Corrective Action Plans

Browse how organizations respond to audit findings

Total CAPs
61,436
In database
Filtered Results
9,763
Matching current filters
Showing Page
66 of 391
25 per page

Filters

Clear
Active filters: § 200.303
Twin Oaks totally agrees with the recommendation to update procedures for purchasing and suspension and debarment to align with Uniform Guidance or other requirements and has already made those changes in policy. This is another timing issue and may show up in 2025 as well. We have a policy of re-ev...
Twin Oaks totally agrees with the recommendation to update procedures for purchasing and suspension and debarment to align with Uniform Guidance or other requirements and has already made those changes in policy. This is another timing issue and may show up in 2025 as well. We have a policy of re-evaluating vendors periodically but don't believe that cheaper is better. There are many factors such as credit lines, historical performance and reliability that have priority in our review. These reviews have already been implemented and Charlie Chervanik is responsible.
Twin Oaks will revise procedures to calculate the MTDC in accordance with Uniform Guidance and apply the indirect cost consistently for all programs and to review the indirect cost allocations performed. Again, because of the timing of this audit report, there may be repeat findings for 2025 but sho...
Twin Oaks will revise procedures to calculate the MTDC in accordance with Uniform Guidance and apply the indirect cost consistently for all programs and to review the indirect cost allocations performed. Again, because of the timing of this audit report, there may be repeat findings for 2025 but should be eliminated going forward. Benjie Read and Felecia Read will work together to calculate the current MTDC by October 31, 2026.
Twin Oaks employs most of their 700 or so employees in residential programs where they work for one program on a set schedule. Twin Oaks is working with Paylocity to create the best solution for those employees that work for different programs or that have multiple programs at their location. The pr...
Twin Oaks employs most of their 700 or so employees in residential programs where they work for one program on a set schedule. Twin Oaks is working with Paylocity to create the best solution for those employees that work for different programs or that have multiple programs at their location. The programs specifically identified with this finding have been eliminated except for the TOCS programs and that is where we are specifically working on the best solution with Paylocity. Benjie Read and Candy Gregory will be responsible for correcting this with Paylocity by October 31, 2026.
Even though this program has been eliminated, Twin Oaks has refined the use of the Divvy credit card review and allocations. Twin Oaks is also researching guidance on the allowable and unallowable costs that can be charged to a program and will be trained on these costs by October 1, 2026 by outside...
Even though this program has been eliminated, Twin Oaks has refined the use of the Divvy credit card review and allocations. Twin Oaks is also researching guidance on the allowable and unallowable costs that can be charged to a program and will be trained on these costs by October 1, 2026 by outside vendor. Benjie Read will be responsible for these trainings.
See 2024-013, This particular finding that relates to the HHS/ORR program will no longer be an issue going forward with the closure of this program.
See 2024-013, This particular finding that relates to the HHS/ORR program will no longer be an issue going forward with the closure of this program.
This problem only applied to the HHS program that was eliminated in December 2023. All other programs that we contract with are paid in arrears and there are no advances. We have proposed a settlement agreement with HHS to eliminate the overpayment and interest. Benjie Read will be responsible for t...
This problem only applied to the HHS program that was eliminated in December 2023. All other programs that we contract with are paid in arrears and there are no advances. We have proposed a settlement agreement with HHS to eliminate the overpayment and interest. Benjie Read will be responsible for the settlement agreement, by October 31, 2026.
1. Responsible Person: Auditor-Controller 2. Corrective action plan: The County agrees with the finding and recommendation. The County Auditor’s office will work with department heads to establish a formalized policy of tracking timely reporting and correspondence procedures with grantors in the cas...
1. Responsible Person: Auditor-Controller 2. Corrective action plan: The County agrees with the finding and recommendation. The County Auditor’s office will work with department heads to establish a formalized policy of tracking timely reporting and correspondence procedures with grantors in the case of delayed reporting. In addition, the County will appropriately allocate employee resources to ensure compliance with deadlines. 3. Anticipated implementation date: June 30, 2027
The County acknowledges that certain required reports were not submitted within the required timeframes. To strengthen the reporting process, the County will begin requesting the information necessary to complete the required reporting during the first month of the performance year and will continue...
The County acknowledges that certain required reports were not submitted within the required timeframes. To strengthen the reporting process, the County will begin requesting the information necessary to complete the required reporting during the first month of the performance year and will continue to track and follow up on outstanding requests until the information is received. Documentation of these requests and follow-up efforts will be maintained to support the County’s compliance with reporting requirements. This process will provide greater oversight of outstanding information and support the timely submission of required reports.
The County acknowledges that one required monthly expenditure report was not submitted within the required timeframe. At the time the report was due, certain financial data and reconciliation issues resulting from the September 2023 transition to the Workday ERP system remained unresolved. The Count...
The County acknowledges that one required monthly expenditure report was not submitted within the required timeframe. At the time the report was due, certain financial data and reconciliation issues resulting from the September 2023 transition to the Workday ERP system remained unresolved. The County delayed submission to allow these issues to be addressed and to ensure accurate expenditure information was reported. The County continues to resolve outstanding system issues and strengthen reconciliation and review procedures to support the timely and accurate submission of required reports in future periods.
The City will implement a new policy to verify vendors are not suspended or debarred.
The City will implement a new policy to verify vendors are not suspended or debarred.
Personnel Responsible for Corrective Action: Madison Garden, County Auditor Anticipated Completion Date: December 30, 2026 Corrective Action Plan: We will build a SEFA plan as well as establish a standard work for how federal grants should be handled when setting up accounts in our ERP system. This ...
Personnel Responsible for Corrective Action: Madison Garden, County Auditor Anticipated Completion Date: December 30, 2026 Corrective Action Plan: We will build a SEFA plan as well as establish a standard work for how federal grants should be handled when setting up accounts in our ERP system. This will help ensure the Auditor’s Office has proper tracking of federal funds and their guidelines.
1. Comprehensive Grant Reconciliation Process- Management will perform a formal year-end reconciliation of all federal grant expenditures to the general ledger, grant agreements, reimbursement requests, and funding agency reports prior to completion of the SEFA. 2. Centralized Federal Award Inventor...
1. Comprehensive Grant Reconciliation Process- Management will perform a formal year-end reconciliation of all federal grant expenditures to the general ledger, grant agreements, reimbursement requests, and funding agency reports prior to completion of the SEFA. 2. Centralized Federal Award Inventory- Management has established a centralized schedule of all federal awards that identifies the fed eral agency, Assistance Listing Number {ALN), passthrough entity, grant number, award period, and responsible program personnel. This inventory will be reviewed and updated throughout the year. 3. Formal SEFA Review Control -A secondary review of the completed SE FA will be performed by a member of management independent of the preparer. The review will include verification of all federal programs, ALNs, pass-through awards, expenditures, and required disclosures. 4. Year-End Program Certifications - Program and finance personnel responsible for grant administration will provide written confirmation of all federal awards and expenditures incurred during the reporting period to ensure completeness. 5. Training and Compliance Monitoring- Finance staff responsible forfederal grant accounting and reporting will receive periodic training regardi ng Uniform Guidance requirements, including SEFA preparation and reporting responsibilities.
Condition: Controls were not designed or implemented effectively to ensure: 1. Mortgage and escrow payments were made in accordance with the due dates and amounts specified in the executed mortgage note agreement. 2. Earnings are retained in the replacement reserve account 3. The organization comple...
Condition: Controls were not designed or implemented effectively to ensure: 1. Mortgage and escrow payments were made in accordance with the due dates and amounts specified in the executed mortgage note agreement. 2. Earnings are retained in the replacement reserve account 3. The organization completes the required financial reports in accordance with the applicable accounting basis, supported by underlying records representing the activity for the period reported. Planned Corrective Action: Management will design and implement internal controls to ensure compliance with mortgage escrow payments, reserve account funding, and quarterly financial reporting requirements, including a process to ensure that documentation of reviews is retained. Contact person responsible for corrective action: Louise Arzu, Vice President, Finance Anticipated Completion Date: 9/30/2026
Finding Number 2024-053 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and co...
Finding Number 2024-053 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. OMES acknowledges that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2024. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI in these findings. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • OMES disagrees that they had sufficient and timely notice to make full corrective actions prior to this FY2024 audit for the following reasons: the FY2021 State auditor & Inspector (SAI) audit was released four days prior to the beginning of FY2024, the FY2022 SAI audit was released near the end of FY2025, and the FY2023 audit was released in FY2026; therefore, OMES could not take corrective action prior to the FY2024 audit began. At the beginning of FY2025, OMES began corrective measures as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. • OMES acknowledges OMES subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. 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.  OMES ensured that the subrecipient agreement included 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) executed an updated 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.  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 in place 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, OMESGMO conducted bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and reviewed documentation provided by CFO to ensure all ERA projects were eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO exercised the proper oversight over their subrecipients and spending. Anticipated Completion Date Completed Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek
Finding Number 2024-038 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and co...
Finding Number 2024-038 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. OMES acknowledges that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2024. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI in these findings. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • OMES disagrees that they had sufficient and timely notice to make full corrective actions prior to this FY2024 audit for the following reasons: the FY2021 State auditor & Inspector (SAI) audit was released four days prior to the beginning of FY2024, the FY2022 SAI audit was released near the end of FY2025, and the FY2023 audit was released in FY2026; therefore, OMES could not take corrective action prior to the FY2024 audit began. At the beginning of FY2025, OMES began corrective measures as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. • OMES acknowledges OMES subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. 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.  OMES ensured that the subrecipient agreement included 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) executed an updated 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.  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 in place 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, OMESGMO conducted bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and reviewed documentation provided by CFO to ensure all ERA projects were eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO exercised the proper oversight over their subrecipients and spending. Anticipated Completion Date Completed Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek
Finding Number 2024-024 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and co...
Finding Number 2024-024 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. OMES acknowledges that OMES did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2024. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI in these findings. Beginning with FY2025, OMES has taken the following measures: • OMES disagrees that they had sufficient and timely notice to make full corrective actions prior to this FY2024 audit for the following reasons: the FY2021 State auditor & Inspector (SAI) audit was released four days prior to the beginning of FY2024, the FY2022 SAI audit was released near the end of FY2025, and the FY2023 audit was released in FY2026; therefore, OMES could not take corrective action prior to the FY2024 audit began. At the beginning of FY2025, OMES began corrective measures as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. • OMES acknowledges OMES subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. 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.  OMES ensured that the subrecipient agreement included 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) executed an updated 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.  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 in place 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, OMESGMO conducted bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and reviewed documentation provided by CFO to ensure all ERA projects were eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO exercised the proper oversight over their subrecipients and spending. Anticipated Completion Date Completed Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek
Finding Number 2024-020 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges they did not implement the proper internal controls and ov...
Finding Number 2024-020 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) acknowledges they did not implement the proper internal controls and oversight of the ERA Program during FY2024. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and has followed the recommendations set forth by SAI as evidenced in the Recommendation section of this finding. 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.  OMES ensured that the subrecipient agreement included 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) executed an updated 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.  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 in place 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 conducted bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and reviewed documentation provided by CFO to ensure all ERA projects were eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO exercised the proper oversight over their subrecipients and spending. Anticipated Completion Date Completed Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek
Finding Number 2024-014 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) partially concurs with these findings. • OMES disagrees that they had s...
Finding Number 2024-014 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) EMERGENCY RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (ERA) AL #21.019 Planned Corrective Action Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) partially concurs with these findings. • OMES disagrees that they had sufficient and timely notice to make full corrective actions prior to this FY2024 audit for the following reasons: the FY2021 State auditor & Inspector (SAI) audit was released four days prior to the beginning of FY2024, the FY2022 SAI audit was released near the end of FY2025, and the FY2023 audit was released in FY2026; therefore, OMES could not take corrective action prior to the FY2024 audit began. At the beginning of FY2025, OMES began corrective measures as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. • OMES acknowledges OMES subrecipient monitoring process lacked the strength and consistency to ensure subrecipients established and maintained effective internal control. However, OMES has taken steps to correct these findings and follow the recommendations set forth by SAI as noted in SAI’s Condition and Context in this finding. 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.  OMES ensured that the subrecipient agreement included 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) executed an updated 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.  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 in place 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, OMESGMO conducted bi-weekly monitoring meetings with CFO and reviewed documentation provided by CFO to ensure all ERA projects were eligible under the ERA guidelines and that CFO exercised the proper oversight over their subrecipients and spending. Anticipated Completion Date Completed Responsible Contact Person Brandy Manek
Finding Number 2024-094 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 97.036 – Disaster Grants – Public Assistance Planned Corrective Action To address this finding, OEM will strengthen its review procedures for the SEFA by implementing a documented review process to verify the ac...
Finding Number 2024-094 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 97.036 – Disaster Grants – Public Assistance Planned Corrective Action To address this finding, OEM will strengthen its review procedures for the SEFA by implementing a documented review process to verify the accuracy and completeness of information provided by ABS. OEM will coordinate with ABS to obtain and retain sufficient supporting documentation for amounts reported on the SEFA and will work with ABS to resolve any discrepancies identified during the review process. In addition, OEM will ensure staff responsible for reviewing the SEFA receive additional guidance and training on SEFA reporting requirements. These actions are intended to improve the accuracy and reliability of future SEFA reporting and strengthen compliance with applicable federal requirements. Anticipated Completion Date SFY26 Reporting Period Responsible Contact Person Brianna Thomas
Finding Number 2024-093 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 97.036 – Disaster Grants – Public Assistance Planned Corrective Action Management acknowledges risk assessments were not performed in SFY24. Going forward, OEM will conduct risk assessments that are an annual re...
Finding Number 2024-093 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 97.036 – Disaster Grants – Public Assistance Planned Corrective Action Management acknowledges risk assessments were not performed in SFY24. Going forward, OEM will conduct risk assessments that are an annual review for all open projects and a monthly review for any new applicants. They will involve feedback from both the subrecipient and OEM’s data and is completed in EMGrants. Anyone has the ability to see the applicant risk rating on the applicant homepage in the system. While there was a grant wide extension for period of performance, management acknowledges the applicants identified by SAI did not request time extensions for their specific project and therefore, did not meet period of performance requirements. OEM will implement procedures to ensure applicants meet period of performance deadlines and have proper time extensions documented when required. Anticipated Completion Date 6/30/2025 9/27/2026 Responsible Contact Person Abby Anderson Sofia Checketts
Finding Number 2024-067 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action OKDHS agrees that additional review procedures would have strengthened controls over the Workforce Support Grant payment approval process and may have prevented th...
Finding Number 2024-067 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action OKDHS agrees that additional review procedures would have strengthened controls over the Workforce Support Grant payment approval process and may have prevented the issuance of payments to individuals who did not meet all eligibility requirements at the time of application. The agency concurs that two Workforce Support Grant payments were issued to individuals whose employment termination dates preceded the application date. As a result, the individuals did not meet the program eligibility requirements for receipt of the workforce bonus payment. Upon identification of the issue, OKDHS reviewed the circumstances surrounding the payments and initiated appropriate corrective actions. The agency has evaluated the affected payments and will pursue recovery of funds as appropriate. OKDHS has reviewed the eligibility verification process associated with Workforce Support Grant payments and has implemented additional procedures designed to strengthen verification of employment status prior to payment approval. These procedures include enhanced review of available employment records and validation of eligibility information submitted as part of the application process. Additionally, OKDHS will continue recovery efforts related to identified ineligible payments and will monitor compliance with updated review procedures to reduce the likelihood of similar errors occurring in future provider assistance initiatives. Anticipated Completion Date N/A Responsible Contact Person Kayla Urtz
Finding Number 2024-033 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action The Agency agrees that additional oversight activities could have provided greater visibility into provider use of Stabilization Payments and has incorporated less...
Finding Number 2024-033 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action The Agency agrees that additional oversight activities could have provided greater visibility into provider use of Stabilization Payments and has incorporated lessons learned into subsequent provider assistance initiatives through enhanced monitoring, documentation expectations, and recovery procedures for confirmed noncompliance. However, OKDHS respectfully disagrees with several conclusions contained within the finding, including the characterization of questioned costs and the extrapolation of provider-specific exceptions across the broader population of Stabilization Payment recipients. The Child Care Stabilization Payment Program was established under the American Rescue Plan Act to provide emergency financial assistance intended to stabilize the child care industry during the COVID-19 public health emergency. Stabilization Payments were awarded using an approved payment methodology based upon provider eligibility, licensed capacity, and applicable STAR level. As previously communicated to the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), OKDHS does not concur with the assertion that the monitoring activities identified by SAI were required under the Stabilization Payment Program. The applicable Notice of Award specifically excluded significant portions of the traditional federal post-award administrative requirements, including most post-award requirements and the federal cost principles. Accordingly, OKDHS does not believe the Stabilization Payment Program should be evaluated using the same oversight framework applicable to traditional reimbursement or discretionary grant programs. Providers receiving Stabilization Payments were required to certify that funds would be used only for allowable purposes established by the American Rescue Plan Act and applicable program guidance and were responsible for maintaining supporting documentation for those expenditures. When information indicating potential misuse of funds is identified, OKDHS reviews the circumstances and pursues recovery actions as appropriate. While documentation obtained from providers may assist in evaluating provider compliance, the absence of documentation during the audit does not, by itself, establish that Stabilization Payments were improperly awarded or expended for unallowable purposes. OKDHS also respectfully disagrees with the treatment of unsupported expenditures as equivalent to known unallowable expenditures. Unsupported expenditures reflect circumstances in which documentation was unavailable for audit review and do not establish that funds were expended for unallowable purposes. As a result, the Agency believes the questioned costs materially overstate actual federal exposure. Finally, OKDHS does not concur that provider-specific exceptions may be extrapolated across the broader provider population. The exceptions identified by SAI reflect individual provider documentation and spending practices rather than a common agency-level eligibility, payment methodology, or processing error. Accordingly, the Agency does not believe the audit evidence supports extrapolating these exceptions to estimate program-wide questioned costs. Although the Stabilization Payment Program has concluded, OKDHS has strengthened oversight of subsequent provider assistance initiatives by enhancing monitoring procedures, documentation expectations, and recovery processes for confirmed provider noncompliance. The Agency will continue reviewing cases identified through audit activities and pursue recovery of confirmed unallowable expenditures in accordance with applicable federal requirements. Anticipated Completion Date N/A Responsible Contact Person Kayla Urtz
Finding Number 2024-032 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action The Oklahoma Department of Human Services (OKDHS) partially concurs with this finding. The Agency agrees opportunities existed to strengthen oversight of Child Car...
Finding Number 2024-032 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action The Oklahoma Department of Human Services (OKDHS) partially concurs with this finding. The Agency agrees opportunities existed to strengthen oversight of Child Care provider monitoring activities and has implemented corrective actions to enhance monitoring procedures, documentation, supervisory oversight, Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) verification, and monitoring during non-traditional operating hours. Child Care Services has resumed full QRIS monitoring, implemented precertification visits, enhanced monitoring documentation, strengthened supervisory review, expanded staff training, and continues to refer suspected fraud or misuse of program funds to the Office of Inspector General for investigation. The Agency also recognizes the analytical techniques utilized during the audit as a valuable opportunity to strengthen its detective control environment. OKDHS is evaluating implementation of similar data analytics as part of its routine monitoring activities to better identify providers that warrant additional review. These analytics will enhance oversight by directing monitoring resources toward higher-risk providers while complementing existing licensing and investigative processes. This will become possible to implement shortly with the implementation of the new childcare invoicing system. However, the Agency respectfully disagrees with the questioned costs. The finding identifies a weakness in one component of the Agency's oversight framework but does not demonstrate that the underlying provider payments failed to satisfy applicable federal or state reimbursement requirements. Licensing monitoring is intended to evaluate compliance with health and safety requirements, while payment allowability is supported through separate controls, including child eligibility determinations, authorized rate assignments, electronic attendance records, and automated payment system edits. The audit did not identify deficiencies in these payment controls or demonstrate that providers receiving the questioned payments failed to meet the requirements governing reimbursement. The Agency also respectfully disagrees with the report's characterization of the non-traditional hours payment methodology. Non-traditional hours enhancements are payable only when established eligibility, attendance, and reimbursement requirements have been satisfied in accordance with the approved Child Care Provider Rate Schedule. Accordingly, the Agency does not believe the hypothetical examples contained in the finding accurately reflect how non-traditional hours payments are authorized or processed. While the Agency agrees that strengthening monitoring activities and expanding analytical oversight will further reduce program risk, the presence of analytical risk indicators or the absence of a monitoring visit during nontraditional hours does not, by itself, establish that otherwise supported expenditures are unsupported or unallowable. The Agency believes the audit appropriately identified opportunities to strengthen preventive and detective controls but does not believe the evidence demonstrates that the questioned costs represent improper expenditures. Anticipated Completion Date In Progress Responsible Contact Person Kayla Urtz
Finding Number 2024-031 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action OKDHS agrees that certain administrative errors identified through program reviews and audit activities, including confirmed payment calculation errors, eligibilit...
Finding Number 2024-031 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.575 – CCDF Cluster Planned Corrective Action OKDHS agrees that certain administrative errors identified through program reviews and audit activities, including confirmed payment calculation errors, eligibility determination issues, attendance verification deficiencies, and provider noncompliance, require corrective action. The Agency has initiated reviews and recovery efforts for confirmed overpayments and instances of provider noncompliance and continues to strengthen monitoring, award calculations, documentation requirements, and recovery procedures for provider assistance programs. However, OKDHS respectfully disagrees with several conclusions contained within this finding, including the characterization of questioned costs, the treatment of unsupported expenditures as unallowable expenditures, the attribution of provider actions directly to the Agency, the extrapolation methodology, and conclusions regarding the overall design and effectiveness of the Desert Grant Program. The Desert Grant Program was developed using emergency American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to rapidly increase child care capacity in underserved areas of Oklahoma within federally established obligation and liquidation deadlines. As previously communicated to the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the applicable Notice of Award expressly excluded substantial portions of the traditional federal grant administration requirements, including most pre-award requirements, most post-award requirements, and the federal cost principles. Accordingly, OKDHS does not concur that the program should be evaluated using the same framework applicable to traditional federal grant programs or that retrospective disagreement with the program's design, funding methodology, or implementation strategy constitutes evidence of noncompliance. The Agency further does not concur with the treatment of unsupported expenditures as equivalent to unallowable expenditures. Providers receiving Desert Grant funding certified that grant funds would be used only for allowable purposes, agreed to maintain supporting documentation, and acknowledged their obligation to repay funds if they failed to comply with program requirements. While the absence of documentation during audit testing may warrant additional review, it does not independently establish that funds were expended for unallowable purposes. Likewise, the closure of a provider or other post-award business outcomes do not, by themselves, establish misuse of grant funds or Agency noncompliance. The Agency continues to evaluate these cases individually and pursue recovery when the facts demonstrate noncompliance with the terms of the award. OKDHS also respectfully disagrees with conclusions regarding the overall effectiveness or sustainability of the Desert Grant Program. The audit contains numerous observations regarding alternative funding methodologies, incremental payment structures, business planning considerations, sustainability assumptions, and other program design decisions. While these observations may identify opportunities for future program improvement, they represent differences in program design philosophy rather than evidence that the Agency failed to administer the federal award in accordance with applicable requirements. The Agency does not believe retrospective assessments regarding how the program could have been structured differently constitute a basis for questioned costs. Finally, OKDHS does not concur with the extrapolation methodology reflected in this finding. The questioned costs combine fundamentally different exception types, including confirmed administrative errors, unsupported expenditures, provider documentation deficiencies, provider closures, provider spending decisions, and observations regarding program design. These categories arise from different causes, involve different responsibilities, and require different corrective actions. Accordingly, OKDHS does not believe combining these distinct exception types into a single projected questioned cost accurately reflects actual noncompliance or federal exposure associated with the program. Although the Agency respectfully disagrees with significant portions of the finding, OKDHS has strengthened oversight of provider assistance initiatives by enhancing award calculations, documentation expectations, provider certifications, monitoring activities, analytical review procedures, and recovery processes. The Agency will continue reviewing Desert Grant awards, recovering confirmed overpayments and unallowable expenditures where appropriate, and incorporating lessons learned into future program implementation. Anticipated Completion Date On Going Responsible Contact Person Kayla Urtz
Finding Number 2024-060 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.658 - LIHEAP Planned Corrective Action OKDHS concurs that the control environment in place during the period reviewed did not provide adequate segregation of duties and allowed incompatible responsibilities t...
Finding Number 2024-060 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) 93.658 - LIHEAP Planned Corrective Action OKDHS concurs that the control environment in place during the period reviewed did not provide adequate segregation of duties and allowed incompatible responsibilities to be concentrated within the program area. OKDHS takes the identified fraudulent activity and associated control weaknesses seriously. The fraudulent activity involved intentional actions by a former employee who was able to exploit excessive access and insufficient segregation between program administration, vendor maintenance, and payment-related processes. Upon identification of the suspected activity, OKDHS took action to remove the employee's access, terminate employment, and refer the matter for investigation and appropriate legal action. OKDHS continues to cooperate with investigative authorities regarding the full scope of the activity. In response, OKDHS is not limiting corrective action to additional review within the existing LIHEAP process. The Agency is redesigning the underlying business processes to separate program administration from vendor registration, vendor maintenance, contracting, financial reporting, and payment processing. The corrective actions described below are intended to establish independent controls across multiple organizational functions and reduce reliance on information prepared and controlled solely within the program area. Enhanced Financial Reporting and Oversight OKDHS Finance is working to obtain more detailed, transaction-level LIHEAP information to support independent financial oversight and reconciliation. Historically, Finance relied substantially on summarized information provided by the program area. The enhanced reporting structure is intended to provide Finance with greater visibility into underlying LIHEAP transactions and improve its ability to independently reconcile, review, and analyze program expenditures. This increased access to detailed information will also support the development of exception reporting and other analytical procedures designed to identify unusual payment activity, vendor activity, or other anomalies requiring additional review. Transition of LIHEAP Payments to PeopleSoft OKDHS is working with its technical teams to transition LIHEAP payment processing to PeopleSoft. This change will integrate LIHEAP payments into the Agency's established financial system and associated financial controls rather than maintaining a separate program controlled vendor and payment process. Under the redesigned process, LIHEAP providers will be required to complete the applicable statewide vendor registration process before receiving payment. Vendor establishment and maintenance, including changes to vendor information, will therefore be subject to controls outside of the LIHEAP program area. The transition will eliminate the program area's ability to independently maintain the vendor information used to facilitate LIHEAP payments and will provide greater segregation between program eligibility and benefit authorization responsibilities and the vendor establishment and payment functions. Centralized Vendor Registration and Maintenance As part of the transition to PeopleSoft, the existing AFS vendor-maintenance process will be replaced by the statewide vendor registration and maintenance process. LIHEAP program staff will no longer independently control the establishment or maintenance of the vendor records used for payment. This change is intended to ensure that vendor creation and modification are performed through an independent process and are appropriately separated from program functions responsible for determining eligibility and authorizing benefits. Formal Provider Contracting OKDHS Procurement is working to establish contracts with LIHEAP providers. Formalizing provider relationships through the procurement and contracting process will establish additional independent review and documentation before providers participate in the program and receive payments. The contracting process will also provide a defined mechanism for establishing provider responsibilities, maintaining provider information, and addressing compliance or performance concerns. Strengthened Segregation of Duties Collectively, these changes are designed to establish segregation across the major components of the LIHEAP process: • AFS/LIHEAP program staff will remain responsible for program administration and applicable eligibility and benefit determinations; • Statewide vendor registration and financial system processes will control vendor establishment and maintenance; • Procurement will oversee the formal contracting process with participating providers; and • Finance will have increased access to detailed transaction information to support independent financial oversight, reconciliation, and analysis. This structure is intended to prevent a single employee or organizational unit from controlling the program, vendor, and payment functions necessary to initiate and conceal improper transactions. System Controls and Monitoring As the redesigned processes are implemented, OKDHS will continue to evaluate system controls, access permissions, exception reporting, and data analytics to identify unusual vendor or payment activity. The transition to centralized vendor registration, PeopleSoft payment processing, formal provider contracting, and enhanced financial reporting will provide additional opportunities for independent review and monitoring. OKDHS will also continue to cooperate with OIG and other appropriate investigative and legal authorities regarding the identified fraudulent activity and will pursue appropriate recovery and corrective actions based on the results of those proceedings. These actions represent a significant redesign of the LIHEAP control environment and are intended to address the underlying conditions that allowed the fraudulent activity to occur and remain undetected. By distributing responsibility for program administration, vendor registration and maintenance, contracting, financial oversight, and payment processing across independent functions, OKDHS is establishing a more sustainable control structure designed to reduce the risk of similar fraudulent activity in the future. Anticipated Completion Date In Progress Responsible Contact Person Kayla Urtz
« 1 64 65 67 68 391 »