312 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
479313 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
479314 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479315 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479316 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479317 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479318 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479319 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479320 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479321 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479322 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479323 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479324 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479325 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479326 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
479327 2023-009 Material Weakness - B
479328 2023-010 Significant Deficiency - B
479329 2023-009 Material Weakness - B
479330 2023-010 Significant Deficiency - B
479331 2023-009 Material Weakness - B
479332 2023-010 Significant Deficiency - B
1055736 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
1055737 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
1055738 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
1055739 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
1055740 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
1055741 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
1055742 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
1055743 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
1055744 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
1055745 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
1055746 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
1055747 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
1055748 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
1055749 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
1055750 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
1055751 2023-003 Material Weakness - B
1055752 2023-004 Significant Deficiency - B
1055753 2023-005 Significant Deficiency - E
1055754 2023-006 Material Weakness - G
1055755 2023-007 Material Weakness - G
1055756 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055757 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055758 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055759 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055760 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055761 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055762 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055763 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055764 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055765 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055766 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055767 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055768 2023-008 Material Weakness - G
1055769 2023-009 Material Weakness - B
1055770 2023-010 Significant Deficiency - B
1055771 2023-009 Material Weakness - B
1055772 2023-010 Significant Deficiency - B
1055773 2023-009 Material Weakness - B
1055774 2023-010 Significant Deficiency - B

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
09.U00 Basic Field Grant $6.00M Yes 5
21.027 Eviction Legal Defense $1.06M Yes 2
93.044 Special Programs for the Aging, Title Iii, Part B $695,061 Yes 1
21.027 Arapahoe Eviction Clinic $456,208 Yes 2
16.575 Civil Legal Services for Victims $454,910 - 0
16.320 Services for Victims of Human Trafficking $178,481 - 0
09.U00 Agricultural Worker Grant $162,560 Yes 5
09.U00 Native American Grant $144,793 Yes 5
21.008 Low Income Taxpayer Clinics (litc) $142,673 - 0
21.027 Eviction Diversion $114,994 Yes 2
09.U00 Technology Innovation Grants (tig) $71,397 Yes 5
16.815 Tribal Civil Legal Assistance $16,888 - 0
93.044 Supportive Services and Senior Centers $6,536 Yes 1

Contacts

Name Title Type
U2A8LRNKEF81 Silvia Zelaya Auditee
3038371313 Adam Pyzdrowski Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: NOTE 1 BASIS OF PRESENTATION Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the full accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. Federal financial assistance provided to subrecipients is treated as an expenditure when it is paid to the subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: Y Rate Explanation: Colorado Legal Services has elected to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the “Schedule”) includes the federal award activity of Colorado Legal Services under programs of the federal government for the year ended December 31, 2023. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of Colorado Legal Services, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net assets, or cash flows of Colorado Legal Services.
Title: NOTE 2 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the full accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. Federal financial assistance provided to subrecipients is treated as an expenditure when it is paid to the subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: Y Rate Explanation: Colorado Legal Services has elected to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the full accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. Federal financial assistance provided to subrecipients is treated as an expenditure when it is paid to the subrecipient.
Title: NOTE 3 INDIRECT COST RATE Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the full accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. Federal financial assistance provided to subrecipients is treated as an expenditure when it is paid to the subrecipient. De Minimis Rate Used: Y Rate Explanation: Colorado Legal Services has elected to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Colorado Legal Services has elected to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance.

Finding Details

2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month.  Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549.  One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 010: Review of Indirect Cost Rate Claims related to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.303), state federal award recipients must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal award recipients are managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: During our testing, we were unable to see evidence of review and approval of two indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of the Organization’s indirect cost claims. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noted during the recalculation of the Organization’s indirect cost rate claim on two separate grants. Cause: The Organization does not have a process in place that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims. Effect: The lack of such a control process could result in the Organization claiming incorrect amounts of indirect costs for reimbursement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider implementing a process that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of such claims. Documentation of contemporaneous review should also be maintained. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month.  Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549.  One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 010: Review of Indirect Cost Rate Claims related to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.303), state federal award recipients must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal award recipients are managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: During our testing, we were unable to see evidence of review and approval of two indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of the Organization’s indirect cost claims. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noted during the recalculation of the Organization’s indirect cost rate claim on two separate grants. Cause: The Organization does not have a process in place that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims. Effect: The lack of such a control process could result in the Organization claiming incorrect amounts of indirect costs for reimbursement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider implementing a process that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of such claims. Documentation of contemporaneous review should also be maintained. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month.  Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549.  One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 010: Review of Indirect Cost Rate Claims related to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.303), state federal award recipients must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal award recipients are managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: During our testing, we were unable to see evidence of review and approval of two indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of the Organization’s indirect cost claims. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noted during the recalculation of the Organization’s indirect cost rate claim on two separate grants. Cause: The Organization does not have a process in place that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims. Effect: The lack of such a control process could result in the Organization claiming incorrect amounts of indirect costs for reimbursement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider implementing a process that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of such claims. Documentation of contemporaneous review should also be maintained. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 003: Cost Allocation of Salaries and Wages to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1635.4(a) and 2 CFR 200.430), state that federal award recipients must base allocations of salaries and wages costs to grants on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Condition: During our testing we noted:  Two instances of employees’ pay period salaries totaling $1,742 being allocated to a grant using a flat percentage of 10%, and  One instance of an employee’s pay period salary of $147 being allocated to two grants using a combination of their time an effort on those grants while the remaining portion of the employee’s salary was allocated to LSC and two other private grants using a base of total grant hours for the period divided by total hours coded to the Organization’s general fund. As such, the salary costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. Questioned costs: $1,742 of allocated salary expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These three instances were noting during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries and wages cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries and wages cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 005: Retention of LSC Case File Retainer Agreement Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1611.9) state that federal award recipients must execute a retainer agreement with each client when extended service representation commences or as soon thereafter as is practicable. The agreement must include a statement identifying the legal problem for which representation was sought and the nature of the legal services to be provided. The recipient must maintain copies of all retainer agreements executed. No written retainer agreement is required when the recipient is only providing advice and counsel or brief service, or when legal services are being provided by a private attorney per the private attorney involvement provisions of 45 CFR 1614. Condition: During our testing we were unable to see evidence of the required retainer agreement for a case file tested. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 60 case files. Cause: The Organization’s case file review internal controls did not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Effect: The Organization’s case file review internal controls may not detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review its case file review internal controls to ensure that they are designed in a manner to detect and prevent noncompliance with this requirement. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 006: LSC Private Attorney Involvement (PAI) Cost Allocation and Documentation Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09.706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1614.7) states that federal award recipients shall demonstrate compliance with the PAI requirement by utilizing financial systems and procedures and maintaining supporting documentation to identify and account separately for costs related to the PAI requirement. It also states that non-personnel costs shall be allocated on the basis of reasonable operating data and that all methods of allocating common costs shall be clearly documentation. In addition, it states that any direct or indirect time of staff attorneys or paralegals is allocated as a cost to PAI, such costs must be documented by time sheets accounting for the time those employees have spent on PAI activities. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  One salary allocation over allocated $289 of expenses to the PAI requirement due to a manual adjustment of the individual’s salary during the pay period,  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $260 of payroll tax expenses related to one month during the year,  Ten salary allocations were allocated using time records related to the various work periods throughout the year but the expense was allocated using the salaries of the employees at the end of the year. The resulting salary allocation was $401 higher than what the allocation would have been using salaries in effect during the allocable work periods. As such, the costs mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to grant payroll costs and were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and compensation. Questioned costs: $950 of allocated salary and payroll tax expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 09.706060. Context: These instances were noting during testing of 19 payroll and payroll-related PAI requirement costs. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 007: Allocation of LSC Derivative Income Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Grants Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.17) state that derivative income resulting from an activity supported in whole or in part with LSC funds shall be allocated to the fund in which the recipient’s LSC grant is recorded in the same proportion that the amount of LSC funds expended bears to the total amount expended by the recipient to support the activity. Condition: During our testing, we noted that the Organization allocated interest income earned on LSC funds were allocated to the LSC based on the proportion of LSC funds earning interest as opposed to the ratio of LSC expenses compared to total Organization expenses. Questioned costs: None. Context: This instance was noted during our recalculation of the Organization’s interest income allocation to the LSC fund. Cause: The Organization’s policy describes an allocation method for interest income that is different from the method described in the federal regulations. Effect: The difference between the allocation method listed in the federal regulations and the method used by the Organization resulted in an under allocation of $198,593 of interest income to the LSC fund. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its derivative income allocation method, policy and procedures to reflect the method described in the federal regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 008: Matching Requirements of Aging Cluster Grants Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Aging Cluster - Special Programs for the Aging, Title III, Part B Assistance Listing Number: 93.044 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – Aging Cluster Pass-Through Agency: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Award Period: Various – Aging Cluster, see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations and specific federal award pass-through agreements require the Organization to contribute matching funds to support the services to be provided with the federal award funds. Condition: During our testing we noted that the Organization did not meet its required match for four separate grants. The Organization’s matching requirements for the grant period of these grants totaled $88,530 and the Organization contributed a total of $80,908 of matching funds during the period, resulting in an undermatch of $7,622. However, we also noted that in total the Organization over matched five other separate grants tested for a total of $27,011. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noting during testing of matching requirements for 10 federal award pass-through agreements. Cause: The Organization does not have a control process in place to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Effect: The Organization may not meet its matching requirements under federal award agreements. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a control process to ensure that it meets its matching requirements within the grant period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month.  Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549.  One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 010: Review of Indirect Cost Rate Claims related to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.303), state federal award recipients must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal award recipients are managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: During our testing, we were unable to see evidence of review and approval of two indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of the Organization’s indirect cost claims. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noted during the recalculation of the Organization’s indirect cost rate claim on two separate grants. Cause: The Organization does not have a process in place that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims. Effect: The lack of such a control process could result in the Organization claiming incorrect amounts of indirect costs for reimbursement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider implementing a process that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of such claims. Documentation of contemporaneous review should also be maintained. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month.  Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549.  One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 010: Review of Indirect Cost Rate Claims related to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.303), state federal award recipients must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal award recipients are managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: During our testing, we were unable to see evidence of review and approval of two indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of the Organization’s indirect cost claims. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noted during the recalculation of the Organization’s indirect cost rate claim on two separate grants. Cause: The Organization does not have a process in place that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims. Effect: The lack of such a control process could result in the Organization claiming incorrect amounts of indirect costs for reimbursement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider implementing a process that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of such claims. Documentation of contemporaneous review should also be maintained. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding:  Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance  Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that:  We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month.  Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549.  One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 010: Review of Indirect Cost Rate Claims related to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.303), state federal award recipients must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal award recipients are managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: During our testing, we were unable to see evidence of review and approval of two indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of the Organization’s indirect cost claims. Questioned costs: None Context: These instances were noted during the recalculation of the Organization’s indirect cost rate claim on two separate grants. Cause: The Organization does not have a process in place that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims. Effect: The lack of such a control process could result in the Organization claiming incorrect amounts of indirect costs for reimbursement. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider implementing a process that documents review and approval of submitted indirect cost claims by someone other than the preparer of such claims. Documentation of contemporaneous review should also be maintained. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding