Audit 344762

FY End
2024-06-30
Total Expended
$4.35M
Findings
4
Programs
32
Organization: Yancey County, North Carolina (NC)
Year: 2024 Accepted: 2025-03-05

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
525650 2024-002 Material Weakness - A
525651 2024-002 Material Weakness - A
1102092 2024-002 Material Weakness - A
1102093 2024-002 Material Weakness - A

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
93.778 Medical Assistance Program $833,058 Yes 0
66.458 Clean Water State Revolving Fund $824,440 Yes 0
97.036 Disaster Grants - Public Assistance (presidentially Declared Disasters) $152,891 - 0
93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families $135,823 - 0
21.032 Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency Fund $123,816 - 0
20.509 Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit Program $122,714 - 0
93.658 Foster Care Title IV-E $110,755 - 0
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $100,659 Yes 0
10.557 Wic Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children $95,261 - 0
93.044 Special Programs for the Aging, Title Iii, Part B, Grants for Supportive Services and Senior Centers $93,811 - 0
93.967 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration with Academia to Strengthen Public Health $86,381 - 0
93.045 Special Programs for the Aging, Title Iii, Part C, Nutrition Services $76,645 - 0
93.596 Child Care Mandatory and Matching Funds of the Child Care and Development Fund $73,333 - 0
93.563 Child Support Services $58,255 - 0
93.667 Social Services Block Grant $57,831 - 0
93.268 Immunization Cooperative Agreements $43,097 - 0
97.042 Emergency Management Performance Grants $39,698 - 0
93.991 Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant $30,431 - 0
93.069 Public Health Emergency Preparedness $27,884 - 0
16.738 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program $23,283 - 0
93.994 Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant to the States $17,293 - 0
93.767 Children's Health Insurance Program $15,382 - 0
93.053 Nutrition Services Incentive Program $12,588 - 0
93.556 Marylee Allen Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program $9,210 - 0
10.561 State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program $7,198 Yes 1
93.674 John H. Chafee Foster Care Program for Successful Transition to Adulthood $5,127 - 0
93.568 Low-Income Home Energy Assistance $4,598 - 0
93.645 Stephanie Tubbs Jones Child Welfare Services Program $3,788 - 0
93.659 Adoption Assistance $1,396 - 0
93.917 Hiv Care Formula Grants $400 - 0
93.977 Sexually Transmitted Diseases (std) Prevention and Control Grants $100 - 0
93.116 Project Grants and Cooperative Agreements for Tuberculosis Control Programs $29 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
L98MCUHKC2J8 Brandi Burleson Auditee
8286823819 Travis Keever Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: Basis of Presentation Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the SEFA are reported on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Yancey County has elected not to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (SEFA) includes the federal and State grant activity of Yancey County under the programs of the federal government and the State of North Carolina for the year ended June 30, 2024. The information in this SEFA is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) and the State Single Audit Implementation Act. Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of Yancey County, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net position or cashflows of Yancey County.
Title: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the SEFA are reported on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Yancey County has elected not to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Expenditures reported in the SEFA are reported on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Yancey County has elected not to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance.
Title: Cluster of Programs Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the SEFA are reported on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Yancey County has elected not to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. The following are clustered by the NC Department of Health and Human Services and are treated separately for state audit requirement purposes: Subsidized Child Care, Foster Care and Adoption
Title: Loans Outstanding Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported in the SEFA are reported on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance, wherein certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: Yancey County has elected not to use the 10-percent de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. Yancey County had the following loan balances outstanding at June 30, 2024 for loans the grantor has still imposed continuing compliance requirements. Loans outstanding at the beginning of the year and loans made during the year are included in the SEFSA. The balance of the loans outstanding at June 30, 2024 consist of: Capitalization Grants for Cleant Water State Revolving Funds, Assistance Listing No. 66.458, Pass-Through Grantor's Number CS370504-01, FY 2024 Expenditure $202,019, FY 2024 Forgiven $282,918, Amount Outstanding $756,395.

Finding Details

Finding 2024-02: Material Noncompliance/Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.303 requires the non-Federal entity to “establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Reasonable assurance includes the County documenting a key control was implemented. Condition: The County has not implemented a formal process or internal policy for performing 2nd party reviews to verify the income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs. Context: The 2nd party review process is the key internal control over the accuracy of FNS/SNAP case income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. County staff noted that they follow the Federal policy regarding 2nd party review over FNS, which requires 2nd party reviews on all households with five of more members and try to perform others reviews as time allows, but that documentation of these reviews is not maintained. There was no documentation available for us to review to verify that any 2nd party reviews had been performed. Cause: The County does not have a formal policy requiring 2nd party reviews be performed or a process to document the 2nd party reviews that are performed. Effect: The current 2nd party review process does not function as an effective internal control over compliance. Identification of repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the implementation of a formal and documented 2nd party review process to include an appropriate number of reviews given the volume of applications processed for a given time period. These 2nd party reviews that are performed should be selected from the entire population of cases, not just those with 5 or more household members. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The County agrees with this finding and is taking coordinated effort and action. Refer to corrective action plan on subsequent page 15.
Finding 2024-02: Material Noncompliance/Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.303 requires the non-Federal entity to “establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Reasonable assurance includes the County documenting a key control was implemented. Condition: The County has not implemented a formal process or internal policy for performing 2nd party reviews to verify the income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs. Context: The 2nd party review process is the key internal control over the accuracy of FNS/SNAP case income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. County staff noted that they follow the Federal policy regarding 2nd party review over FNS, which requires 2nd party reviews on all households with five of more members and try to perform others reviews as time allows, but that documentation of these reviews is not maintained. There was no documentation available for us to review to verify that any 2nd party reviews had been performed. Cause: The County does not have a formal policy requiring 2nd party reviews be performed or a process to document the 2nd party reviews that are performed. Effect: The current 2nd party review process does not function as an effective internal control over compliance. Identification of repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the implementation of a formal and documented 2nd party review process to include an appropriate number of reviews given the volume of applications processed for a given time period. These 2nd party reviews that are performed should be selected from the entire population of cases, not just those with 5 or more household members. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The County agrees with this finding and is taking coordinated effort and action. Refer to corrective action plan on subsequent page 15.
Finding 2024-02: Material Noncompliance/Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.303 requires the non-Federal entity to “establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Reasonable assurance includes the County documenting a key control was implemented. Condition: The County has not implemented a formal process or internal policy for performing 2nd party reviews to verify the income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs. Context: The 2nd party review process is the key internal control over the accuracy of FNS/SNAP case income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. County staff noted that they follow the Federal policy regarding 2nd party review over FNS, which requires 2nd party reviews on all households with five of more members and try to perform others reviews as time allows, but that documentation of these reviews is not maintained. There was no documentation available for us to review to verify that any 2nd party reviews had been performed. Cause: The County does not have a formal policy requiring 2nd party reviews be performed or a process to document the 2nd party reviews that are performed. Effect: The current 2nd party review process does not function as an effective internal control over compliance. Identification of repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the implementation of a formal and documented 2nd party review process to include an appropriate number of reviews given the volume of applications processed for a given time period. These 2nd party reviews that are performed should be selected from the entire population of cases, not just those with 5 or more household members. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The County agrees with this finding and is taking coordinated effort and action. Refer to corrective action plan on subsequent page 15.
Finding 2024-02: Material Noncompliance/Material Weakness in Internal Control Criteria: Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.303 requires the non-Federal entity to “establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Reasonable assurance includes the County documenting a key control was implemented. Condition: The County has not implemented a formal process or internal policy for performing 2nd party reviews to verify the income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs. Context: The 2nd party review process is the key internal control over the accuracy of FNS/SNAP case income verification and eligibility determinations made by County staff. County staff noted that they follow the Federal policy regarding 2nd party review over FNS, which requires 2nd party reviews on all households with five of more members and try to perform others reviews as time allows, but that documentation of these reviews is not maintained. There was no documentation available for us to review to verify that any 2nd party reviews had been performed. Cause: The County does not have a formal policy requiring 2nd party reviews be performed or a process to document the 2nd party reviews that are performed. Effect: The current 2nd party review process does not function as an effective internal control over compliance. Identification of repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the implementation of a formal and documented 2nd party review process to include an appropriate number of reviews given the volume of applications processed for a given time period. These 2nd party reviews that are performed should be selected from the entire population of cases, not just those with 5 or more household members. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The County agrees with this finding and is taking coordinated effort and action. Refer to corrective action plan on subsequent page 15.