Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During Benefits Accuracy Measurement (BAM) case testing, it was noted that cases were not being completed timely. 25 out 40 cases sampled were not completed within 60 days (62.50% error rate), it is required that 70 percent be completed within 60 days of the week ending date of the batch. 8 out of 40 of the sampled cases were not completed under 90 days (20.00% error rate), it is required that 95 percent of cases must be completed within 90 days of the week of date of the batch. 3 of 37 of the sampled cases were not completed within 120 days (7.50% error rate), it is required that 98 percent be completed within 120 days of the week ending date of the batch. Questioned costs: None. Context: BAM cases need to be completed at minimum of 70 percent of cases competed within 60 days of the week ending of the date of batch, 95 percent of cases completed within 90 days of the week ending date of the batch and 98 percent of cases for the year must be completed within 120 days of the ending date of calendar year. Cause: Due to COVID-19 circumstances and a rise of BAM cases to review, cases were not reviewed timely due to the amount and staffing issues. Effect: This indicates that BAM cases are not being reviewed timely, this can cause potential issues to not be appropriately and timely addressed that are looked at during BAM case reviews. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls are in place to ensure that cases are reviewed within the required timeframes. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During Benefits Accuracy Measurement (BAM) case testing, it was noted that cases were not being completed timely. 25 out 40 cases sampled were not completed within 60 days (62.50% error rate), it is required that 70 percent be completed within 60 days of the week ending date of the batch. 8 out of 40 of the sampled cases were not completed under 90 days (20.00% error rate), it is required that 95 percent of cases must be completed within 90 days of the week of date of the batch. 3 of 37 of the sampled cases were not completed within 120 days (7.50% error rate), it is required that 98 percent be completed within 120 days of the week ending date of the batch. Questioned costs: None. Context: BAM cases need to be completed at minimum of 70 percent of cases competed within 60 days of the week ending of the date of batch, 95 percent of cases completed within 90 days of the week ending date of the batch and 98 percent of cases for the year must be completed within 120 days of the ending date of calendar year. Cause: Due to COVID-19 circumstances and a rise of BAM cases to review, cases were not reviewed timely due to the amount and staffing issues. Effect: This indicates that BAM cases are not being reviewed timely, this can cause potential issues to not be appropriately and timely addressed that are looked at during BAM case reviews. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls are in place to ensure that cases are reviewed within the required timeframes. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 31 CFR section 19.300 requires that prior to entering into subawards and contracts with award funds, recipients must verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Condition: The date when suspension and debarment requirements were checked and verified were not maintained or documented. One instance in which suspension and debarment check and verification did not occur. Questioned costs: None. Context: Seven of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation related to when the verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. One of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation that verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. Cause: Lack of internal controls to ensure properly documented and maintained suspension and debarment checks. Effect: Failure to maintain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Noncompliance with 31 CFR section 19.300. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend management document when vendors are checked and verified for suspension and debarment requirements and for this to occur for all vendors. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 31 CFR section 19.300 requires that prior to entering into subawards and contracts with award funds, recipients must verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Condition: The date when suspension and debarment requirements were checked and verified were not maintained or documented. One instance in which suspension and debarment check and verification did not occur. Questioned costs: None. Context: Seven of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation related to when the verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. One of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation that verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. Cause: Lack of internal controls to ensure properly documented and maintained suspension and debarment checks. Effect: Failure to maintain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Noncompliance with 31 CFR section 19.300. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend management document when vendors are checked and verified for suspension and debarment requirements and for this to occur for all vendors. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include timely submission to ensure the compliance of all reports submitted to the federal agency. Condition: During our testing of performance reports, we noted five out the five tested reports were not submitted timely and lacked documentation of review. Questioned costs: None. Context: Out of the five reports tested, all five reports did not have supporting documentation that reports were submitted timely or reviewed by an authorized official. Cause: The agency had staffing turnover during the fiscal year causing lack of review and untimely submission. Effect: Compliance with the timeliness reporting requirement for this program was not being met. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-009. Recommendation: We recommend the agency implement procedures to ensure reports are properly reviewed and submitted in a timely manner as well as increase training efforts on reporting requirements if there is future staffing turnover. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing (CFDA) number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal control should include procedures to ensure required information is communicated prior to the issuance of the subaward. Condition: During our testing, we noted forty out of the forty subrecipients (with expenditures totaling $10,453,259) had required information omitted from the sub agreements to the subrecipients including Assistance Listing (CFDA) title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award. Questioned costs: None. Context: Forty out of the Forty subrecipients did not include required information in sub agreements issued to subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient controls in place to ensure that subaward agreements contain all required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-011. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include procedures in place to ensure the required certifications for covered contracts and subawards are received, documented, and contracts are not made with a debarred or suspended party. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted twenty-one vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for state vendors. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty-one of the sixty covered transaction tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: Several of these vendors were previously approved under Kansas State statute and through the Kansas Department of Administration, which does not perform suspension and debarment procedures over vendors. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-010. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted that management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. This includes suspension and debarment verification documentation and other supporting details including contract agreements. Questioned costs: None. Context: Management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to tracking of suspension and debarment for vendors and subrecipients. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. We recommend that the agency have proper procedures in place to ensure that all contractual documentation is maintained and able to be located. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include timely submission to ensure the compliance of all reports submitted to the federal agency. Condition: During our testing of performance reports, we noted five out the five tested reports were not submitted timely and lacked documentation of review. Questioned costs: None. Context: Out of the five reports tested, all five reports did not have supporting documentation that reports were submitted timely or reviewed by an authorized official. Cause: The agency had staffing turnover during the fiscal year causing lack of review and untimely submission. Effect: Compliance with the timeliness reporting requirement for this program was not being met. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-009. Recommendation: We recommend the agency implement procedures to ensure reports are properly reviewed and submitted in a timely manner as well as increase training efforts on reporting requirements if there is future staffing turnover. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing (CFDA) number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal control should include procedures to ensure required information is communicated prior to the issuance of the subaward. Condition: During our testing, we noted forty out of the forty subrecipients (with expenditures totaling $10,453,259) had required information omitted from the sub agreements to the subrecipients including Assistance Listing (CFDA) title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award. Questioned costs: None. Context: Forty out of the Forty subrecipients did not include required information in sub agreements issued to subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient controls in place to ensure that subaward agreements contain all required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-011. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include procedures in place to ensure the required certifications for covered contracts and subawards are received, documented, and contracts are not made with a debarred or suspended party. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted twenty-one vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for state vendors. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty-one of the sixty covered transaction tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: Several of these vendors were previously approved under Kansas State statute and through the Kansas Department of Administration, which does not perform suspension and debarment procedures over vendors. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-010. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted that management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. This includes suspension and debarment verification documentation and other supporting details including contract agreements. Questioned costs: None. Context: Management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to tracking of suspension and debarment for vendors and subrecipients. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. We recommend that the agency have proper procedures in place to ensure that all contractual documentation is maintained and able to be located. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed timely for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 10 0 6 0 0 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 10,644,442 $ 0 $ 6,688,567 $ 0 $ 0 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed timely, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and the filing was actually completed. Cause: KDCF was understaffed during the fiscal year which impacted the timeliness. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and the information is not being provided on the public website. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF implement a process that includes tracking the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed timely for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 10 0 6 0 0 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 10,644,442 $ 0 $ 6,688,567 $ 0 $ 0 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed timely, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and the filing was actually completed. Cause: KDCF was understaffed during the fiscal year which impacted the timeliness. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and the information is not being provided on the public website. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF implement a process that includes tracking the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed at all for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 2 2 2 2 2 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and KHRC. Cause: Both KDCF and KHRC assumed that the other agency was going to complete this reporting. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and could result in a miscommunication to subrecipients as to the nature of the subaward. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF and KHRC implement a process that includes ensuring the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed at all for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 2 2 2 2 2 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and KHRC. Cause: Both KDCF and KHRC assumed that the other agency was going to complete this reporting. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and could result in a miscommunication to subrecipients as to the nature of the subaward. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF and KHRC implement a process that includes ensuring the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed timely for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 10 0 6 0 0 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 10,644,442 $ 0 $ 6,688,567 $ 0 $ 0 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed timely, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and the filing was actually completed. Cause: KDCF was understaffed during the fiscal year which impacted the timeliness. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and the information is not being provided on the public website. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF implement a process that includes tracking the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per the grant agreement, ?nonrecurring expenses of adoption may be paid on behalf of the child?. The case file should have documentation for the nonrecurring expenses. Condition: During testing of eligibility, it was noted that two participants out of the sixty tested lacked supporting documentation for non-recurring expenses paid on behalf of those participants. Questioned costs: None. Context: The participants were considered eligible for the program, however their case files were not complete for non-recurring expenses portion of the file. Cause: Internal controls did not catch the missing documentation. Effect: The non-recurring expenses that lacked documentation could have been for ineligible expenses. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that DCF have internal controls in place to mitigate this from happening in the future. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part section 170 requires subaward be reported to the Federal Funding and Accounting Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: Management was unable to provide a listing of reports related to the Federal Funding Accounting and Transparency Act (FFATA). Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Questioned costs: None. Context: We were not provided a listing of reports. Cause: Management could not login into the system of record (FSRS) and reports were not saved to alternate location. Effect: Federal reporting requirements were not performed. Subrecipient awards are material to the program. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency implement controls to ensure routine access to FSRS and to save completed reports to a secondary location. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Condition: Subaward agreements to the subrecipients including Assisting Listing title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award, were not included. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients did not have required information in the applicable subawards. Cause: Lack of sufficient internal controls to ensure subawards include required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F requires the pass-through entity to verify that subrecipients expected to be audited, met this requirement. Condition: Management did not track, determine or monitor the audit verification requirement for any subrecipients. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients were not monitored related to the audit verification requirement. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to subrecipient audit verification. Effect: Failure to verify and review subrecipient audits could result in subrecipients lacking required audits or audit findings that directly impact the program?s compliance requirements. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for monitoring of annual audits for subrecipients. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part section 170 requires subaward be reported to the Federal Funding and Accounting Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: Management was unable to provide a listing of reports related to the Federal Funding Accounting and Transparency Act (FFATA). Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Questioned costs: None. Context: We were not provided a listing of reports. Cause: Management could not login into the system of record (FSRS) and reports were not saved to alternate location. Effect: Federal reporting requirements were not performed. Subrecipient awards are material to the program. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency implement controls to ensure routine access to FSRS and to save completed reports to a secondary location. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Condition: Subaward agreements to the subrecipients including Assisting Listing title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award, were not included. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients did not have required information in the applicable subawards. Cause: Lack of sufficient internal controls to ensure subawards include required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F requires the pass-through entity to verify that subrecipients expected to be audited, met this requirement. Condition: Management did not track, determine or monitor the audit verification requirement for any subrecipients. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients were not monitored related to the audit verification requirement. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to subrecipient audit verification. Effect: Failure to verify and review subrecipient audits could result in subrecipients lacking required audits or audit findings that directly impact the program?s compliance requirements. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for monitoring of annual audits for subrecipients. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During Benefits Accuracy Measurement (BAM) case testing, it was noted that cases were not being completed timely. 25 out 40 cases sampled were not completed within 60 days (62.50% error rate), it is required that 70 percent be completed within 60 days of the week ending date of the batch. 8 out of 40 of the sampled cases were not completed under 90 days (20.00% error rate), it is required that 95 percent of cases must be completed within 90 days of the week of date of the batch. 3 of 37 of the sampled cases were not completed within 120 days (7.50% error rate), it is required that 98 percent be completed within 120 days of the week ending date of the batch. Questioned costs: None. Context: BAM cases need to be completed at minimum of 70 percent of cases competed within 60 days of the week ending of the date of batch, 95 percent of cases completed within 90 days of the week ending date of the batch and 98 percent of cases for the year must be completed within 120 days of the ending date of calendar year. Cause: Due to COVID-19 circumstances and a rise of BAM cases to review, cases were not reviewed timely due to the amount and staffing issues. Effect: This indicates that BAM cases are not being reviewed timely, this can cause potential issues to not be appropriately and timely addressed that are looked at during BAM case reviews. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls are in place to ensure that cases are reviewed within the required timeframes. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During Benefits Accuracy Measurement (BAM) case testing, it was noted that cases were not being completed timely. 25 out 40 cases sampled were not completed within 60 days (62.50% error rate), it is required that 70 percent be completed within 60 days of the week ending date of the batch. 8 out of 40 of the sampled cases were not completed under 90 days (20.00% error rate), it is required that 95 percent of cases must be completed within 90 days of the week of date of the batch. 3 of 37 of the sampled cases were not completed within 120 days (7.50% error rate), it is required that 98 percent be completed within 120 days of the week ending date of the batch. Questioned costs: None. Context: BAM cases need to be completed at minimum of 70 percent of cases competed within 60 days of the week ending of the date of batch, 95 percent of cases completed within 90 days of the week ending date of the batch and 98 percent of cases for the year must be completed within 120 days of the ending date of calendar year. Cause: Due to COVID-19 circumstances and a rise of BAM cases to review, cases were not reviewed timely due to the amount and staffing issues. Effect: This indicates that BAM cases are not being reviewed timely, this can cause potential issues to not be appropriately and timely addressed that are looked at during BAM case reviews. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls are in place to ensure that cases are reviewed within the required timeframes. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 31 CFR section 19.300 requires that prior to entering into subawards and contracts with award funds, recipients must verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Condition: The date when suspension and debarment requirements were checked and verified were not maintained or documented. One instance in which suspension and debarment check and verification did not occur. Questioned costs: None. Context: Seven of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation related to when the verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. One of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation that verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. Cause: Lack of internal controls to ensure properly documented and maintained suspension and debarment checks. Effect: Failure to maintain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Noncompliance with 31 CFR section 19.300. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend management document when vendors are checked and verified for suspension and debarment requirements and for this to occur for all vendors. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 31 CFR section 19.300 requires that prior to entering into subawards and contracts with award funds, recipients must verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Condition: The date when suspension and debarment requirements were checked and verified were not maintained or documented. One instance in which suspension and debarment check and verification did not occur. Questioned costs: None. Context: Seven of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation related to when the verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. One of nineteen covered transactions did not have documentation that verification of suspension and debarment requirements occurred. Cause: Lack of internal controls to ensure properly documented and maintained suspension and debarment checks. Effect: Failure to maintain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Noncompliance with 31 CFR section 19.300. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend management document when vendors are checked and verified for suspension and debarment requirements and for this to occur for all vendors. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR 435.916, redeterminations must be made for all Medicaid Beneficiaries annually. Condition: From a sample of sixty individuals, the annual redetermination process was not fully documented for three of the selections. Questioned costs: None. Context: Three of the sixty sampled individual Medicaid recipients did not have any supporting documentation on file, which is an error rate of 5.0%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Manual errors lead to three of the sampled individual Medicaid recipients not having reviews completed or supporting documentation available on file. For two of the samples, a redetermination had not been completed since September 2015, and due to manual edits were not identified for annual redeterminations. For one of the samples, the State was unable to locate archived documentation to support the individual Medicaid recipient?s U.S. citizenship or immigration status. Effect: Compliance with the documentation requirement for this program is not being met and presents difficulty in proving there were not improper payments made. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDHE reviews the process of redeterminations being sent to the household and identify any problem areas in the process which could undermine the redetermination frequency. We also recommend that KDHE reviews the training materials to ensure that all staff who make eligibility determinations are aware of the required supporting documentation to be saved for both initial eligibility determinations and redeterminations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 42 CFR part 442, providers must meet the prescribed health and safety standards for hospitals, nursing facilities, and ICF/IID. Condition: From a sample of sixty providers, two of the providers did not have a recertification survey completed within the required timeframe which is used to meet the provider health and safety standards. Questioned costs: None. Context: Two of the sixty providers sampled received payments from the State without meeting the prescribed health and safety standards, which is an error rate of 3.3%. A non-statistical sampling method was used to select the sample. Cause: Due to staffing shortages and a focus on completing Tier One workload requirements, KDHE has not been able to conduct all of the recertification surveys timely. Effect: Compliance with the prescribed health and safety standards for this program is not being met. Providers who are not meeting the health and safety standards, are still able to receive payments. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the State train all staff members to properly verify providers are meeting the prescribed health and safety standards before making payments to those providers. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include timely submission to ensure the compliance of all reports submitted to the federal agency. Condition: During our testing of performance reports, we noted five out the five tested reports were not submitted timely and lacked documentation of review. Questioned costs: None. Context: Out of the five reports tested, all five reports did not have supporting documentation that reports were submitted timely or reviewed by an authorized official. Cause: The agency had staffing turnover during the fiscal year causing lack of review and untimely submission. Effect: Compliance with the timeliness reporting requirement for this program was not being met. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-009. Recommendation: We recommend the agency implement procedures to ensure reports are properly reviewed and submitted in a timely manner as well as increase training efforts on reporting requirements if there is future staffing turnover. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing (CFDA) number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal control should include procedures to ensure required information is communicated prior to the issuance of the subaward. Condition: During our testing, we noted forty out of the forty subrecipients (with expenditures totaling $10,453,259) had required information omitted from the sub agreements to the subrecipients including Assistance Listing (CFDA) title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award. Questioned costs: None. Context: Forty out of the Forty subrecipients did not include required information in sub agreements issued to subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient controls in place to ensure that subaward agreements contain all required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-011. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include procedures in place to ensure the required certifications for covered contracts and subawards are received, documented, and contracts are not made with a debarred or suspended party. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted twenty-one vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for state vendors. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty-one of the sixty covered transaction tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: Several of these vendors were previously approved under Kansas State statute and through the Kansas Department of Administration, which does not perform suspension and debarment procedures over vendors. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-010. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted that management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. This includes suspension and debarment verification documentation and other supporting details including contract agreements. Questioned costs: None. Context: Management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to tracking of suspension and debarment for vendors and subrecipients. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. We recommend that the agency have proper procedures in place to ensure that all contractual documentation is maintained and able to be located. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include timely submission to ensure the compliance of all reports submitted to the federal agency. Condition: During our testing of performance reports, we noted five out the five tested reports were not submitted timely and lacked documentation of review. Questioned costs: None. Context: Out of the five reports tested, all five reports did not have supporting documentation that reports were submitted timely or reviewed by an authorized official. Cause: The agency had staffing turnover during the fiscal year causing lack of review and untimely submission. Effect: Compliance with the timeliness reporting requirement for this program was not being met. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-009. Recommendation: We recommend the agency implement procedures to ensure reports are properly reviewed and submitted in a timely manner as well as increase training efforts on reporting requirements if there is future staffing turnover. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing (CFDA) number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal control should include procedures to ensure required information is communicated prior to the issuance of the subaward. Condition: During our testing, we noted forty out of the forty subrecipients (with expenditures totaling $10,453,259) had required information omitted from the sub agreements to the subrecipients including Assistance Listing (CFDA) title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award. Questioned costs: None. Context: Forty out of the Forty subrecipients did not include required information in sub agreements issued to subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient controls in place to ensure that subaward agreements contain all required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-011. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include procedures in place to ensure the required certifications for covered contracts and subawards are received, documented, and contracts are not made with a debarred or suspended party. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted twenty-one vendors did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures for state vendors. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty-one of the sixty covered transaction tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: Several of these vendors were previously approved under Kansas State statute and through the Kansas Department of Administration, which does not perform suspension and debarment procedures over vendors. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: Yes, finding 2021-010. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During our testing of sixty covered transactions (thirty-six vendors and twenty-four subrecipients), we noted that management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. This includes suspension and debarment verification documentation and other supporting details including contract agreements. Questioned costs: None. Context: Management was not able to provide supporting documentation for two vendors and three subrecipients. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to tracking of suspension and debarment for vendors and subrecipients. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the agency obtain certifications from vendor stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. We recommend that the agency have proper procedures in place to ensure that all contractual documentation is maintained and able to be located. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed timely for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 10 0 6 0 0 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 10,644,442 $ 0 $ 6,688,567 $ 0 $ 0 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed timely, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and the filing was actually completed. Cause: KDCF was understaffed during the fiscal year which impacted the timeliness. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and the information is not being provided on the public website. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF implement a process that includes tracking the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed timely for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 10 0 6 0 0 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 10,644,442 $ 0 $ 6,688,567 $ 0 $ 0 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed timely, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and the filing was actually completed. Cause: KDCF was understaffed during the fiscal year which impacted the timeliness. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and the information is not being provided on the public website. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF implement a process that includes tracking the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed at all for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 2 2 2 2 2 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and KHRC. Cause: Both KDCF and KHRC assumed that the other agency was going to complete this reporting. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and could result in a miscommunication to subrecipients as to the nature of the subaward. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF and KHRC implement a process that includes ensuring the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed at all for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 2 2 2 2 2 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 $ 3,246,853 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and KHRC. Cause: Both KDCF and KHRC assumed that the other agency was going to complete this reporting. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and could result in a miscommunication to subrecipients as to the nature of the subaward. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF and KHRC implement a process that includes ensuring the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During testing of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) reports, it was noted that the reports were not filed timely for the fiscal year. Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements 10 0 6 0 0 Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements $ 10,644,442 $ 0 $ 6,688,567 $ 0 $ 0 Questioned costs: None. Context: While the reports were not filed timely, the supporting documentation that was needed to file the reports was gathered by KDCF and the filing was actually completed. Cause: KDCF was understaffed during the fiscal year which impacted the timeliness. Effect: Compliance with the reporting requirement for this program is not being met and the information is not being provided on the public website. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that KDCF implement a process that includes tracking the timely submission of the FFATA reports. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per the grant agreement, ?nonrecurring expenses of adoption may be paid on behalf of the child?. The case file should have documentation for the nonrecurring expenses. Condition: During testing of eligibility, it was noted that two participants out of the sixty tested lacked supporting documentation for non-recurring expenses paid on behalf of those participants. Questioned costs: None. Context: The participants were considered eligible for the program, however their case files were not complete for non-recurring expenses portion of the file. Cause: Internal controls did not catch the missing documentation. Effect: The non-recurring expenses that lacked documentation could have been for ineligible expenses. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that DCF have internal controls in place to mitigate this from happening in the future. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part section 170 requires subaward be reported to the Federal Funding and Accounting Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: Management was unable to provide a listing of reports related to the Federal Funding Accounting and Transparency Act (FFATA). Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Questioned costs: None. Context: We were not provided a listing of reports. Cause: Management could not login into the system of record (FSRS) and reports were not saved to alternate location. Effect: Federal reporting requirements were not performed. Subrecipient awards are material to the program. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency implement controls to ensure routine access to FSRS and to save completed reports to a secondary location. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Condition: Subaward agreements to the subrecipients including Assisting Listing title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award, were not included. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients did not have required information in the applicable subawards. Cause: Lack of sufficient internal controls to ensure subawards include required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F requires the pass-through entity to verify that subrecipients expected to be audited, met this requirement. Condition: Management did not track, determine or monitor the audit verification requirement for any subrecipients. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients were not monitored related to the audit verification requirement. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to subrecipient audit verification. Effect: Failure to verify and review subrecipient audits could result in subrecipients lacking required audits or audit findings that directly impact the program?s compliance requirements. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for monitoring of annual audits for subrecipients. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part section 170 requires subaward be reported to the Federal Funding and Accounting Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: Management was unable to provide a listing of reports related to the Federal Funding Accounting and Transparency Act (FFATA). Transactions Tested Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Dollar Amount of Tested Transactions Subaward Not Reported Report Not Timely Subaward Amount Incorrect Subaward Missing Key Elements Not able to test Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown Questioned costs: None. Context: We were not provided a listing of reports. Cause: Management could not login into the system of record (FSRS) and reports were not saved to alternate location. Effect: Federal reporting requirements were not performed. Subrecipient awards are material to the program. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency implement controls to ensure routine access to FSRS and to save completed reports to a secondary location. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states 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. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient?s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Condition: Subaward agreements to the subrecipients including Assisting Listing title and number, subrecipient?s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award, were not included. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients did not have required information in the applicable subawards. Cause: Lack of sufficient internal controls to ensure subawards include required information. Effect: Failure to communicate required information could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F requires the pass-through entity to verify that subrecipients expected to be audited, met this requirement. Condition: Management did not track, determine or monitor the audit verification requirement for any subrecipients. Questioned costs: None. Context: Twenty nine out of the twenty nine subrecipients were not monitored related to the audit verification requirement. Cause: Lack of sufficient tracking and monitoring procedures related to subrecipient audit verification. Effect: Failure to verify and review subrecipient audits could result in subrecipients lacking required audits or audit findings that directly impact the program?s compliance requirements. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the agency review its procedures for monitoring of annual audits for subrecipients. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.