Audit 353302

FY End
2024-09-30
Total Expended
$752.75M
Findings
108
Programs
78
Organization: Harris County- 7 Month Audit (TX)
Year: 2024 Accepted: 2025-04-10

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
554634 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554635 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554636 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554637 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554638 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554639 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554640 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554641 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554642 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554643 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554644 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554645 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
554646 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554647 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554648 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554649 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554650 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554651 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554652 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554653 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554654 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554655 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554656 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554657 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554658 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554659 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554660 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554661 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554662 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554663 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554664 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554665 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554666 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554667 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554668 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554669 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
554670 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554671 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554672 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554673 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554674 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554675 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554676 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554677 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554678 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554679 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554680 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554681 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554682 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
554683 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
554684 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
554685 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
554686 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
554687 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
1131076 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131077 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131078 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131079 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131080 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131081 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131082 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131083 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131084 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131085 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131086 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131087 2024-006 Significant Deficiency - L
1131088 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131089 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131090 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131091 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131092 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131093 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131094 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131095 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131096 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131097 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131098 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131099 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131100 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131101 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131102 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131103 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131104 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131105 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131106 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131107 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131108 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131109 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131110 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131111 2024-007 Significant Deficiency - L
1131112 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131113 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131114 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131115 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131116 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131117 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131118 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131119 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131120 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131121 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131122 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131123 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131124 2024-008 Significant Deficiency - H
1131125 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
1131126 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
1131127 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
1131128 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I
1131129 2024-009 Significant Deficiency - I

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
97.036 Disaster Grants - Public Assistance (presidentially Declared Disasters) $46.28M - 0
10.557 Wic Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children $8.00M Yes 1
93.268 Immunization Cooperative Agreements $7.78M Yes 0
93.566 Refugee and Entrant Assistance State/replacement Designee Administered Programs $7.49M - 0
16.606 State Criminal Alien Assistance Program $7.48M - 0
93.914 Hiv Emergency Relief Project Grants $6.92M - 0
93.391 Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (stlt) Health Department Response to Public Health Or Healthcare Crises $6.27M Yes 0
20.205 Highway Planning and Construction $5.06M - 0
14.228 Community Development Block Grants/state's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii $4.55M - 0
93.495 Community Health Workers for Public Health Response and Resilient $3.78M - 0
21.023 Emergency Rental Assistance Program $3.69M Yes 0
93.967 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration with Academia to Strengthen Public Health $3.26M Yes 0
93.686 Ending the Hiv Epidemic: A Plan for America — Ryan White Hiv/aids Program Parts A and B $1.49M Yes 1
14.900 Lead Hazard Reduction Grant Program $1.44M Yes 1
14.218 Community Development Block Grants/entitlement Grants $1.13M Yes 1
95.001 High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program $1.10M - 0
93.778 Medical Assistance Program $983,960 - 0
93.323 Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity for Infectious Diseases (elc) $820,873 - 0
14.267 Continuum of Care Program $611,194 - 0
64.055 Staff Sergeant Parker Gordon Fox Suicide Prevention Grant Program $527,295 - 0
16.922 Equitable Sharing Program $523,485 - 0
93.243 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Projects of Regional and National Significance $514,259 - 0
16.741 Dna Backlog Reduction Program $447,606 Yes 0
93.658 Foster Care Title IV-E $393,418 - 0
93.197 Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Projects, State and Local Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention and Surveillance of Blood Lead Levels in Children $369,097 - 0
16.738 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program $366,072 - 0
21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds $341,128 Yes 0
97.056 Port Security Grant Program $336,998 - 0
93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families $275,705 - 0
47.083 Integrative Activities $255,837 - 0
20.616 National Priority Safety Programs $250,000 - 0
16.742 Paul Coverdell Forensic Sciences Improvement Grant Program $236,259 - 0
93.493 Congressional Directives $223,684 - 0
20.507 Federal Transit Formula Grants $218,411 - 0
93.069 Public Health Emergency Preparedness $196,912 Yes 2
93.070 Environmental Public Health and Emergency Response $171,161 - 0
16.588 Violence Against Women Formula Grants $160,000 - 0
87.002 Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety $155,718 - 0
93.940 Hiv Prevention Activities Health Department Based $150,075 - 0
16.710 Public Safety Partnership and Community Policing Grants $129,947 - 0
93.354 Public Health Emergency Response: Cooperative Agreement for Emergency Response: Public Health Crisis Response $115,991 - 0
97.024 Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program $111,271 - 0
93.121 Oral Diseases and Disorders Research $111,069 - 0
14.231 Emergency Solutions Grant Program $105,284 - 0
93.556 Marylee Allen Promoting Safe and Stable Families Program $103,444 - 0
93.597 Grants to States for Access and Visitation Programs $103,000 - 0
93.590 Community-Based Child Abuse Prevention Grants $95,754 - 0
16.575 Crime Victim Assistance $83,693 Yes 1
81.128 Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program (eecbg) $77,708 - 0
16.045 Community-Based Violence Intervention and Prevention Initiative $75,904 - 0
97.067 Homeland Security Grant Program $66,786 - 0
93.136 Injury Prevention and Control Research and State and Community Based Programs $64,866 Yes 1
93.103 Food and Drug Administration Research $60,665 - 0
93.926 Healthy Start Initiative $55,477 - 0
16.609 Project Safe Neighborhoods $53,498 - 0
93.116 Project Grants and Cooperative Agreements for Tuberculosis Control Programs $50,202 - 0
21.032 Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency Fund $47,328 - 0
16.812 Second Chance Act Reentry Initiative $39,938 - 0
93.318 Protecting and Improving Health Globally: Building and Strengthening Public Health Impact, Systems, Capacity and Security $37,157 - 0
21.016 Equitable Sharing $36,850 - 0
32.011 Affordable Connectivity Outreach Grant Program $34,477 - 0
20.513 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities $33,211 - 0
45.310 Grants to States $32,623 - 0
16.735 Prea Program: Strategic Support for Prea Implementation $27,926 - 0
93.674 John H. Chafee Foster Care Program for Successful Transition to Adulthood $27,600 - 0
66.046 Climate Pollution Reduction Grants $25,796 - 0
93.994 Maternal and Child Health Services Block Grant to the States $23,847 - 0
93.421 Strengthening Public Health Systems and Services Through National Partnerships to Improve and Protect the Nation’s Health $18,298 - 0
14.239 Home Investment Partnerships Program $16,063 Yes 0
93.788 Opioid Str $10,681 - 0
93.008 Medical Reserve Corps Small Grant Program $6,584 - 0
16.015 Missing Alzheimer's Disease Patient Assistance Program $6,516 - 0
16.593 Residential Substance Abuse Treatment for State Prisoners $5,302 - 0
93.991 Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant $5,242 - 0
10.561 State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program $3,984 - 0
20.600 State and Community Highway Safety $3,886 - 0
16.320 Services for Trafficking Victims $746 - 0
93.084 Prevention of Disease, Disability, and Death by Infectious Diseases $-750 - 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
JFMKAENLGN81 Mike Post Auditee
9329274560 Elyza Jain Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes the federal grant activity and state grant activity of the County and is presented on the modified cash basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“OMB Uniform Guidance”) and Texas Grant Management Standards (“TxGMS”); as applicable. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2.CFR.200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) requires the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent de minimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes the federal grant activity and state grant activity of the County and is presented on the modified cash basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“OMB Uniform Guidance”) and Texas Grant Management Standards (“TxGMS”); as applicable. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. Federal and state awards provided to subrecipients are treated as expenditures when paid to the sub-recipient.
Title: INDIRECT COST RATE Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes the federal grant activity and state grant activity of the County and is presented on the modified cash basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“OMB Uniform Guidance”) and Texas Grant Management Standards (“TxGMS”); as applicable. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2.CFR.200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) requires the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent de minimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate. The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2.CFR.200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) requires the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent de minimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate.
Title: RECONCILIATION Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes the federal grant activity and state grant activity of the County and is presented on the modified cash basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“OMB Uniform Guidance”) and Texas Grant Management Standards (“TxGMS”); as applicable. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2.CFR.200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) requires the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent de minimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate. Reconciliation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal and State Awards to Grants Special Revenue Fund of the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024. See the Notes to the SEFA for table. Certain costs reflected in the schedule of the federal and state awards in the current year may represent costs incurred in prior years that have been approved for reimbursement by the granting agency and recorded in the current year financials.
Title: REPORTING ENTITY Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes the federal grant activity and state grant activity of the County and is presented on the modified cash basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“OMB Uniform Guidance”) and Texas Grant Management Standards (“TxGMS”); as applicable. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2.CFR.200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) requires the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent de minimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate. The County, for purposes of the supplementary schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes all the funds of the primary government as defined by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement No. 14, “The Financial Reporting Entity.” It does not include the following component units of the County as follows: Harris County Hospital District, Harris County Flood Control District, Harris County Juvenile Board, Harris Center for Mental Health and IDD (formerly MHMRA) and The Children's Assessment Center Foundation. These component units also receive federal financial assistance but separately satisfy the audit requirements of OMB Uniform Grant Guidance and TxGMS and by engaging other auditors to perform an audit in accordance with OMB Uniform Grant Guidance and TxGMS.
Title: NEGATIVE EXPENSES Accounting Policies: The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal and state awards includes the federal grant activity and state grant activity of the County and is presented on the modified cash basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (“OMB Uniform Guidance”) and Texas Grant Management Standards (“TxGMS”); as applicable. Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the basic financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The County did not elect to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate as covered in 2.CFR.200.414. Uniform Guidance 200.510(6) requires the County to disclose whether or not it elected to use the 10 percent de minimis cost rate that 200.414(f) allows for nonfederal entities that have never received a negotiated indirect cost rate. The negative amounts shown in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal and State Awards resulted from adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior fiscal years.

Finding Details

Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance Finding and Significant Deficiency – Reporting Criteria: 2CFR 200.303 establishes that grant recipients should establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards, including controls over reviews of reports and compliance with reporting requirements. 2 CFR 200.239(c) establishes that grant recipients should submit performance reports timely. Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 16 programmatic reports whereby there should have been appropriate levels of review and compliance with submission requirements. Two reports were submitted to the granting agency late, 3 reports did not have any evidence of review and approval of the reports prior to submission, and 4 reports did not have proper segregation of duties as related to the preparation and submission of the reports. Cause: For the late reports, department management did not monitor and ensure that the reports were submitted in a timely manner due to other emergency events at the County taking priority. For the reports with lack of review support, management did not maintain supporting documentation of the review performed on the reports prior to submission. Lastly, for the reports without proper segregation of duties, Harris County did not design or implement a segregation of duties control to ensure separate preparer and reviewer. Effect: Failure to review and approve the reports prior to submission to the grantor, late submission of the reports, and lack of segregation of duties increases the risk of submitting an inaccurate report and may result in the early termination of the award, reimbursement of award funds, and cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Management should establish detailed and precise controls to ensure timely reviews, clear identification of preparers and reviewers, and retain evidence of such reviews to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer of Harris County Public Health Danielle Calhoun, Associate Director of Harris County Public Health Allison Hare, Director of Public Health Emergency Preparedness Beatrice Best, Lead Grant Program Supervisor of Harris County Public Health
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Reporting Criteria: Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA), direct recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: During our testing, D&T inspected 3 separate grants or ALN’s with 14 subrecipients for completion of the FFATA report. D&T selected 11 subrecipients for testing and identified Harris County did not submit 11 FFATA reports within FSRS. As such, the control was not designed or implemented. Cause: Grant management was not aware of the FFATA reporting requirement. Effect: Failure to report sub-award data could potentially constitute an event of material noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: Of 14 subrecipients related to 3 separate grants, D&T tested 11 and identified 11 instances of FFATA report not submitted. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that they have a mechanism for reporting subaward data in the FSRS and a process for informing departments of all parts of the applicable requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): 93.686: Richard Williams, Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Public Health 14.218: Craig Atkins, Chief Financial Officer, Harris County Housing and Community Development 16.575: Tom Hargis, Director Grants and Partnerships, Office of County Administration.
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-008–Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Period of Performance Criteria: Per 2CFR 200.1, the requirements of period of performance are defined as the time interval between the start and end date of a Federal award, which may include one or more budget periods. Each grant has a specified period of performance for the period which should be followed in accordance with the grant agreement. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified expenditures which were inappropriately classified to the wrong grant year for period of performance. Cause: The department did not perform a detailed review of the period of performance due to department turnover. Effect: Failure to ensure expenses are properly reviewed and coded to the correct period or grant could result in noncompliance with the award contract, which may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Recommendation: Grant management should ensure that a detailed review of the period of performance is performed. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Leah Barton, Interim Executive Director of Public Health
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager
2024-009– Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Procurement Criteria: Per OMB 2 CFR 200.213, a pass-through entity must verify that the subrecipient is not excluded or disqualified from receiving or participating in Federal Awards. Further, per Harris County’s Procedure for Executive Order 12549 Debarment and Suspension, prior to award in Commissioners Court, the Harris County Purchasing Office will determine if a vendor has been debarred or suspended by the Federal Government. Condition: During our testing, D&T identified Harris County could not provide evidence indicating that 2 of the 3 vendors selected for testing were properly checked against the excluded parties list before entering into a contract with the vendor. It was determined that the entities were neither suspended nor debarred as of the testing date. Cause: The County failed to search all vendors for suspension and debarment and maintain evidence of the search within the bid package. Effect: Grant funded contracts could be awarded to vendors that are suspended/debarred, which would be in violation of federal regulations and may result in the early termination of the grant award, non-reimbursement of grant funding, or cessation of future funding. Context: We were not able to receive evidence for 2 of 3 vendor selections to support Harris County verified the vendors were not suspended/debarred before entering into contracts with the vendors. Recommendation: Harris County should implement policies in alignment with the OMB 2 CFR 200.213 (Suspension and debarment) to ensure that all vendors used in federal award programs are not suspended or debarred and that documentation of this procedure is maintained in the vendor files prior to entering into a contract and expending funds. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan County Contact Person(s): Paige McInnis, Purchasing Agent Tiffany Harris, Compliance Manager