Finding No.: 2023-027 AL Program: COVID-19 21.023 – Emergency Rental Assistance Program Area: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Questioned Costs: $53,435 Contact Person(s): Epiphanio Cabrera, Jr., Grants Administrator, OGM-SC Corrective Action Plan: Condition 1a: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) ...
Finding No.: 2023-027 AL Program: COVID-19 21.023 – Emergency Rental Assistance Program Area: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Questioned Costs: $53,435 Contact Person(s): Epiphanio Cabrera, Jr., Grants Administrator, OGM-SC Corrective Action Plan: Condition 1a: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) respectfully disagrees with this finding. Under the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Emergency Rental Assistance Program 2 (ERA2), states, territories, and other eligible grantees were expressly authorized to pay rental arrears (past-due rent) on behalf of eligible households. Treasury guidance states that ERA2 financial assistance could include current rent, rental arrears (back rent), utility and home energy costs, utility and home energy arrears, and other housing-related expenses. Finding No.: 2023-027, continued AL Program: COVID-19 21.023 – Emergency Rental Assistance Program Area: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Questioned Costs: $53,435 Contact Person(s): Epiphanio Cabrera, Jr., Grants Administrator, OGM-SC Corrective Action Plan: Treasury's FAQ further clarifies that: A grantee may provide assistance for rental arrears that accrued on or after March 13, 2020. A grantee was not required to pay the full amount of arrears and could structure the program to provide partial assistance if desired. For the CNMI specifically, if your ERA2 award was active during the period of performance, payment of eligible rental arrears was an allowable use of funds. However, Treasury closed the ERA2 program on September 30, 2025, and ERA2 funds may no longer be used to provide new rental assistance, including rental arrears. As a practical matter, many ERA programs adopted policies of paying up to three months of future rent at a time, but that was often a program design choice or carried over from ERA1 administration rather than a statutory ERA2 limitation. The controlling Treasury guidance limits total assistance to 18 months combined across ERA1 and ERA2. The CNMI followed US Treasury Guidelines and pushed for a combined 18-month max limit, if financially needed, across ERA1 and ERA2. Therefore, the Office disagrees with the $30,336 questioned cost and we are requesting that this finding be removed based on our explanation above. Proposed Completion Date: Ongoing Condition 1b: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) respectfully disagrees with this finding. Under the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Emergency Rental Assistance Program 2 (ERA2), states, territories, and other eligible grantees were expressly authorized to pay rental arrears (past-due rent) on behalf of eligible households. Treasury guidance states that ERA2 financial assistance could include current rent, rental arrears (back rent), utility and home energy costs, utility and home energy arrears, and other housing-related expenses. Treasury's FAQ further clarifies that: A grantee may provide assistance for rental arrears that accrued on or after March 13, 2020. A grantee was not required to pay the full amount of arrears and could structure the program to provide partial assistance if desired. For the CNMI specifically, if your ERA2 award was active during the period of performance, payment of eligible rental arrears was an allowable use of funds. However, Treasury closed the Finding No.: 2023-027, continued AL Program: COVID-19 21.023 – Emergency Rental Assistance Program Area: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Questioned Costs: $53,435 Contact Person(s): Epiphanio Cabrera, Jr., Grants Administrator, OGM-SC Corrective Action Plan: ERA2 program on September 30, 2025, and ERA2 funds may no longer be used to provide new rental assistance, including rental arrears. As a practical matter, many ERA programs adopted policies of paying up to three months of future rent at a time, but that was often a program design choice or carried over from ERA1 administration rather than a statutory ERA2 limitation. The controlling Treasury guidance limits total assistance to 18 months combined across ERA1 and ERA2. Therefore, the Office disagrees with the $5,452 questioned cost and we are requesting that this finding be removed based on our explanation above. Proposed Completion Date: Ongoing Condition 1c: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) respectfully disagrees with the findings because using the Purchase Requisition or Purchase Order methodology is not the only method of obtaining goods or services in the CNMI Government. In this situation, the Office opted to use the Invoice Central method in MUNIS. Items for purchase were specifically identified in the portal and it was approved by the Division of Financial Services. The items being purchased are allowable items (office supplies); however, the method used by the Office may not be acceptable by the auditor. Again, the Office disagrees as DOF officials approved the transaction and paid the item out with check#619104. The invoice # for this transaction is 739384-0. If the transaction is not allowable, then DOF should update their SOPs or not allow the Invoice Entry module to be used. Again, we disagree with the finding and questioned cost amounting to $3,485.39. Therefore, the Office disagrees with the $3,485.39 questioned cost and we are requesting that this finding be removed based on our explanation above. Proposed Completion Date: Ongoing Finding No.: 2023-027, continued AL Program: COVID-19 21.023 – Emergency Rental Assistance Program Area: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Questioned Costs: $53,435 Contact Person(s): Epiphanio Cabrera, Jr., Grants Administrator, OGM-SC Corrective Action Plan: Condition 2a: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) respectfully disagrees with this finding. After the audit inquiry, the supporting timesheet associated with the questioned payroll costs was located and is available for review. The documentation substantiates the payroll charges previously questioned. Accordingly, the Office respectfully disagrees with the questioned costs of $1,159 and requests removal of this finding. Proposed Completion Date: Ongoing Condition 2b: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) respectfully disagrees with this finding. The payroll costs in question are traceable within the financial management system; however, the reporting format aggregates payroll and fringe benefit expenditures in a manner that may make individual employee costs difficult to identify without familiarity with the system's reporting structure. The questioned amount of $658.17 can be reconciled to supporting payroll records and underlying accounting data. The Office is prepared to provide additional supporting documentation and reconciliation schedules to demonstrate the traceability of these costs. Accordingly, the Office respectfully disagrees with the questioned costs of $658 and requests removal of this finding. Proposed Completion Date: Ongoing Condition 3: The Office of Grants Management (OGM) respectfully disagrees with the findings and questioned costs of $12,345.00. According to our records and using budgetary print template reports, the following has been spent: Finding No.: 2023-027, continued AL Program: COVID-19 21.023 – Emergency Rental Assistance Program Area: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Questioned Costs: $53,435 Contact Person(s): Epiphanio Cabrera, Jr., Grants Administrator, OGM-SC Corrective Action Plan: The CCERA Program spent in total $10,398,930.38 out of the total award of $10,400,669.30, leaving an unspent balance of $1,738.92. This is also reported in the final submitted report to US Treasury. US Treasury accepted the report and advised us to return the unused funds plus 5% interest, which changed the total owed to $1,746.41. This is substantiated by a notice from US Treasury to Collect for Delinquent Indebtedness under Invoice# OCAERA0411A dated March 11, 2025. Thus, confirming that the CNMI only spent $10,398,930.38 under ERA1. Furthermore, there are internal controls built into the MUNIS System that will not allow us to exceed the budgeted amount, so we are not able to exceed the budgeted amount. Thus, the Office disagrees with the $12,345 questioned cost and we are requesting that this finding be removed based on our explanation above. Proposed Completion Date: Ongoing