Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Late Filing of Data Collection FormCriteria
In accordance with the Uniform Guidance, the audit package and the Data Collection Form must be submitted within 30 days after receipt of the auditors’ report or nine months after the end of the fiscal year, whichever comes first.
Condition
There are inadequate internal controls in place to ensure that CRDF Global financial statement audit is completed in a manner to allow the Data Collection Form to be filed by the reporting deadline.
Context
The Data Collection Form for the year ended December 31, 2021 was not submitted to the Federal Audit Clearinghouse by the September 30, 2022 deadline.
Cause
There were delays in completing the 2021 audit as management needed additional time to reconcile accounts and provide the requested supporting documentation due to employee turnover.
Effect
Management was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
We recommend that management enhance its internal controls, policies and procedures to ensure that all filing requirements under federal awards are met.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.
Time Keeping
Criteria
Management has identified an issue pertaining to timekeeping compliance. Specifically, certain activities related to preparing or working on proposals were classified as direct payroll costs charged to federal programs, rather than being treated as indirect costs.
Context
CRDF Global lacks proper controls to ensure that proposal activities are appropriately charged as indirect costs. According to 2 CFR 200.460, proposal costs encompass the expenses incurred in preparing bids, proposals, or applications for potential federal and non-federal awards or projects. This includes the development of data necessary to support the bids or proposals. Generally, proposal costs, whether successful or unsuccessful, should be treated as indirect costs and allocated to all activities of the non-federal entity.
Cause
Ineffective time charging guidance was provided to program staff.
Effect
As a result, there is an incorrect reporting of payroll costs between direct and indirect categories for federally funded projects.
Questioned Costs
None.
Repeat Finding
No.
Recommendation
To address this issue, we recommend that management enhances its current policies and procedures. Specifically, there should be a focus on ensuring that effective time charging guidance is provided to program staff. Additionally, payroll and other expense allocations should be corrected to avoid any further discrepancy.