FAC Explorer

Audit 315870

FY End
2023-12-31
Total Expended
$21.17M
Findings
8
Programs
6
Organization: Regional Food Bank of Northeastern New York, Inc. (NY)
Year: 2023 Accepted: 2024-07-24
Auditor: Mengel Metzger Barr & CO LLP

Organization Exclusion Status:

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
479363 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
479364 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
479365 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
479366 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
1055805 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
1055806 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
1055807 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N
1055808 2023-001 Significant Deficiency Yes N

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
10.569 Emergency Food Assistance Program (food Commodities) $13.86M - 1
14.228 Community Development Block Grants/state's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii $5.47M Yes 0
10.187 Commodity Credit CORP $297,104 - 0
10.568 Emergency Food Assistance Program (administrative Costs) $173,985 - 1
10.561 State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program $146,172 - 0
97.024 Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program $21,237 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
JTPLV8JRQ699 Deanna Zuzick Auditee
5187863691 Heather Lewis Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: Basis of Presentation Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not 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 thefederal award activity of the Regional Food Bank of Northeastern New York, Inc. (Food Bank)under programs of the federal government for the year ended December 31, 2023. Theinformation in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S.Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles,and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedulepresents only a selected portion of the operations of the Food Bank, it is not intended to and doesnot present the financial position, changes in net assets, or cash flows of the Food Bank.
Title: Noncash Assistance/Emergency Food Assistance Program (Commodities) Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance Federal awards expended in the form of noncash assistance during the year ended December 31,2023 have been reported at the fair market value of the commodities received and distributed. AtDecember 31, 2023, the Food Bank had food commodities inventory totaling $2,510,328.
Title: Subreceipts Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance The Emergency Food Assistance Program (Commodities) (TEFAP) The Food Bank provided federal awards to eligible programs. The value of the commodities distributed totaled $13,856,472 during 2023. State Administrative Matching Grants for the Hunger Prevention Nutrition Assistance Program The Food Bank provided operation support grants to eligible programs during 2023. None of this amount was expended from federal awards.
Title: Insurance Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance The Food Bank did not participate in any federal insurance programs as of December 31, 2023.
Title: Loans and Loan Guarantees Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance The Food Bank had no federal loans or federal loan guarantees outstanding as of December 31,2023.
Title: Matching Costs Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not 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 does not include matching costs.
Title: Audits by Other Auditors Accounting Policies: 1.Expenditures reported in the Schedule are presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The amounts reported as expenditures were obtained from the general ledger and other supporting documentation, which is the source of the financial statements. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance and/or other cost principles applicable to not-for-profit organizations, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement.2.The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. 3.Pass-through entity identifying numbers are presented where available. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The Food Bank has not elected to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance There were no audits of the Food Bank’s federal award programs by other auditors during orcovering the year ended December 31, 2023.

Finding Details

Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.
Finding 2023-001
2023-001 Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture (USDA) Pass-Through Entity: State of New York Executive Department of General Services Assistance Listing Numbers: 10.568 and 10.569 Pass-through Grant Numbers: 4NY810809, 4NY430803, and 8NY200100 Program Name: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Food Distribution Cluster Criteria: 7 CFR Section 250.19(a) identifies requirements related to record keeping for this major program. It is important to note the Food Bank appeared to maintain the appropriate supporting documents and required components, this finding relates to one component regarding lack of a signoff not lack of documentation. Condition: During our testing, we noted the following: The invoices created as a result of USDA orders being made were not consistently signed off onby the recipient agency representative upon pick up or delivery of the commodities. Cause: The Food Bank will always try to get these signatures but there are instances where the recipient agency representative will leave without signing. There is no check for the signoff prior to the recipient agency departing with the goods. Effect: The Food Bank does not have consistent documentation, via a signoff, that goods noted on the invoice were picked up by the recipient agency. Questioned Costs: None Context/Sampling: We selected 40 USDA orders across all recipient agencies. 10 of which were from the top 5 volume sites in 2023 and 30 picked haphazardly. Of these 40, there were 3 instances where the invoice was missing a signature from the recipient agency. The invoice is generated from the same software used by the Food Bank to track inventory throughout the year and at year end. During our testing of the components of this software, specifically, values, receipts of inventory, distributions of inventory, and year end test counts of inventory, we found these transactions to be properly supported and recorded. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: The Food Bank should ensure that when the recipient agencies pick up or have orders delivered, they do not leave without the invoice being properly signed off on. View of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will implement the recommendations.