Audit 39548

FY End
2022-06-30
Total Expended
$21.23M
Findings
8
Programs
22
Year: 2022 Accepted: 2022-11-22

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
44815 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
44816 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
44817 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
44818 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
621257 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
621258 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
621259 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I
621260 2022-001 Significant Deficiency - I

Contacts

Name Title Type
S9DULTEH7GJ9 Tyler Dehne Auditee
9527072055 Michelle Hoffman, CPA Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Title: Basis of Presentation Accounting Policies: Expenditures reported on the Schedule are reported on the modified accrual basis of accounting. Such expenditures are recognized following the cost principles contained in the Uniform Guidance for all awards with the exception of ALN 21.027, which follows criteria determined by the Department of Treasury for allowability of costs. Under these principles, certain types of expenditures are not allowable or are limited as to reimbursement. Negative amounts shown on the Schedule represent adjustments or credits made in the normal course of business to amounts reported as expenditures in prior years. Independent School District No. 191 does not charge indirect costs to its federal programs, however if they were to charge indirect costs they would use the indirect cost rate provided to them by the Minnesota Department of Education (the pass-through entity) rather than use the 10% de minimis indirect cost rate as allowed under the Uniform Guidance. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The auditee did not use the de minimis cost rate. The accompanying schedule of expenditures of federal awards (the Schedule) includes the federal award activity of Independent School District No. 191 under programs of the federal government for the year ended June 30, 2022. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of 2 CFR Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of Independent School District No. 191, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in position, or cash flows of Independent School District No. 191.

Finding Details

SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER PROCUREMENT ? STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS Condition: During our audit we noted no formal record was retained of a comparison of rates or prices to other emotional health services for a procurement purchase over the threshold of $250,000. Criteria or Specific requirement: The District should have controls in place to ensure compliance with procurement requirements of the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund program. This includes approving all purchases and performing a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Effect: Lack of proper procedures and controls related to the procurement could result in improper contracts being paid with federal funds. The District could also possibly award a contract to a vendor that would charge more than other responsible bidders due to not having performed cost analysis. Cause: The vendor has been utilized by the District for over ten years as a professional service. The District recently charged it to federal funds to supplant some of their other costs. The District was unable to locate the original documents for the contract to determine if they were still under a professional services contract or not, and was not able to come up with any other type of documentation showing the required cost analysis. Questioned Costs: $50,000 Context: One of the five contracts tested did not have supporting documentation following procurement guidelines. Recommendation: We recommend that the District ensures it retains documentation of its controls over all procurements going forward. We also recommend that the district keep documentation of price analysis for procurement items over the micro purchase threshold of $10,000. Prior Year Finding? No Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.