Audit 380288

FY End
2025-06-30
Total Expended
$8.31M
Findings
3
Programs
3
Organization: Town of Amite City (LA)
Year: 2025 Accepted: 2026-01-08

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
1168468 2025-001 Material Weakness Yes P
1168469 2025-002 Material Weakness Yes I
1168470 2025-003 Material Weakness Yes I

Programs

ALN Program Spent Major Findings
21.027 CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS $5.70M Yes 3
66.458 CLEAN WATER STATE REVOLVING FUND $2.60M Yes 0
16.738 EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM $4,145 Yes 0

Contacts

Name Title Type
TMXLKHFDA2N4 Jewel McCoy Auditee
9857488761 Jacob Waguespack Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

This schedule of expenditures of federal awards includes the federal grant activity of Town of Amite City and is presented on the accrual basis of accounting. The information in this schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Regualtions Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirments for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance).
The Town of Amite City has elected not to use the 10 percent de minimis indirect cost rate allowed under Uniform Guidance.

Finding Details

Criteria: Under Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.302, §200.303, §200.305, §200.318–§200.326, and §200.430), a non-federal entity must establish, document, and maintain written policies and procedures for the management of federal awards. Effective internal control over federal awards provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the awards. Condition: The Town did not have written policies and procedures required by Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200) for the administration of its federal programs. Specifically, the Town has not formally documented policies and procedures addressing key areas required under the Uniform Guidance, including but not limited to allowable and unallowable costs and cost principles, procurement standards, suspension and debarment, conflicts of interest, cash management, and reporting and record retention requirements. While informal processes exist, they are not sufficiently documented to ensure consistent application or compliance with federal requirements. Cause: The Town has not developed or formally adopted written federal grant management policies and procedures. Effect: Without formal written policies and procedures, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with federal program requirements. This condition exposes the Town to potential noncompliance with federal regulations, increases the risk of unallowable costs being charged to federal awards, and may affect the Town’s ability to properly administer, monitor, and report federal program activity. Additionally, the lack of documentation may impair continuity of compliance in the event of change in key personnel. Recommendation: The Town should develop, formally adopt, and implement written policies and procedures to comply with Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200). The policies should address all major compliance areas, including but not limited to allowable and unallowable costs and cost principles, procurement standards, suspension and debarment, conflicts of interest, cash management, and reporting and record retention requirements. The Town should ensure that staff responsible for federal grant administration are properly trained to ensure adherence to these policies and that the policies are reviewed periodically and updated as needed. Views of responsible officials: See management’s responses to findings on Page 78.
Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.318(d), non-Federal entities must avoid the acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items. Non-federal entities are required to maintain effective procurement procedures and internal controls to ensure goods and services procured with federal funds are necessary, reasonable, and not duplicative. Condition: While performing procedures over the Town’s federal grant program activity, we noted that the Town incurred a duplicated cost when it processed and paid the same contractor invoice twice. Cause: The Town has not established or implemented written procedures requiring staff to review previous purchases or confirm whether services have been performed before initiating new procurements. Effect: Failure to ensure that goods purchased and services procured are necessary and nonduplicative increases the risk of waste and mismanagement of federal funds. This may result in unallowable costs being charged to federal awards and could require repayment of questioned costs to the granting agency. Questioned Cost: $37,430. Recommendation: As discussed at item 2025-001, we recommend Town develop, formally adopt, and implement written policies and procedures to comply with Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200). Views of responsible officials: See management’s responses to findings on Page 78.
Criteria: Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.214 and §200.318(h)) prohibits non-federal entities from contracting with or making subawards to parties that are suspended or debarred. Entities must verify vendor eligibility by: Checking SAM.gov, Obtaining a vendor certification, or Adding a clause in contracts stating the vendor is not suspended or debarred. Condition: The Town did not have adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements of the Uniform Guidance when procuring goods or services using federal funds. Cause: The Town had not established written procedures or implemented controls to ensure required suspension and debarment checks were performed and documented during procurement involving federal funds. Effect: Without controls to ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements, the Town is at increased risk of awarding federal funds to ineligible vendors. This could result in unallowable costs, questioned costs, or potential repayment of federal funds. Recommendation: The Town should develop and implement written policies and procedures requiring documentation of suspension and debarment checks before entering into contracts funded with federal awards. Acceptable methods include maintaining SAM.gov eligibility verification screenshots, obtaining vendor certifications, or including appropriate contract language. Views of responsible officials: See management’s responses to findings on Page 78.