Finding number: 2022 001 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: Title I, Grants to Local Education Agencies ALN #: 84.010 Award number: 305 532937 2022 0035 Award year: September 1, 2021 to June 30, 2023 Finding: Internal Control and Compliance over Payroll Costs Prior Year Finding: 2018 001 Type of Finding: Material Weakness Criteria In accordance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1), charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass both Federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non Federal entity?s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the non Federal entity; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee?s salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of allowable costs associated with payroll charges, we noted that the City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) documents time and attendance of employees on daily timesheets signed by the employee, as well as weekly time and effort reporting worksheets. The timesheets are then reviewed by each employee?s supervisor and the worksheets are reviewed by the Department Head or designee, ensuring appropriate salary and wage distribution. However, for our sample of 40 payroll transactions charged to the program, 6 transactions were not supported by a completed timesheet. Cause This appears to be due to an insufficient system for collecting, filing and maintaining supporting documentation for payroll transactions charged to Federal programs. Effect BPS is not in compliance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1) regarding documentation in support of salaries and wages charge to the federal program. The number of transactions that were not supported by a time sheet represent 15% of the selected population and indicate a systemic problem. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs of $24,188, for unsupported payroll charges, were charged to ALN # 84.010, Award No. 305 532937 2022 0035. Recommendation We recommend that BPS implement control procedures to ensure that all payroll costs charged to the federal program are supported by documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1). View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The District will revert back to the previously approved Google Form process for daily sign in and sign out procedures. This form is authenticated through IT and managed in a centralized repository making it easier to recall data for auditing and validate for weekly time reporting. The District created a new office of Compliance and Risk Management. The office will audit and review the established process quarterly to ensure integrity of the process.
Finding number: 2022 002 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: Title I, Grants to Local Education Agencies ALN #: 84.010 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Reporting Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria The City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) receives funding from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). DESE sets policy for the grants and required reports. DESE issues guidance in Grants for Schools: Getting Them and Using them, A Procedural Manual. According to the DESE?s procedure manual, ?At the conclusion of grant activities, recipients must submit a final financial report to the Department, accounting for the expenditure of funds received. Grants Management has developed an online process and standard form (FR1) for collecting this information. The FR1 form should be submitted to Grants Management within sixty (60) days of the end date of the grant. Grant recipients should file their reports after carefully reconciling all figures with their city auditor, town accountant, or agency business manager.? Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our review of compliance with subrecipient reporting requirements for the Title I program, we noted that, for our sample of 4 of the population of 13 FR1 reports required to be filed in fiscal year 2022, 3 reports were filed over a year after the respective grant period ended. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the filing of financial reports under the program. Effect BPS does not have effective internal controls over the Federal award in regard to the primary recipient?s Title I program reporting requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that BPS implement control procedures to ensure that the FR1 form be submitted to DESE Grants Management within sixty (60) days of the end date of the grant in accordance with the reporting requirements of the primary Federal recipient of the Title I program. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The Finance Department at Boston Public Schools will implement an internal fiscal tracker to monitor and update on a quarterly basis to reflect reporting timelines and ensure timely spending of all grant funds. In addition, BPS will create a grant close procedure document that outlines the roles, responsibilities, and tasks associated with completing the FR1.
Finding number: 2022 003 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: Title I, Grants to Local Education Agencies ALN #: 84.010 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control and Compliance over Annual Report Card, High School Graduation Rate Prior Year Finding: Yes 2021 002 Type of Finding: Material Weakness Criteria Beginning with annual report cards providing assessment results for the 2010?2011 school year, a State educational agency (SEA) and its local education agencies (LEAs) must report graduation rate data for all public high schools at the school, LEA, and State levels using the 4 year adjusted cohort rate under 34 CFR section 200.19(b)(1)(i) (iv)). Additionally, SEAs and LEAs must include the 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate (which may be combined with an extended year adjusted cohort graduation rate or rates) in adequate yearly progress (AYP) determinations beginning with determinations based on assessments administered in the 2011?2012 school year. Graduation rate data must be reported both in the aggregate and disaggregated by each subgroup described in 34 CFR section 200.13(b)(7)(ii) using a 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate. To remove a student from the cohort, a school or LEA must confirm, in writing, that the student transferred out, emigrated to another country, or is deceased. To confirm that a student transferred out, the school or LEA must have official written documentation that the student enrolled in another school or in an educational program that culminates in the award of a regular high school diploma. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition For 9 of 60 students removed from their respective cohorts in the Student Information Management System (SIMS) selected for testing, the City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) could not provide any official written documentation that the student emigrated to another country, is deceased, or is enrolled in another school or in an education program that culminates in the award of a regular high school diploma. Cause This appears to be due to insufficient review of supporting documentation before removal of students from the adjusted cohort graduation rate. Effect BPS is potentially misstating the number of students in the adjusted cohorts used by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to determine the 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation BPS management should re familiarize and re enforce the requirements with staff related to the removal of students from the adjusted cohorts used to determine the 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate and the policies and procedures to obtain and monitor official written documentation of student transfers required to remove students from their respective cohort. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee Between April and June 2022, the district contracted with Ernst and Young to complete a review of withdrawal processes and make recommendations to improve monitoring and internal audit processes. In August 2022, the district formed a student withdrawal working group, which created a process memo to support the appropriate withdrawal process for students in grades 9 12. At the August Management and Operations Institute, the student withdrawal working group was able to communicate and train school leaders and their administration on the appropriate withdrawal processes for students. Throughout the fall and winter, the student withdrawal working group has been monitoring the number of students withdrawn from the district; reviewing associated documentation of the withdrawal; and working with school leaders and school administration both at the central office level as well as through the liaisons and leaders within the regional structure to upload appropriate withdrawal documentation or update withdrawal codes to reflect the evidence associated with each student?s withdrawal case.
Finding number: 2022 004 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: COVID-19 Education Stabilization Fund ALN #: 84.425D Award number: 115 511413 2022 0035 Award year: July 30, 2021 to September 30, 2023 Finding: Internal Control and Compliance over Payroll Costs Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Material Weakness Criteria In accordance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1), charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass both Federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non Federal entity?s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the non Federal entity; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee?s salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of allowable costs associated with payroll charges, we noted that the City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) documents time and attendance of employees on daily timesheets signed by the employee, as well as weekly time and effort reporting worksheets. The timesheets are then reviewed by each employee?s supervisor and the worksheets are reviewed by the Department Head or designee, ensuring appropriates salary and wage distribution. However, for our sample of 40 payroll transactions charged to the program, 12 transactions were not supported by a completed timesheet. Cause This appears to be due to an insufficient system for collecting, filing and maintaining supporting documentation for payroll transactions charged to Federal programs. Effect BPS is not in compliance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1) regarding documentation in support of salaries and wages charge to the federal program. The number of transactions that were not supported by a time sheet represent 30% of the selected population and indicate a systemic problem. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs of $41,281, for unsupported payroll charges, were charged to ALN # 84.425, Award No. 115 511413 2022 0035. Recommendation We recommend that BPS implement control procedures to ensure that all payroll costs charged to the federal program are supported by documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1). View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The District will revert back to the previously approved Google Form process for daily sign in and sign out procedures. This form is authenticated through IT and managed in a centralized repository making it easier to recall data for auditing and validate for weekly time reporting. The District created a new office of Compliance and Risk Management. The office will audit and review the established process quarterly to ensure integrity of the process.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 007 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety & Security Program: Homeland Security Grant Program ALN #: 97.067 Award number: Boston FFY 19 UASI, Boston FFY 20 UASI, Boston FFY 21 UASI, Boston FFY 22 UASI, Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition Based on our testwork, it was noted that the Mayor?s Office of Office of Emergency Management (OEM) did not perform a formal evaluation of each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring to be performed. Further, our review of program monitoring documentation for our sample of 4 of the population of 11 subrecipients indicated that, although OEM performed subrecipient monitoring in fiscal year 2022, OEM did not follow up with 2 out of 4 subrecipients as to why the amount of total program expenditures on the subrecipients? fiscal year 2021 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) were different than total program expenditures reported to them by OEM. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding both the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients, as well as follow up with subrecipients when differences are noted between funding amounts reported to the subrecipient by OEM and amounts reported of the subrecipient?s SEFA. Effect OEM does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring, and ensuring that the total amount of expenditures reported on the subrecipient?s SEFA is consistent with grant funding provided by OEM to the subrecipient. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance for determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring, and to ensure that the total amount of expenditures reported on the subrecipient?s SEFA is consistent with grant funding provided by OEM to the subrecipient. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee OEM will add an event to the departmental annual calendar on the first business day of the month of May of every year indicating that pre risk assessment forms for the upcoming fiscal year beginning on July 1st are to be sent out to subrecipients of federal funds. The addition of this even to the calendar will ensure that all appropriate Admin and Finance staff at OEM are aware of this annual requirement and follow up with subrecipients to receive completed pre risk assessments in advance of the new fiscal year. OEM?s Director of Admin and Finance will be the primary point of contact for pre risk assessment related inquiries from subrecipients, with the Assistant Deputy Chief of Administration serving as a backup point of contact. An event will also be added on the final business day of May each year to ensure that OEM staff follow up with subrecipients that were not responsive to the initial request. OEM will also institute a policy of requiring a written response following receipt of a SEFA letter from OEM detailing the previous fiscal year?s expenditures on behalf of a subrecipient. This written response will contain confirmation that the subrecipients have recorded the same expenditures in their accounting systems as OEM reported in the SEFA letter. Should there be any discrepancy between the information provided in the SEFA from OEM and the expenditures reported by the subrecipient, OEM will schedule a meeting to reconcile any differences and resolve discrepancies within 30 days of being notified of said discrepancies. The Director of Admin and Finance and the Assistant Deputy Chief of Administration will represent OEM in this meeting with the appropriate staff from the subrecipient reporting a discrepancy. Confirmation of resolution of any discrepancies will be documented in writing and attached to SEFA letters for record keeping purposes.
Finding number: 2022 001 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: Title I, Grants to Local Education Agencies ALN #: 84.010 Award number: 305 532937 2022 0035 Award year: September 1, 2021 to June 30, 2023 Finding: Internal Control and Compliance over Payroll Costs Prior Year Finding: 2018 001 Type of Finding: Material Weakness Criteria In accordance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1), charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass both Federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non Federal entity?s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the non Federal entity; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee?s salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of allowable costs associated with payroll charges, we noted that the City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) documents time and attendance of employees on daily timesheets signed by the employee, as well as weekly time and effort reporting worksheets. The timesheets are then reviewed by each employee?s supervisor and the worksheets are reviewed by the Department Head or designee, ensuring appropriate salary and wage distribution. However, for our sample of 40 payroll transactions charged to the program, 6 transactions were not supported by a completed timesheet. Cause This appears to be due to an insufficient system for collecting, filing and maintaining supporting documentation for payroll transactions charged to Federal programs. Effect BPS is not in compliance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1) regarding documentation in support of salaries and wages charge to the federal program. The number of transactions that were not supported by a time sheet represent 15% of the selected population and indicate a systemic problem. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs of $24,188, for unsupported payroll charges, were charged to ALN # 84.010, Award No. 305 532937 2022 0035. Recommendation We recommend that BPS implement control procedures to ensure that all payroll costs charged to the federal program are supported by documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1). View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The District will revert back to the previously approved Google Form process for daily sign in and sign out procedures. This form is authenticated through IT and managed in a centralized repository making it easier to recall data for auditing and validate for weekly time reporting. The District created a new office of Compliance and Risk Management. The office will audit and review the established process quarterly to ensure integrity of the process.
Finding number: 2022 002 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: Title I, Grants to Local Education Agencies ALN #: 84.010 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Reporting Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria The City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) receives funding from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). DESE sets policy for the grants and required reports. DESE issues guidance in Grants for Schools: Getting Them and Using them, A Procedural Manual. According to the DESE?s procedure manual, ?At the conclusion of grant activities, recipients must submit a final financial report to the Department, accounting for the expenditure of funds received. Grants Management has developed an online process and standard form (FR1) for collecting this information. The FR1 form should be submitted to Grants Management within sixty (60) days of the end date of the grant. Grant recipients should file their reports after carefully reconciling all figures with their city auditor, town accountant, or agency business manager.? Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our review of compliance with subrecipient reporting requirements for the Title I program, we noted that, for our sample of 4 of the population of 13 FR1 reports required to be filed in fiscal year 2022, 3 reports were filed over a year after the respective grant period ended. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the filing of financial reports under the program. Effect BPS does not have effective internal controls over the Federal award in regard to the primary recipient?s Title I program reporting requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that BPS implement control procedures to ensure that the FR1 form be submitted to DESE Grants Management within sixty (60) days of the end date of the grant in accordance with the reporting requirements of the primary Federal recipient of the Title I program. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The Finance Department at Boston Public Schools will implement an internal fiscal tracker to monitor and update on a quarterly basis to reflect reporting timelines and ensure timely spending of all grant funds. In addition, BPS will create a grant close procedure document that outlines the roles, responsibilities, and tasks associated with completing the FR1.
Finding number: 2022 003 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: Title I, Grants to Local Education Agencies ALN #: 84.010 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control and Compliance over Annual Report Card, High School Graduation Rate Prior Year Finding: Yes 2021 002 Type of Finding: Material Weakness Criteria Beginning with annual report cards providing assessment results for the 2010?2011 school year, a State educational agency (SEA) and its local education agencies (LEAs) must report graduation rate data for all public high schools at the school, LEA, and State levels using the 4 year adjusted cohort rate under 34 CFR section 200.19(b)(1)(i) (iv)). Additionally, SEAs and LEAs must include the 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate (which may be combined with an extended year adjusted cohort graduation rate or rates) in adequate yearly progress (AYP) determinations beginning with determinations based on assessments administered in the 2011?2012 school year. Graduation rate data must be reported both in the aggregate and disaggregated by each subgroup described in 34 CFR section 200.13(b)(7)(ii) using a 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate. To remove a student from the cohort, a school or LEA must confirm, in writing, that the student transferred out, emigrated to another country, or is deceased. To confirm that a student transferred out, the school or LEA must have official written documentation that the student enrolled in another school or in an educational program that culminates in the award of a regular high school diploma. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition For 9 of 60 students removed from their respective cohorts in the Student Information Management System (SIMS) selected for testing, the City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) could not provide any official written documentation that the student emigrated to another country, is deceased, or is enrolled in another school or in an education program that culminates in the award of a regular high school diploma. Cause This appears to be due to insufficient review of supporting documentation before removal of students from the adjusted cohort graduation rate. Effect BPS is potentially misstating the number of students in the adjusted cohorts used by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to determine the 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation BPS management should re familiarize and re enforce the requirements with staff related to the removal of students from the adjusted cohorts used to determine the 4 year adjusted cohort graduation rate and the policies and procedures to obtain and monitor official written documentation of student transfers required to remove students from their respective cohort. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee Between April and June 2022, the district contracted with Ernst and Young to complete a review of withdrawal processes and make recommendations to improve monitoring and internal audit processes. In August 2022, the district formed a student withdrawal working group, which created a process memo to support the appropriate withdrawal process for students in grades 9 12. At the August Management and Operations Institute, the student withdrawal working group was able to communicate and train school leaders and their administration on the appropriate withdrawal processes for students. Throughout the fall and winter, the student withdrawal working group has been monitoring the number of students withdrawn from the district; reviewing associated documentation of the withdrawal; and working with school leaders and school administration both at the central office level as well as through the liaisons and leaders within the regional structure to upload appropriate withdrawal documentation or update withdrawal codes to reflect the evidence associated with each student?s withdrawal case.
Finding number: 2022 004 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass through agency: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Program: COVID-19 Education Stabilization Fund ALN #: 84.425D Award number: 115 511413 2022 0035 Award year: July 30, 2021 to September 30, 2023 Finding: Internal Control and Compliance over Payroll Costs Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Material Weakness Criteria In accordance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1), charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass both Federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non Federal entity?s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the non Federal entity; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee?s salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of allowable costs associated with payroll charges, we noted that the City of Boston Public Schools (BPS) documents time and attendance of employees on daily timesheets signed by the employee, as well as weekly time and effort reporting worksheets. The timesheets are then reviewed by each employee?s supervisor and the worksheets are reviewed by the Department Head or designee, ensuring appropriates salary and wage distribution. However, for our sample of 40 payroll transactions charged to the program, 12 transactions were not supported by a completed timesheet. Cause This appears to be due to an insufficient system for collecting, filing and maintaining supporting documentation for payroll transactions charged to Federal programs. Effect BPS is not in compliance with 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1) regarding documentation in support of salaries and wages charge to the federal program. The number of transactions that were not supported by a time sheet represent 30% of the selected population and indicate a systemic problem. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs of $41,281, for unsupported payroll charges, were charged to ALN # 84.425, Award No. 115 511413 2022 0035. Recommendation We recommend that BPS implement control procedures to ensure that all payroll costs charged to the federal program are supported by documentation as required by 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1). View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The District will revert back to the previously approved Google Form process for daily sign in and sign out procedures. This form is authenticated through IT and managed in a centralized repository making it easier to recall data for auditing and validate for weekly time reporting. The District created a new office of Compliance and Risk Management. The office will audit and review the established process quarterly to ensure integrity of the process.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 005 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria 2 CFR section 200.331(a) indicates that all pass through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification: (1) Federal Award Identification. ? Subrecipient?s name (which must match registered name in DUNS); ? Subrecipient?s DUNS number (see ? 200.32 Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number); ? Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); ? Federal award date; ? Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; ? Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action; ? Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient; ? Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass through entity; ? Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); ? Name of Federal awarding agency, pass through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the pass through entity; ? ALN Number and Name; the pass through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the ALN number at time of disbursement; ? Identification of whether the award is R&D; and ? Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged per ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs). (2) All requirements imposed by the pass through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (3) Any additional requirements that the pass through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; (4) An approved Federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal government or, if no such rate exists, either a rate negotiated between the pass through entity and the subrecipient (in compliance with this part), or a de minimis indirect cost rate as defined in ? 200.414 Indirect (F&A) costs, paragraph (b) of this part. (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient?s records and financial statements as necessary for the passthrough entity to meet the requirements of this section, ? 200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance, and Subpart F ? Audit Requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) subaward letters were authorized however it was noted that such documents did not contain all of the required elements of 2 CFR Section 200.331(a) listed above. For all 8 subrecipients, the subaward letter did not identify whether the subaward is R&D and did not contain the indirect cost rate for the Federal award. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate review to ensure the subaward includes all of the required elements of 2CFR Section 200.331(a) prior to authorization. Effect Aging does not have adequate controls over subrecipient notification requirements. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM execute an updated MOA with its subrecipients that expressly includes all information description in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1) as required by the Uniform Guidance. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission has revised the addendum that is attached to their award letters to include whether or not the award is R&D and a section on indirect cost rate.
Finding number: 2022 006 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Elderly Affairs Program: Aging Cluster ALN #: 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 Award number: Various Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition During our testing of subrecipient monitoring for a sample of 8 out of the population of 20 subrecipients, the City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission (Age Strong Commission) was unable to provide documentation for one of the 8 subrecipients showing that a formal risk evaluation had been performed. In addition, the Age Strong Commission?s internal controls did not include formal risk evaluation procedures. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients. Effect The Age Strong Commission does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs None Recommendation We recommend that the Age Strong Commission implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance to ensure appropriate subrecipient monitoring. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee A risk assessment questionnaire will be completed prior to funding being awarded to a sub recipient. The City of Boston?s Age Strong Commission?s policies and procedures will be updated to reflect this.
Finding number: 2022 007 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Pass through agency: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety & Security Program: Homeland Security Grant Program ALN #: 97.067 Award number: Boston FFY 19 UASI, Boston FFY 20 UASI, Boston FFY 21 UASI, Boston FFY 22 UASI, Award year: Various Finding: Internal Control over Subrecipient Monitoring Prior Year Finding: No Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.331 (b), a pass through entity must evaluate each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring, which may include consideration of such factors as: ? The subrecipient?s prior experience with the same or similar subawards; ? The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F Audit Requirements of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; ? Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and ? The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Also, according to 2 CFR 200.331 (d), a pass through entity must: ? Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. ? Follow up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass through entity detected through audits, on site reviews, and other means. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non Federal entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition Based on our testwork, it was noted that the Mayor?s Office of Office of Emergency Management (OEM) did not perform a formal evaluation of each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring to be performed. Further, our review of program monitoring documentation for our sample of 4 of the population of 11 subrecipients indicated that, although OEM performed subrecipient monitoring in fiscal year 2022, OEM did not follow up with 2 out of 4 subrecipients as to why the amount of total program expenditures on the subrecipients? fiscal year 2021 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) were different than total program expenditures reported to them by OEM. Cause This appears to be due to inadequate policies and procedures surrounding both the initial risk assessment of the subrecipients, as well as follow up with subrecipients when differences are noted between funding amounts reported to the subrecipient by OEM and amounts reported of the subrecipient?s SEFA. Effect OEM does not have adequate controls over evaluating each subrecipient?s risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring, and ensuring that the total amount of expenditures reported on the subrecipient?s SEFA is consistent with grant funding provided by OEM to the subrecipient. Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation We recommend that OEM implement control procedures to ensure that each subrecipient is evaluated for risk of noncompliance for determining appropriate subrecipient monitoring, and to ensure that the total amount of expenditures reported on the subrecipient?s SEFA is consistent with grant funding provided by OEM to the subrecipient. View of Responsible Officials from the Auditee OEM will add an event to the departmental annual calendar on the first business day of the month of May of every year indicating that pre risk assessment forms for the upcoming fiscal year beginning on July 1st are to be sent out to subrecipients of federal funds. The addition of this even to the calendar will ensure that all appropriate Admin and Finance staff at OEM are aware of this annual requirement and follow up with subrecipients to receive completed pre risk assessments in advance of the new fiscal year. OEM?s Director of Admin and Finance will be the primary point of contact for pre risk assessment related inquiries from subrecipients, with the Assistant Deputy Chief of Administration serving as a backup point of contact. An event will also be added on the final business day of May each year to ensure that OEM staff follow up with subrecipients that were not responsive to the initial request. OEM will also institute a policy of requiring a written response following receipt of a SEFA letter from OEM detailing the previous fiscal year?s expenditures on behalf of a subrecipient. This written response will contain confirmation that the subrecipients have recorded the same expenditures in their accounting systems as OEM reported in the SEFA letter. Should there be any discrepancy between the information provided in the SEFA from OEM and the expenditures reported by the subrecipient, OEM will schedule a meeting to reconcile any differences and resolve discrepancies within 30 days of being notified of said discrepancies. The Director of Admin and Finance and the Assistant Deputy Chief of Administration will represent OEM in this meeting with the appropriate staff from the subrecipient reporting a discrepancy. Confirmation of resolution of any discrepancies will be documented in writing and attached to SEFA letters for record keeping purposes.