Finding: 2024-004 Time/Salary Allocations (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: ALN #21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria or Specific Requirement (including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): CFR §200.430 Compensation—personal services. States; (g) Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Criteria or Specific Requirement (including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation) (continued): These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (vii) Support the distribution of the employee’s salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. Condition: During our audit of DOL’s compensation practices, we noted that salaries and benefits charged to Federal programs were allocated using predetermined estimates rather than contemporaneous records reflecting actual time spent. These allocations were not supported by detailed documentation, such as timekeeping records or personnel activity reports, and the only support available was in the form of internal memos recorded in the general ledger. Cause: DOL has not implemented a system for documenting time and effort in a manner that complies with Federal requirements. The current process relies on estimates rather than actual, verifiable work performed. Effect or Potential Effect: Without accurate and documented time and effort reporting, there is a risk that Federal awards are either overcharged or undercharged for salaries and benefits. This creates the potential for noncompliance with Federal cost principles, and could lead to disallowed costs in the event of a monitoring or program audit. For ALN #21.027, we identified $80,985 in questioned costs, representing the total amount of unsupported salary and benefit charges to this program. Such deficiencies could also impair the Organization's eligibility for future Federal funding. Questioned Costs: $80,985 (all salaries and benefits changed to ALN #21.027) Context: We tested a statistically valid sample of employee salaries charged to Federal awards. The deficiencies noted were consistent across the sample population, indicating a systemic issue rather than isolated exceptions. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We recommend that DOL strengthen its payroll allocation procedures to ensure compliance with 2 CFR §200.430. Specifically, we advise the following steps: 1. Implement Time and Effort Reporting: All employees whose salaries are charged in whole or in part to Federal awards should complete project-specific timesheets that record actual time spent on each cost objective or funding source. 2. Certifications and Approvals: Timesheets should be signed by the employee and reviewed and certified by their direct supervisor to confirm accuracy. 3. Allocate Based on Actual Time: Salaries and benefits should be allocated to funding sources based on the proportion of actual time worked, as indicated in approved timesheets, rather than based on estimates. 4. Incorporate into Internal Controls: These procedures should be incorporated into DOL’s internal control system and formally documented in its accounting policies and procedures manual. 5. Training and Oversight: Staff responsible for managing payroll allocations and Federal reporting should receive training on Federal time and effort requirements. Periodic internal reviews should be conducted to ensure adherence. By implementing these practices, DOL will significantly reduce the risk of questioned costs, improve compliance with Federal grant requirements, and strengthen the reliability of its financial reporting.
Finding: 2024-005 Timely Reporting Under Federal Pass-Through Awards (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: ALN #21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria or Specific Requirement (including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): §200.329 Monitoring and reporting program performance (c)(1) states that “The non-Federal entity must submit performance reports at the interval required by the Federal awarding agency”. Condition: As part of our compliance audit over DOL’s programmatic reporting requirements under its Federal pass-through awards, we noted two instances in which programmatic reports were not submitted to the Federal pass-through entity by the deadline stated in the grant agreement. We also noted three instances in which the financial reports were submitted after the required due dates. Ultimately, all reports were completed and accepted by the pass-through donor. Cause: The delays in report submissions appears to be the result of administrative and capacity challenges with respect to gathering and compiling the required data within the required timeframe. Effect or Potential Effect: Late program report submissions result in delays of program monitoring and evaluation. Late financial report submission could result in delay of project fund reimbursement or advances. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: As a Federal award pass-through recipient, DOL is responsible for oversight of the operations of the Federal award supported activities. DOL must monitor its activities under Federal pass-through awards to assure compliance with applicable Federal requirements and that performance expectations are being achieved. Federal awards require varying financial and programmatic reports to be submitted according to the timeframe stated in the grant agreement. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We recommend that DOL review its policies and procedures and strengthen internal controls to ensure that all financial and programmatic reports are submitted to the passthrough donor by the deadlines stipulated in the terms of the agreement.
Finding: 2024-006 Procurement Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: ALN #21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria or Specific Requirement (including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): §200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while DOL has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for competitive and noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, DOL lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: DOL’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, DOL could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that DOL develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.