Corrective Action Plans

Finding Number 2023-092 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA) Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) disagrees with the report did include the demographic section, which is a required reporting element. Per the email titled 2025.03.24 Reporting download Issue OIG, page 7 of the pdf request verification the demographic data was received. On page 6 of the attachments a response states that the data for Q1, Q2 and Q3 2023 had been received. Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector Office’s (SAI) findings that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2023. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • Oversight and management of the ERA program has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which has staff with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has recently hired additional staff, and the two staff members dedicated to the management of the ERA program have 20+ years of combined federal grant specific experience. • To ensure that the subrecipient agreement includes all the required terms under the ERA Program and that the agreement does not expire, OMES-GMO and the Communities of Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) have recently executed a Subrecipient Grant Agreement Amendment that details the responsibilities of OMES to monitor CFO and the duties and processes that CFO must follow in regard to ERA Program, including detailed cash management policies. See Attached – Grant Agreement Amendment. • OMES-GMO required the return of the remaining ERA2 Program funds from CFO to ensure proper oversight and review of ERA expenditures is performed. • OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. For example, OMES-GMO’s process for disbursing funds to a subrecipient requires a written request from the subrecipient with supporting documentation, then OMES-GMO assigns a staff lead and secondary grant analyst to perform a primary and secondary review for compliance and to require additional supporting documentation if needed to approve the request. Once those reviews are completed and approved by the OMES- GMO staff, the Director of the OMES-GMO must approve the request before it is sent to the OMES Finance Division, who will then verify the calculated amount(s) before completing the disbursement to the subrecipient. These internal controls and policies have been implemented for the management and oversight of the ERA Program and provide a multi-layer review that will prevent fraud and risk factors applicable to the ERA program. Additionally, the OMES- GMO staff assigned to the ERA program have the training and knowledge to ensure compliance with the Federal grant requirements. • Depending on the level of risk, OMES-GMO conducts monthly, bi-weekly or weekly meetings with each subrecipient to monitor the progress of projects and address any issues or changes that might impact the project. For the ERA Program, OMES-GMO conducts bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and is currently reviewing documentation provided by CFO to ensure all current ERA projects are eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO is exercising the proper oversight over their subrecipients. • OMES-GMO will continue with their current ERA monitoring steps and internal controls and will work with CFO to ensure ERA program funds are spent in accordance with ERA program guidelines and state and federal regulations. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing throughout the life of the grant Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-089 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA) Planned Corrective Action While documenting controls over subrecipient administrative expenditures for the ERA 1 and ERA 2 grants, we noted that OMES did not require the subrecipients to submit supporting documentation for administrative expenditures charged to the programs. Further, we determined one of the subrecipients, Communities Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO), did not have sufficient internal controls over administrative expenditures to ensure they were for allowable costs and activities. Community Foundation of Oklahoma 1. For 15 of 17, or 88.24%, of credit cards tested, the included at least one expenditure for unallowable costs. These costs also included gift cards. ($53,248.41 questioned costs) • We disagree with the finding and questioned costs as the amount for all mentioned questioned costs has been returned to the ERA program. CFO has also strengthened their internal controls and understanding to more accurately identify appropriate expenses to allocate to ERA Admin funds in the future. See attached Internal Controls. 2. For $28,661 of allowable credit card administrative expenditures, the expense was attributable to multiple jurisdictions and only 90.33% of the cost should have been charged to the State of Oklahoma; however, CFO was unable to support the proper allocation was completed and that 100% of the cost was not charged to the State. We determined we would question 9.67% of the allowable expenditures ($2,771.52 questioned costs), since the State paid for expenditures that were the responsibility of other jurisdictions. Note: all credit card transactions were ‘multi’ jurisdictions; however, the unallowable costs are questioned in the first bullet. • See response to 2023-028 - Second Condition and Context. 3. For 2 of 48, or 4.17%, of claims tested, the invoice was not itemized, and we were unable to determine if the administrative costs were allowable. ($32,589.33 questioned costs) • We disagree with the finding. Itemized invoices have been attached in Attachment “OneDrive_1_4_22-2025.zip” 4. For 3 of 48, or 6.25%, of claims tested, the costs were for services to non-profit Shelterwell, which is an organization that was formed by the Executive Director of Community Cares Partners (CCP) with CCP team members after CCP stopped accepting ERA applications. Shelterwell works with tenants and landlords to provide education and mediation between tenants and landlords but is not legally part of Communities Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO)/CCP and does not directly provide rental assistance. Therefore, all payments to Shelterwell do not directly support the administration of the ERA program and are not allowable administrative costs. ($3,847.90 questioned costs) • We partially agree in that the expenses listed for Shelterwell were incorrectly allocated to the Admin account. These expenses should have been expensed from their ERA2 Housing Stability grants. CFO has strengthened our internal controls and understanding to more accurately code and identify expenses, so they are expensed to the correct fund in the future. We partially disagree that the payments made to Shelterwell are unallowable. According to the 2024 ERA Compliance Supplement and FAQ 23, 10% of the funds under ERA1 and ERA2 may be used for housing stability services. The 2024 Compliance Supplement in describing Administrative Expenses, states, "Under ERA 1, a grantee may use up to 10 percent of the total award amount for direct and indirect administrative costs and may use up to 10 percent of the total award amount for housing stability services. Under ERA 2, a grantee may use up to 15 percent of the total award amount for direct and indirect administrative costs and may use up to 10 percent of the total award amount for housing stability services ..." This is also repeated in FAQ23. According to both 2024 Compliance Supplement and FAQ23, housing stability services include but are not limited to: eviction prevention and eviction diversion programs; mediation between landlords and tenants; housing counseling; fair housing counseling; housing navigators or promotors that help households access programs or find housing; case management related to housing stability; housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking; legal services or attorney’s fees related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability; and specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors that support their ability to access or maintain housing. Additionally, under FAQ 21, grantees may use ERA payments to make subawards to other entities, including nonprofit organizations and local governments, to administer ERA programs on behalf of the grantees. Therefore, payments to Shelterwell are allowable expenses b/c these non-profits provided services that fell under the allowable uses for Housing Stability Services and CFO was able to make a subaward to these non- profits in accordance with FAQ 21. 5. For 3 of 48, or 6.25%, of claims tested, the costs were for services for non-profit SidexSide (formerly LastMile) also created by CFO/CCP, which is an organization that provides job skills training and connects employers with participants seeking employment. SidexSide is not legally part of CFO/CCP and does not directly provide rental assistance; therefore, payments made to SidexSide do not directly support the administration of ERA program and are not allowable administrative costs. ($8,824.00 questioned costs) • We partially agree in that the expenses listed for SidexSide were incorrectly allocated to the Admin account. These expenses should have been expensed from their ERA2 Housing Stability grants. CFO has strengthened our internal controls and understanding to more accurately code and identify expenses, so they are expensed to the correct fund in the future. We partially disagree that the payments made to SidexSide are unallowable. According to the 2024 ERA Compliance Supplement and FAQ 23, 10% of the funds under ERA1 and ERA2 may be used for housing stability services. The 2024 Compliance Supplement in describing Administrative Expenses, states, "Under ERA 1, a grantee may use up to 10 percent of the total award amount for direct and indirect administrative costs and may use up to 10 percent of the total award amount for housing stability services. Under ERA 2, a grantee may use up to 15 percent of the total award amount for direct and indirect administrative costs and may use up to 10 percent of the total award amount for housing stability services ..." This is also repeated in FAQ23. According to both 2024 Compliance Supplement and FAQ23, housing stability services include but are not limited to: eviction prevention and eviction diversion programs; mediation between landlords and tenants; housing counseling; fair housing counseling; housing navigators or promotors that help households access programs or find housing; case management related to housing stability; housing-related services for survivors of domestic abuse or human trafficking; legal services or attorney’s fees related to eviction proceedings and maintaining housing stability; and specialized services for individuals with disabilities or seniors that support their ability to access or maintain housing. Additionally, under FAQ 21, grantees may use ERA payments to make subawards to other entities, including non-profit organizations and local governments, to administer ERA programs on behalf of the grantees. Therefore, payments to SidexSide are allowable expenses b/c these non-profits provided services that fell under the allowable uses for Housing Stability Services and CFO was able to make a subaward to these non- profits in accordance with FAQ 21. See attached NON CC 3-SidexSide.program tie to housing stability. 6. For 4 of 48, or 8.33%, of claims tested, the costs were unallowable and included items such as trainings unrelated to ERA, gift cards, alcohol, and food. ($1,549.76 questioned costs) • We agree and the funds were returned. See Attachment “NON CC 4 Refund” 7. For 1 of 48, or 2.08%, of claims tested, the costs were for the Afghan Legal Network project which partnered with CFO to provide ERA funds to Afghanistan refugees; SAI determined these costs are unallowable as the refugees were not Oklahoma residents, and not eligible for assistance. Therefore, administrative costs related to this project were also unallowable. ($498.00 questioned costs) • The expense listed for ALN was incorrectly allocated to the Admin account. This expense should have been expensed from their ERA2 Housing Stability grants. CFO has strengthened our internal controls and understanding to more accurately code and identify expenses, so they are expensed to the correct fund in the future. See also the response to Finding 2023-027. 8. For 1 of 48, or 2.08%, of claims tested, the cost was unrelated to ERA and unallowable. CFO/CCP has refunded the expense using private funds after SAI determined it was unallowable. ($250.00 questioned costs) • We acknowledge that CFO has refunded this expense while the FY23 audit was in process. 9. For 27 of 48, or 56.25%, of claims tested, the cost was allowable; however, the expense was attributable to multiple jurisdictions and only 90.33% of the cost should have been charged to the State. However, CFO/CCP was unable to support the proper allocation was completed and that 100% of the cost was not charged to the State. We question 9.67% of the allowable expenditures ($16,527.61 questioned costs) • See the response to Finding 2023-028 – Second Condition and Context. Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector Office’s (SAI) findings that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2023. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • Oversight and management of the ERA program has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which has staff with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has recently hired additional staff, and the two staff members dedicated to the management of the ERA program have 20+ years of combined federal grant specific experience. • To ensure that the subrecipient agreement includes all the required terms under the ERA Program and that the agreement does not expire, OMES-GMO and the Communities of Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) have recently executed a Subrecipient Grant Agreement Amendment that details the responsibilities of OMES to monitor CFO and the duties and processes that CFO must follow in regard to ERA Program, including detailed cash management policies. See Attached – Grant Agreement Amendment. • OMES-GMO required the return of the remaining ERA2 Program funds from CFO to ensure proper oversight and review of ERA expenditures is performed. • OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. For example, OMES-GMO’s process for disbursing funds to a subrecipient requires a written request from the subrecipient with supporting documentation, then OMES-GMO assigns a staff lead and secondary grant analyst to perform a primary and secondary review for compliance and to require additional supporting documentation if needed to approve the request. Once those reviews are completed and approved by the OMES-GMO staff, the Director of the OMES-GMO must approve the request before it is sent to the OMES Finance Division, who will then verify the calculated amount(s) before completing the disbursement to the subrecipient. These internal controls and policies have been implemented for the management and oversight of the ERA Program and provide a multilayer review that will prevent fraud and risk factors applicable to the ERA program. Additionally, the OMES-GMO staff assigned to the ERA program have the training and knowledge to ensure compliance with the Federal grant requirements. • Depending on the level of risk, OMES-GMO conducts monthly, bi-weekly or weekly meetings with each subrecipient to monitor the progress of projects and address any issues or changes that might impact the project. For the ERA Program, OMES-GMO conducts bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and is currently reviewing documentation provided by CFO to ensure all current ERA projects are eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO is exercising the proper oversight over their subrecipients. • OMES-GMO will continue with their current ERA monitoring steps and internal controls and will work with CFO to ensure ERA program funds are spent in accordance with ERA program guidelines and state and federal regulations. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing throughout the life of the grant Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-028 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA) Planned Corrective Action Condition and Context: While documenting controls over subrecipient program and administrative expenditures for the ERA 1 and ERA 2 grants, we noted that OMES did not require the subrecipients to submit supporting documentation for expenditures charged to the programs. Further, we determined one subrecipient, Communities Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) did not have sufficient internal controls over program or administrative expenditures to ensure they were for allowable costs and activities. • Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector Office’s (SAI) findings that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2023. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • Oversight and management of the ERA program has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which has staff with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has recently hired additional staff, and the two staff members dedicated to the management of the ERA program have 20+ years of combined federal grant specific experience. • To ensure that the subrecipient agreement includes all the required terms under the ERA Program and that the agreement does not expire, OMES-GMO and the Communities of Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) have recently executed a Subrecipient Grant Agreement Amendment that details the responsibilities of OMES to monitor CFO and the duties and processes that CFO must follow in regard to ERA Program, including detailed cash management policies. See Attached – Grant Agreement Amendment. • OMES-GMO required the return of the remaining ERA2 Program funds from CFO to ensure proper oversight and review of ERA expenditures is performed. • OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. For example, OMES-GMO’s process for disbursing funds to a subrecipient requires a written request from the subrecipient with supporting documentation, then OMES-GMO assigns a staff lead and secondary grant analyst to perform a primary and secondary review for compliance and to require additional supporting documentation if needed to approve the request. Once those reviews are completed and approved by the OMES- GMO staff, the Director of the OMES-GMO must approve the request before it is sent to the OMES Finance Division, who will then verify the calculated amount(s) before completing the disbursement to the subrecipient. These internal controls and policies have been implemented for the management and oversight of the ERA Program and provide a multi-layer review that will prevent fraud and risk factors applicable to the ERA program. Additionally, the OMESGMO staff assigned to the ERA program have the training and knowledge to ensure compliance with the Federal grant requirements. • Depending on the level of risk, OMES- GMO conducts monthly, bi-weekly or weekly meetings with each subrecipient to monitor the progress of projects and address any issues or changes that might impact the project. For the ERA Program, OMES-GMO conducts bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and is currently reviewing documentation provided by CFO to ensure all current ERA projects are eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO is exercising the proper oversight over their subrecipients. • OMES-GMO will continue with their current ERA monitoring steps and internal controls and will work with CFO to ensure ERA program funds are spent in accordance with ERA program guidelines and state and federal regulations. • Community Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) Due to a classification misunderstanding, CFO recently changed its financial process and is currently tracking expenditures as a subrecipient. CFO does have internal controls for expenditures and using their established process to update the tracking of their expenditures. (attachment internal controls – expenditures) CFO is reconciling the administrative expenses to capture and show the costs associated with administering the program. Condition and Context: While reviewing all administrative management fees, we noted one of the subrecipients charged the ERA 1 and ERA 2 grants $5,585,126.89 in unallowable administrative costs (management fees) that were retained by the subrecipient and were not attributable to providing financial assistance and housing stability services. The management fees the subrecipient charged to the grant do not represent actual admin expenditures, but rather an arbitrary amount retained by CFO (Questioned costs - $5,585,126.89). See management fees referenced in finding 2023-091. • A spreadsheet showing administrative expenses for FY23 is included with the finding response. CFO has used the allocable percentage of 90.33%, as provided by SAI in the finding 2023-088, to show the portion of expenditures attributed to the state ERA program. All previous and subsequent years are currently going through the same reconciliation effort. Any charges that were deemed unallowable by SAI during this audit or previous audits, such as credit card charges, will be removed from the actual expenditures spreadsheet and noted in the financial software. Transactional data from the subrecipients' financial system are included as backup for the administrative expenses. Documentation was previously not requested for CFO’s expenditures. Supporting documentation is being provided at this time to substantiate the response more fully. CFO has included a sample of personnel expenses in the response to this finding as a show of good faith. (Attachment 2022-08 CFO Payroll Support Docs, OneDrive _1 _4 _22-2025) Condition and Context: In addition, during our test work for the ERA 1 program administrative limit, we noted that administrative costs charged to the program exceeded the 10% allowable limit by 5.81%, or $1,259,429 • Being this is a multiple year grant program that was set up as earned administrative funds based upon programmatic spend, an ebb and flow of admin earned, and expended, is directly in relation to the programmatic spend. Looking at one fiscal year as a snapshot does not present the entire picture accurately. Over the course of the grant, the administrative funds earned have been at or under the cap established by Treasury. accurately. Over the course of the grant, the administrative funds earned have been at or under the cap established by Treasury. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing throughout the life of the grant Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-027 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA) Planned Corrective Action AUDIT BULLET POINT “Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Eligibility exceptions: • For 22 of 89, or 24.72%, of items tested, the applicant was an Afghanistan refugee and not a renter who lived in Oklahoma at the time of applying for assistance; therefore, they were not eligible, and the payment was unallowable. The subrecipient, Communities Foundation of Oklahoma, paid for the applicant to be in a hotel and then subsequently paid for their rent and utilities. Since the applicants were not eligible all payments were unallowable; therefore, we did not determine if the payment was calculated correctly or if the assistance exceeded 15 months for ERA 1 or 18 months for ERA 2. However, of these unallowable costs, we noted the following: • Some applicants were reimbursed for monthly lawn services as part of their monthly rental payment. • Several payments were made to the applicants after the initial payment without receiving an additional application or additional funds request (AFR) form (See FAQ #10).” OMES RESPONSE: The State disagrees that payments made to Afghan refugees were unallowable. The finding asserts that 22 applicants were ineligible for Emergency Rental Assistance (ERA) because they were Afghan refugees and were not “renters who lived in Oklahoma at the time of applying.” This interpretation is inconsistent with U.S. Department of the Treasury guidance, which does not require U.S. citizenship, legal residency, or prior tenancy in Oklahoma as a condition of eligibility. • Citizenship or Legal Residency Is Not a Requirement for ERA Eligibility. It is never mentioned in the ERA statute or Treasury guidance that U.S. citizenship, lawful residency, or duration of tenancy required. The U.S. Treasury’s ERA FAQ #1 explicitly outlines the four criteria for eligibility: • The household must be obligated to pay rent on a residential dwelling; • One or more individuals within the household must have experienced financial hardship due to the pandemic; • The household must demonstrate a risk of homelessness or housing instability; • Household income must be at or below 80% of area median income (AMI). These Afghan households were invited by our government leaders to resettle in Oklahoma as part of the federal government’s Operation Allies Welcome initiative. When the Afghans arrived in Oklahoma, they immediately sought housing, being assisted by agencies such as Catholic Charities. Obviously, they were not homeowners. As tenants or households seeking to rent housing during the midst of a pandemic without any immediate means of securing employment, they were experiencing housing instability and fully met the ERA Program 1 and 2 criteria. Upon arrival: • They were not homeowners; • They had no permanent housing; • They were working with nonprofit agencies like Catholic Charities to find housing; • Because of the pandemic, they were not able to secure work and had no or extremely low income; • They were at imminent risk of homelessness. Treasury has further emphasized in FAQ #1, “… these requirements provide for various means of documentation so that grantees may extend this emergency assistance to vulnerable populations without imposing undue documentation burdens…” Again, never is the word “residence or citizen” used, even in the footnotes. This language was clearly intended to include undocumented individuals, newly arrived refugees, and others in nontraditional or transitional housing situations. Furthermore, as noted in the CFO/CCP ERA application for rental assistance previously provided to SAI, the eligibility requirements do not require residency but that only the applicant live in the State of Oklahoma. Further Support: • September 9, 2021, Email between CCP/CFO and the Director of Tax and Housing Advocacy for the National Council of State Housing Agencies. Discusses that CCP was working with housing stability service partners, specifically Catholic Charities, to help with housing Afghans when they came to Oklahoma. Emails also clarify that the Afghan refugees would only be able to apply once they moved to Oklahoma. (See attached) • Sept 29, 2021 – Email from U.S. Dept. of State, Bureau of Populations, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), U.S. Department of State, which invited a variety of Federal Agency representatives to a call to hear from the OK Catholic Charities director to speak about the Oklahoma Catholic Charities “model of utilizing CARES Act funding to support both temporary and long term housing for Afghan arrivals and an additional hour was set aside for discussion of this model. Executive Director of the Oklahoma City Catholic Charities forwarded this email to CCP asking if she would join to assist with the discussion of this model. Listed below are the agencies that had representatives on the email. the National Security Council and Subcommittees  The White House – Organization of the National Security Council and Subcommittees  Executive Office of the President.  U.S. Department  Federal FEMA Office  U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services  Homeland Security  Catholic Charities  U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops  Administration of Children & Families  Governors, Biden Administration point person for Afghan Parolee Assistance. (See attached) • October 3, 2021, Follow-up Email thanking people regarding the presentation and for joining the call. “The insight, creativity, and partnership is inspiring and has the potential to assist so many Afghans.” Furthermore, an email was to the attendees of the presentation clarifying ERA as the funding source for Oklahoma’s model for developing housing resource for Afghan arrival. Additionally, it was stated that “We hope that these clarifications and enclosed links will help us understand how these funds may be leveraged to house Afghans when they are resettled from the bases to other locations around the country.” (see attached) • October 24, 2021, Email from ERA Outreach Team Leader, Emergency Housing Team, U.S. Department of the Treasury, to CCP wanting to connect them with Chicago who was looking to do some work with asylum seekers/refugees and was wanting to talk to other grantees who have worked with these populations using ERA funds. Note, this is an ERA Team Leader from the Treasury wanting CCP to share CCP/CFO’s ERA model. Obviously, the Treasury would not reach out to connect CCP/CFO to speak about their Afghan refugee model if they did not approve of the use of ERA funds to assist with housing the refugees. (See attached) • Treasury FAQ #37 – Addresses how grantees can promote access to assistance for all eligible households and is clear that the Guidance contemplates serving individuals from all background and nationalities, stating that grantees “should address barriers … including by providing program documents in multiple languages.” Furthermore, the Guidance states “Grantees should also provide, whether directly or through partner organizations, culturally and linguistically relevant outreach and housing stability services to ensure access to assistance for all eligible households.” In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) ERA grantees must ensure they provide meaningful access to their limited-Englishproficiency (LEP) applicants and beneficiaries of their federally assisted programs, services, and activities. Finally, “Denial of an LEP person’s access to federally assisted programs, services, and activities is a form of nationalorigin discrimination prohibited under Title VI and Treasury’s Title VI implementing regulations at 31 CFR Part 22.” • Treasury guidance on creating applications for the ERA program with no mention of citizenship or residency requirements. Allow applicants to progress and self-attest if they cannot provide documentation - At the stage when applicants are asked to provide documents to establish COVID hardship, housing instability, income, or rental obligation, applicants should also be informed that they may self-attest and move forward in the application if they do not have those documents. • Disaster Housing Recovery Coalition, C/O National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) – Published an information sheet for recipients of Federal awards in response to the COVID-19 pandemic which detailed which awards did not consider immigration status when providing assistance. Under the ERA Program, the NLIHC stated that “The law establishing the Emergency Rental Assistance Program does not impose restrictions based on immigration status.” (Attached – labeled FAQs- Eligibility for Assistance Based on Immigration Status) 2. Hotel Stays Are Allowable Options for Temporarily Displaced Households Treasury provided a Broader Reading of “Obligated to Pay Rent on a Residential Dwelling,” and determined the costs of staying in a hotel are eligible expenses, and rental assistance could be provided to temporarily displaced households living in hotels. The audit finding narrowly interprets the term “obligated to pay rent” in FAQ #1. However, multiple Treasury FAQs — including FAQ #7, #26, and #35 — demonstrate that the Department intended a flexible, inclusive interpretation, recognizing the emergency nature of the program and the housing challenges faced by displaced individuals and families and reinforces that the term “residential dwelling” is not limited to traditional apartments with leases but includes hotels and other temporary housing used in transition. • FAQ #7: Permits hotel or motel costs to be covered using ERA funds when the household lacks alternative housing options, even without a formal lease. • FAQ #26: States that rental assistance may be provided to households residing temporarily in hotels or motels when they are • displaced or between housing. FAQ #27: Allows rental assistance for rent-to- own households, further demonstrating that the key is ERA CANNOT be used for homeowners (FAQ #20). • FAQ #35: Specifically authorizes relocation assistance for households who have been evicted or otherwise displaced and are attempting to secure new permanent housing. These provisions explicitly contemplate support for individuals and families—such as Afghan refugees— who were temporarily displaced and used hotels as the only available rental housing (in truth, many Oklahomans are forced to do this) until suitable housing could be secured (rendered more difficult for larger families – up to 10+ children). As allowed under Treasury ERA FAQs #7 and #26, hotel stays were covered when used as transitional housing due to lack of available rental stock—especially for large families. Afghan refugees fell squarely within this provision. 3. Lawn Services as Part of Rent This is allowable as part of the cost of the rental of the premises. For all rentals that have a yard there is lawn maintenance, and the landlord has the option to determine how to charge (or absorb) that cost. These costs were not reimbursed as separate utility costs, but as part of the monthly rental obligation agreed to in writing. 4. Subsequent Payments Without AFR Forms • ERA guidance allows grantees to implement streamlined processes to reduce burden and deliver aid efficiently. CCP’s internal policies permitted continued rental and utility assistance without requiring new applications or additional AFR forms, so long as eligibility remained unchanged and appropriate documentation was on file. This approach is aligned with Treasury’s consistent encouragement to minimize administrative barriers in the interest of program responsiveness and urgency. Treasury guidance also stated, Only ask applicants for information that is required by the ERA statutes and Treasury’s guidance to provide them assistance. AUDIT BULLET POINT “Further, while summarizing the data on ‘applicant’, we noted one line item was made up of 498 individual payments made to hotels on behalf of the Afghanistan refugees, which consisted of 186 applicants. We identified 185 of these applicants had payments for Afghanistan refugees to live in hotels prior to applying to the ERA program. Since, at the time of the application, they were not obligated to pay rent on a residential dwelling per Department of Treasury FAQ 1 and established CCP ERA policy, the cost is unallowable. This resulted in $1,727,687.64 in questioned costs (these costs do not include payments previously questioned in the first bullet).” OMES RESPONSE: OMES disagrees with this finding. Multiple Treasury FAQs, including #7, #26, and #35, reinforces the term “residential dwelling” is not limited to traditional apartments but may include hotels and other temporary housing used in transition. Also, FAQ #8 states that a beneficiary is not required to have rental arrears to receive assistance and permits enrollment “of households for only prospective benefits.” The only restriction is that for the ERA1 program, if an applicant is requesting prospective assistance and the applicant also has rental arrears, the grantee must also provide assistance to reduce those arrears (this restriction does not apply to ERA2). Finally, per FAQ # 13, eligible households do not have to be in their current rental home when the COVID-19 public health emergency was declared, stating, “Payments under ERA are provided to help households meet housing costs that they are unable to meet as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. There is no requirement regarding the length of tenure in the current unit.” Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector Office’s (SAI) findings that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2023. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • Oversight and management of the ERA program has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which has staff with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has recently hired additional staff, and the two staff members dedicated to the management of the ERA program have 20+ years of combined federal grant specific experience. • To ensure that the subrecipient agreement includes all the required terms under the ERA Program and that the agreement does not expire, OMES-GMO and the Communities of Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) have recently executed a Subrecipient Grant Agreement Amendment that details the responsibilities of OMES to monitor CFO and the duties and processes that CFO must follow in regard to ERA Program, including detailed cash management policies. See Attached – Grant Agreement Amendment. • OMES-GMO required the return of the remaining ERA2 Program funds from CFO to ensure proper oversight and review of ERA expenditures is performed. • OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. For example, OMESGMO’s process for disbursing funds to a subrecipient requires a written request from the subrecipient with supporting documentation, then OMES-GMO assigns a staff lead and secondary grant analyst to perform a primary and secondary review for compliance and to require additional supporting documentation if needed to approve the request. Once those reviews are completed and approved by the OMES-GMO staff, the Director of the OMESGMO must approve the request before it is sent to the OMES Finance Division, who will then verify the calculated amount(s) before completing the disbursement to the subrecipient. These internal controls and policies have been implemented for the management and oversight of the ERA Program and provide a multi-layer review that will prevent fraud and risk factors applicable to the ERA program. Additionally, the OMES-GMO staff assigned to the ERA program have the training and knowledge to ensure compliance with the Federal grant requirements. • Depending on the level of risk, OMES-GMO conducts monthly, bi-weekly or weekly meetings with each subrecipient to monitor the progress of projects and address any issues or changes that might impact the project. For the ERA Program, OMES-GMO conducts biweekly monitoring meetings with CFO and is currently reviewing documentation provided by CFO to ensure all current ERA projects are eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO is exercising the proper oversight over their subrecipients. OMES-GMO will continue with their current ERA monitoring steps and internal controls and will work with CFO to ensure ERA program funds are spent in accordance with ERA program guidelines and state and federal regulations. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing throughout the life of the grant Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-026 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERA) Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges the Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector Office’s (SAI) findings that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2023. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • Oversight and management of the ERA program has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which has staff with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has recently hired additional staff, and the two staff members dedicated to the management of the ERA program have 20+ years of combined federal grant specific experience. • To ensure that the subrecipient agreement includes all the required terms under the ERA Program and that the agreement does not expire, OMES-GMO and the Communities of Foundation of Oklahoma (CFO) have recently executed a Subrecipient Grant Agreement Amendment that details the responsibilities of OMES to monitor CFO and the duties and processes that CFO must follow in regard to ERA Program, including detailed cash management policies. See Attached – Grant Agreement Amendment. (See page 15 of attached Grant Agreement.) • OMES-GMO required the return of the remaining ERA2 Program funds from CFO to ensure proper oversight and review of ERA expenditures is performed. • OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. For example, OMES-GMO’s process for disbursing funds to a subrecipient requires a written request from the subrecipient with supporting documentation, then OMES-GMO assigns a staff lead and secondary grant analyst to perform a primary and secondary review for compliance and to require additional supporting documentation if needed to approve the request. Once those reviews are completed and approved by the OMES-GMO staff, the Director of the OMESGMO must approve the request before it is sent to the OMES Finance Division, who will then verify the calculated amount(s) before completing the disbursement to the subrecipient. These internal controls and policies have been implemented for the management and oversight of the ERA Program and provide a multi-layer review that will prevent fraud and risk factors applicable to the ERA program. Additionally, the OMES- GMO staff assigned to the ERA program have the training and knowledge to ensure compliance with the Federal grant requirements. • Risk assessments have been obtained and are attached. • Depending on the level of risk, OMES-GMO conducts monthly, bi-weekly or weekly meetings with each subrecipient to monitor the progress of projects and address any issues or changes that might impact the project. For the ERA Program, OMES-GMO conducts biweekly monitoring meetings with CFO and is currently reviewing documentation provided by CFO to ensure all current ERA projects are eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO is exercising the proper oversight over their subrecipients. • OMES-GMO will continue with their current ERA monitoring steps and internal controls and will work with CFO to ensure ERA program funds are spent in accordance with ERA program guidelines and state and federal regulations. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing throughout the life of the grant Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-108 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) Planned Corrective Action The State agrees with this finding. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which is staffed with individuals with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. Finally, OMES Finance has developed processes which provide for a more thorough coding of expenditures and proper review of expenditures when reporting on their GAAP Z. The State disagrees with the finding. The State had two Grant Award Notifications in place with the Boys and Girls Club which reflects the monies awarded to be used on the capital improvements and Club on the Go Mobile Clubhouses. This indicates the funds were obligated during the covered period. Per the email from the Keri for Jill Geiger Consulting, no signatures on the GANs were required and the Uniform Guidance does not require the GAN to be signed. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which is staffed with individuals with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. OMESGMO’s internal control processes ensure subrecipient risk assessments are performed and that proper grant awarding documentation is provided to subrecipients. Anticipated Completion Date September 2022 Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-098 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) Planned Corrective Action OMES Finance has implemented proper controls for their SEFA process to ensure costs are reported on the correct basis of accounting. OMES agrees with this finding and has put measures in place to correct this issue. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which is staffed with individuals with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls which includes a process for reviewing funding requests to ensure expenditures are allowable under the federal guidelines. The State agrees. Although the delivery of the software occurred during the covered period, the invoice was paid outside of the liquidation period. The State agrees with this finding and has put measures in place to correct this issue. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which is staffed with individuals with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls which includes a process for reviewing funding requests to ensure expenditures are allowable under the federal guidelines. Anticipated Completion Date September 2022 Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-096 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) Planned Corrective Action The State agrees with this finding. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which is staffed with individuals with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. Finally, OMES Finance has developed processes which provide for a more thorough coding of expenditures and proper review of expenditures when reporting on their GAAP Z. The State disagrees with the finding. The State had two Grant Award Notifications in place with the Boys and Girls Club which reflects the monies awarded to be used on the capital improvements and Club on the Go Mobile Clubhouses. This indicates the funds were obligated during the covered period. Per the email from the Keri for Jill Geiger Consulting, no signatures on the GANs were required and the Uniform Guidance does not require the GAN to be signed. Anticipated Completion Date September 2022 Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-094 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) Planned Corrective Action The State agrees in part and the State disagrees in part. In regard to payments made to Jill Geiger Consulting in the amounts of $39,957.00 and $28,272.00, please see attached documentation of time and effort of services provided during FY2023 which were also paid with by CRF funds in FY2023. Please scroll down on the timesheet reports and refer to the Notes column for descriptions. Additionally, the CRF weekly update log is from JGC and gives more details for services provided. For the payments made to Jill Geiger Consulting for the other amounts ($27,083.33 and $34,650), these reimbursements occurred in FY2023 but were not for services provided in FY2023, but for FY2022. If you review the “Summary of requested vouchers Jill Geiger,” the payment of $34,650 occurred on 8/1/2022 but was paid to cover services in May and June 2022. For invoice v00160672 in the amount of $27,083.33, the payment was made July 5, 2022 (FY23) but covered services for April 22 (FY22). You will be able to see more instances of this in the Summary and attached invoices for that same amount. Therefore, the State requests these be taken out of the audit review and findings for FY2023 as the services were not provided in FY2023. The State of Oklahoma agrees in part and disagrees in part. The State agrees that a multi-level system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures, will help ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO). The OMES-GMO is staffed with individuals, who have several years of grant experience implementing these internal controls and procedures. Anticipated Completion Date September 2022 Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-062 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.019 Federal Program name: Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF) Planned Corrective Action The State agrees with this finding. The State is attaching OIG Financial Progress Reports. Cycle 11 accounts for the full and final amount of the grant. The State of Oklahoma agrees and has strengthened their controls over financial reporting of federal grant awards to ensure the amounts are accurately reported. Also, the State will ensure quarterly Financial Progress Reports are properly retained for the appropriate length of time by abiding by state and federal guidelines for the retention of documentation. Within OMES, oversight and management of Federal grants has been transferred to the OMES Grant Management Office (OMES-GMO) which is staffed with individuals with several years of grant experience. OMES-GMO has a multilevel system of internal controls for grant management and oversight that includes routine monitoring, desk review, and site visits for all projects and associated project/administrative expenditures to ensure allowability, accuracy, and assist in the detection of fraud. Anticipated Completion Date September 2022 Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek

Finding Number 2023-013 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 20.509 - Formula Grants for Rural Areas Planned Corrective Action We concur with the auditor’s recommendation. OMPT—We will develop and implement risk assessments as part of our sub-recipient monitoring process and revise existing procedures related to single audits. Lastly, we will meet with Internal Audit, formerly CWO, to establish a process to ensure audit reviews are documented and received. Internal Audit - Unfortunately the issues that occurred in last year’s audit, also effected the transactions selected in this year’s audit. It should be noted that 6 of the 11 missing files were provided to SA&I, however most of those audits were not performed in a timely manner. After the finding last year many changes were implemented in the Audit Office, including a change in management of the Grants and Contract Auditing area. A Smartsheet application is in now in use that allows OMPT to check on the status of audits at any time. We also have done extensive cross training on these single audit reviews and we are currently performing these audits in a timely manner as they come in. Anticipated Completion Date 7/1/2025 Responsible Contact Person OMPT - Eric Rose/Bobby Parkinson Anne Antonelli, Internal Audit – Holly Lowe

Finding Number 2023-011 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 20.509 - Formula Grants for Rural Areas Planned Corrective Action We concur with the auditor’s recommendation. Staff will be trained on how to reconcile & identify discrepancies. Anticipated Completion Date September 2025 Responsible Contact Person Sam Ddamba

Finding Number 2023-036 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) #17.225 Unemployment Insurance Planned Corrective Action OESC concurs with the audit findings and agrees with the recommendation. The agency also acknowledges the importance of data integrity when reporting ETA 9128 activities and the important role such reporting plays in evaluating and monitoring the RESEA program. OESC realized there was an issue with the RESEA enrollments opened during 3rd quarter 2021 and worked on creating procedures to ensure enrollments opened properly. As referenced in the agency’s response to this same finding last year, in January 2023, administrative staff identified issues with enrollments not opening with a recently implemented technology tool. The agency subsequently decided to abandon the new technology and revert to its original scheduling system. OESC worked with the OKJM vendor to ensure all required services are opened automatically when the RESEA enrollment is established. In December 2023, OESC initiated a process to verify the enrollments opened and perform monthly review of all enrollments to ensure all data elements are captured for all participants. This process involves a high degree of manual effort which presents higher risk for inaccuracies. In conjunction with the agency’s modernization efforts, significant work has been directed at implementing solutions to address both the case management and data reporting requirements needed to fully resolve this finding. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing until modernization of RESEA tools is complete Responsible Contact Person Tammy Wood, RESEA/TAA Program Manager

Finding Number 2023-035 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) #17.225 Unemployment Insurance Planned Corrective Action The agency concurs with the findings and agrees with the recommendation. The agency acknowledges our responsibility for program integrity and proper controls for the RESEA program. As we referenced in our response last year, the agency has undertaken modernization efforts to provide better solutions for the RESEA program. EmployOklahoma is the first result of this effort in the workforce employment area and it launched in January 2025 as the replacement for OKJM. The majority of the findings above were related to cases pulled for the period between July 2022 and December 2022; there was improvement in the period from January 2023 to June 2023. We anticipate continued progress and improvement going forward, but there will continue to be elevated risk for inaccuracies until the agency’s modernization efforts are successful in implementing solutions to address both the case management and data reporting requirements needed to fully resolve these findings. Anticipated Completion Date Ongoing until modernization of RESEA tools is complete Responsible Contact Person Tammy Wood, RESEA/TAA Program Manager

Finding Number 2023-031 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) #17.225 Unemployment Insurance Planned Corrective Action OESC concurs with the audit finding and agrees with the recommendation. The agency also acknowledges the importance of data integrity in submitting the ETA 9050, ETA 9052 and ETA 9055 reports. Programming was completed in June 2023 to retain backup of the detailed data at the time each report is run. As part of OESC’s technology modernization efforts, technical resources continue to review reporting requirements for all regulatory reports and validate the accuracy of programming that supports such reporting. DOL completed a Data Validation monitoring of OESC in May 2024, and the DOL reviewers shared favorable comments regarding OESC’s modernization efforts, and the agency was able to satisfy DOL with regard to the area of concern and finding identified in their review. OESC leadership expects to address the underlying causes for this finding as part of our modernization efforts. Anticipated Completion Date Programming completed in June 2023 to retain backup data; data validation for regulatory reports is ongoing as part of OESC technology modernization efforts. Responsible Contact Person Michelle Britten, Chief Administrative Officer

Finding Number 2023-044 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) CN CLUSTER – SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM; NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM, SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN, FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES PROGRAM AL #10.553, 10.555; 10.556; 10.559; 10.582 Planned Corrective Action Child Nutrition programs can modify the claim and reporting systems to pull information for all payments meeting the FFATA reporting requirements for funds paid in excess of $30,000 cumulatively annually to a subrecipient. However, we cannot give a corrective action plan for the actual upload to US Spending.com due to the discontinuation of the FSFR website used to upload FFATA reports on March 6th, 2025. This is being replaced by SAM.gov utilizing an API process. There is currently no guidance to States on how this will done once the new API process is ready to be implemented. Once we have guidance on how the information will be collected and uploaded, we can work with OMES to create an upload and reconciliation process. Anticipated Completion Date July 1, 2025, or when the US Spending system update is available. Responsible Contact Person Jennifer Weber

Finding Number 2023-038 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) CN CLUSTER – SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM; NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM, SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN, FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES PROGRAM AL #10.553, 10.555; 10.556; 10.559; 10.582 Planned Corrective Action Additional training of field-based staff will take place covering the areas of the SFSP review to ensure that meal counts and claim numbers are correct. A SFSP review will not be conducted prior to a claim being filed unless the SFSP program ends prior to a claim being filed. USDA guidance “encourages” a claim review to be conducted when an SFSP review is being conducted. If a sponsor operates for a month or less the review must take place while the program is operating therefore a claim would not be able to be validated. Anticipated Completion Date May 2025 (once SFSP reviews start for summer 2025) Responsible Contact Person Jennifer Weber

Finding Number 2023-015 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) CN CLUSTER – SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM; NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM, SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN, FRESH FRUITS AND VEGETABLES PROGRAM AL #10.553, 10.555; 10.556; 10.559; 10.582 Planned Corrective Action We will update our 3-month Operating Excess form we send to schools to include more information. Any schools that are going to carryover part or all of their excess funds will need to provide us an explanation of what those funds will be spent on and then comments will be made on the log so we follow-up with the school to ensure allowable items were purchased. If they are using the excess for salaries and/or the cost of serving all students free they will need to let us know that in writing as well. Anticipated Completion Date June 2, 2025 Responsible Contact Person Jennifer Weber

Finding Number 2023-069 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 10.551 – SNAP Cluster Planned Corrective Action The agency will manually load the workflow queues using the monitoring transactions for the G1DX discrepancies, and we will continuously work to improve the system failures preventing automatic workload management. This includes bi-weekly updates to ensure all items are properly queued for resolution until the system can fully resume this functionality. Anticipated Completion Date The backlog will be resolved by 06/01/2025. System queue management functionality will be resolved by 09/30/2025. Responsible Contact Person Jennifer McSparrin, Programs Administrator of Business Intelligence

The Center will ensure we have all supporting documentation saved and reviewed prior to payment being issued.

Finding Number: 2023-046 Finding Name: Untimely Review of Subrecipient Performance Reports Finding Condition(s): The Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) did not review subrecipient performance reports in a timely manner according to its program monitoring policies and procedures for subrecipients of the Education and Stabilization Fund - Elementary and Secondary Education (ESF) program for fiscal year 2023. Name of Contact Person(s): • Denise Blaney, Director – Illinois State Board of Education, Title Grant Administration Department • Lazell Logan, Supervisor – Illinois State Board of Education, Title Grant Administration Department • Annie Brooks, Executive Director – Illinois State Board of Education, Regulatory Services Corrective Action(s): To ensure proper review procedures are performed in a timely manner in accordance with its program monitoring policies and procedures, ISBE’s Title Grant Administration Department started to send bi-weekly lists of submitted, past due, and disapproved Grant Periodic Reports (GPRS) to each applicable ISBE department. The Title Grant Administration Department analyzes the GPRS reports and prioritizes reviews based on submission dates. The Title Grant Administration Department also has trained team members to assist with the review process. Proposed Completion Date: October 31, 2024 – Completed

Finding Number: 2023-045 Finding Name: Inadequate Monitoring of 21st Century Subrecipients Finding Condition(s): The Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) did not adequately monitor and document program monitoring procedures performed over subrecipients of the 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st Century) program. Additionally, ISBE did not follow its subrecipient monitoring procedures during the year ended June 30, 2023. Finally, ISBE’s controls for monitoring are not designed at an appropriate level of precision to ensure monitoring of subrecipients is completed as required. Name of Contact Person(s): Ryan Levin, Supervisor; 21st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) State Education Agency Coordinator – Illinois State Board of Education, Wellness and Student Care Management Department Corrective Action(s): To ensure that 21st Century Community Learning Centers (21st CCLC) subgrantees’ progress and performance are monitored in accordance with 2 CFR 200.331(d), 2 CFR 200.331(b) and 2 CFR 200.303, Wellness and Student Care Management Department and the 21st CCLC team will develop processes and structures to facilitate the procedures, protocols, and efficacy of subgrantee monitoring. Components of this work will include, but not be limited to: • Evaluating and revising the program’s subgrantee risk analysis procedures and tools to ensure that they are relevant and accurately reflect the items/actions that suggest higher levels of subgrantee risk (2 CFR 200.331(b)). • Reviewing and revising the procedures and/or documentation that is collected for all three tiers of subgrantee monitoring to ensure that all processes are relevant; are not simply perfunctory; ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that the subaward performance goals are achieved (2 CFR 200.331(d)). • Establishing and implementing specific processes and protocols to ensure that all components of subgrantee monitoring are timely, that management reviews and provides approval for key components of the process, and that accurate and complete documentation is produced and maintained (2 CFR 200.303). Proposed Completion Date: December 31, 2025

Finding Number: 2023-044 Finding Name: Inaccurate Information Included in the Financial Reports Finding Condition(s): The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) did not prepare accurate federal financial status reports for the Airport Improvement Program. Name of Contact Person(s): • Melanie Quinn, Contracts Section Manager – Illinois Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics • Joe Segobiano, Bureau Chief of Administrative Services – Illinois Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics Corrective Action(s): IDOT is working to fully staff and train the Contracts Section of the Division of Aeronautics to ensure reporting is completed as required. Proposed Completion Date: June 30, 2026

Finding Number: 2023-043 Finding Name: Failure to Report Subaward Information Required by FFATA Finding Condition(s): The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) failed to report information required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) for awards granted to subrecipients of the Airport Improvement Program. Name of Contact Person(s): • Melanie Quinn, Contracts Section Manager – Illinois Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics • Joe Segobiano, Bureau Chief of Administrative Services – Illinois Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics Corrective Action(s): IDOT is working to fully staff and train the Contracts Section of the Division of Aeronautics to ensure reporting is completed as required. Proposed Completion Date: June 30, 2026

Finding Number: 2023-041 Finding Name: Inadequate Process for Preparing ETA 2208A Special Report Finding Condition(s): The Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES) does not have an adequate process in place to ensure the ETA 2208A special reports prepared for the Unemployment Insurance (UI) program are complete and accurate. Name of Contact Person(s): • Linette Hughes, Budget Director – Illinois Department of Employment Security, Office of the Budget • Belinda Moreno, State Budget Manager – Illinois Department of Employment Security, Office of the Budget • Anna Hrynewycz, Federal Budget Manager – Illinois Department of Employment Security, Office of the Budget Corrective Action(s): The IDES hired additional budget staff to aid in compiling and checking the reports to ensure complete and accurate reporting. Additionally, the IDES created and approved written procedures for the completion of the reports. Proposed Completion Date: July 1, 2024 - Completed