Audit 362680

FY End
2024-06-30
Total Expended
$5.39M
Findings
4
Programs
11
Organization: Scotts Bluff County Nebraska (NE)
Year: 2024 Accepted: 2025-07-21

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
571706 2024-001 Material Weakness Yes C
571707 2024-001 Material Weakness Yes C
1148148 2024-001 Material Weakness Yes C
1148149 2024-001 Material Weakness Yes C

Contacts

Name Title Type
YM6JAK4AM8P9 Kevin Sylvester Auditee
3086324400 Kevin Sylvester Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: NOTE 2. Accounting Policies: The schedule of expenditures of federal awards is prepared on the cash basis of accounting which is a comprehensive basis of accounting other than accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Accordingly, disbursements are recognized when cash is disbursed. This basis of accounting is consistent with the method utilized for the basic financial statements of the County. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: For certain federal programs, the County may be allowed to utilize an indirect cost rate as determined by the federal program or a negotiated indirect cost rate. The County may otherwise utilize a de minimis indirect cost rate when allowed by the federal program. For these federal programs, federal expenditures included amounts determined as indirect costs. For the Child Support Enforcement program, the County utilized an indirect cost rate of 73.98% applicable to costs incurred by the Child Support Enforcement Office and 29.02% applicable to costs incurred by the Clerk of the District Court. The County did not use the de minimis indirect cost rate for any federal programs Cash Disbursements - For certain federal programs, the County makes cash disbursements under the federal program specifically identified as federal program costs. For these federal programs, the County reports federal expenditures in the amount of cash disbursed and indirect costs claimed under the federal program. Cash Receipts - For certain federal programs, the County receives payment at specified rates per unit of service rendered or product distributed. For these federal programs, the County reports federal expenditures in the amount of cash received under the federal program.
Title: NOTE 4. Accounting Policies: The schedule of expenditures of federal awards is prepared on the cash basis of accounting which is a comprehensive basis of accounting other than accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Accordingly, disbursements are recognized when cash is disbursed. This basis of accounting is consistent with the method utilized for the basic financial statements of the County. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Therefore, some amounts presented in this schedule may differ from amounts presented in, or used in the preparation of, the financial statements. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: For certain federal programs, the County may be allowed to utilize an indirect cost rate as determined by the federal program or a negotiated indirect cost rate. The County may otherwise utilize a de minimis indirect cost rate when allowed by the federal program. For these federal programs, federal expenditures included amounts determined as indirect costs. For the Child Support Enforcement program, the County utilized an indirect cost rate of 73.98% applicable to costs incurred by the Child Support Enforcement Office and 29.02% applicable to costs incurred by the Clerk of the District Court. The County did not use the de minimis indirect cost rate for any federal programs The County receives funds under various federal grant programs and such assistance is to be expended in accordance with the provisions of the various grants. Compliance with the grants is subject to audit by various government agencies which may impose sanctions in the event of noncompliance. Management believes that they have complied with all aspects of the various grant provisions and the results of adjustments, if any, relating to such audits would not have any material financial impact.

Finding Details

SEGREGATION OF ACCOUNTING FUNCTIONS: Criteria: Authorization or approval of transactions, recording of transactions, and custody of assets should normally be segregated from each other. Condition and Context: There is a lack of segregation of accounting functions among various County offices and personnel. This is a continuing item from the prior year. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: The County does not employ sufficient office personnel to properly segregate accounting functions. Potential Effect: This lack of segregation of duties results in an inadequate overall internal control structure design. Recommendation: The County should be aware of the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County should also develop mitigating controls to reduce the risk of errors or fraud associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The County has assessed the benefits and costs associated with proper segregation of duties for all County departments and offices and has determined that cost would outweigh any benefits received. The County understands the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County requires monthly reporting to the Board of Commissioners for various department officials to ensure transactions are recorded, and potential errors and irregularities are identified on a timely basis.
SEGREGATION OF ACCOUNTING FUNCTIONS: Criteria: Authorization or approval of transactions, recording of transactions, and custody of assets should normally be segregated from each other. Condition and Context: There is a lack of segregation of accounting functions among various County offices and personnel. This is a continuing item from the prior year. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: The County does not employ sufficient office personnel to properly segregate accounting functions. Potential Effect: This lack of segregation of duties results in an inadequate overall internal control structure design. Recommendation: The County should be aware of the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County should also develop mitigating controls to reduce the risk of errors or fraud associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The County has assessed the benefits and costs associated with proper segregation of duties for all County departments and offices and has determined that cost would outweigh any benefits received. The County understands the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County requires monthly reporting to the Board of Commissioners for various department officials to ensure transactions are recorded, and potential errors and irregularities are identified on a timely basis.
SEGREGATION OF ACCOUNTING FUNCTIONS: Criteria: Authorization or approval of transactions, recording of transactions, and custody of assets should normally be segregated from each other. Condition and Context: There is a lack of segregation of accounting functions among various County offices and personnel. This is a continuing item from the prior year. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: The County does not employ sufficient office personnel to properly segregate accounting functions. Potential Effect: This lack of segregation of duties results in an inadequate overall internal control structure design. Recommendation: The County should be aware of the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County should also develop mitigating controls to reduce the risk of errors or fraud associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The County has assessed the benefits and costs associated with proper segregation of duties for all County departments and offices and has determined that cost would outweigh any benefits received. The County understands the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County requires monthly reporting to the Board of Commissioners for various department officials to ensure transactions are recorded, and potential errors and irregularities are identified on a timely basis.
SEGREGATION OF ACCOUNTING FUNCTIONS: Criteria: Authorization or approval of transactions, recording of transactions, and custody of assets should normally be segregated from each other. Condition and Context: There is a lack of segregation of accounting functions among various County offices and personnel. This is a continuing item from the prior year. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: The County does not employ sufficient office personnel to properly segregate accounting functions. Potential Effect: This lack of segregation of duties results in an inadequate overall internal control structure design. Recommendation: The County should be aware of the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County should also develop mitigating controls to reduce the risk of errors or fraud associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The County has assessed the benefits and costs associated with proper segregation of duties for all County departments and offices and has determined that cost would outweigh any benefits received. The County understands the inherent risks associated with improper segregation of accounting functions. The County requires monthly reporting to the Board of Commissioners for various department officials to ensure transactions are recorded, and potential errors and irregularities are identified on a timely basis.