Audit 5757

FY End
2023-06-30
Total Expended
$3.69M
Findings
2
Programs
14
Organization: Countryside Charter Academy (MI)
Year: 2023 Accepted: 2023-12-07

Organization Exclusion Status:

Checking exclusion status...

Findings

ID Ref Severity Repeat Requirement
3680 2023-003 Significant Deficiency - N
580122 2023-003 Significant Deficiency - N

Contacts

Name Title Type
HTBBP4CE5EE7 Stacey Howe Auditee
2699443319 Alex Schaeffer Auditor
No contacts on file

Notes to SEFA

Accounting Policies: The accompanying Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (the “Schedule”) includes the federal grant activity of Countryside Academy (the “School”) under programs of the federal government for the year ended June 30, 2023. The information in this Schedule is presented in accordance with the requirements of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the “Uniform Guidance”). Because the Schedule presents only a selected portion of the operations of the School, it is not intended to and does not present the financial position, changes in net position, or cash flows of the School. The School qualifies for high-risk auditee status. Management has utilized the NexSys, Cash Management System and the Grant Auditor Report in preparing the Schedule. De Minimis Rate Used: N Rate Explanation: The auditee did not use the de minimis cost rate

Finding Details

Finding: 2023 – 003 – Federal Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name – 84.425U – U.S. Department of Education– Education Stabilization Fund – Elementary Secondary School Relief Fund (ESSER III) Finding Type – Significant Deficiency (Uniform Guidance) – Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Criteria – The School is required to notify contractors and subcontractors of Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements when the School has a construction project being paid with federal funds. Condition – While reviewing the construction request for proposal for the construction project that was used by federal funds, there was no mention that contractors and subcontracts must use the Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Questioned Costs – None. Cause - The School omitted the Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirement that is required for construction request for proposal for projects that are being paid with federal funds. Effect – The School omitted the Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements in the School’s request for proposal for the construction project that was paid with federal funds. By doing this the School did not notify the contractors and subcontractors that Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements are required. There is a risk that prevailing wages were not paid. Recommendation – The School should include in all construction contracts that are being paid with federal fund that Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements must be paid. School’s Response – The School concurs with this finding and will include Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements in all future construction contracts that are being paid by federal funds.
Finding: 2023 – 003 – Federal Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name – 84.425U – U.S. Department of Education– Education Stabilization Fund – Elementary Secondary School Relief Fund (ESSER III) Finding Type – Significant Deficiency (Uniform Guidance) – Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Criteria – The School is required to notify contractors and subcontractors of Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements when the School has a construction project being paid with federal funds. Condition – While reviewing the construction request for proposal for the construction project that was used by federal funds, there was no mention that contractors and subcontracts must use the Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Questioned Costs – None. Cause - The School omitted the Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirement that is required for construction request for proposal for projects that are being paid with federal funds. Effect – The School omitted the Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements in the School’s request for proposal for the construction project that was paid with federal funds. By doing this the School did not notify the contractors and subcontractors that Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements are required. There is a risk that prevailing wages were not paid. Recommendation – The School should include in all construction contracts that are being paid with federal fund that Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements must be paid. School’s Response – The School concurs with this finding and will include Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements in all future construction contracts that are being paid by federal funds.