Corrective Action Plans

Audit Finding 2025-001 - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Corrective Action Plan The City will revise its procurement policy and procedures to address all relevant requirements under Uniform Guidance, specifically: . Incorporate written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest for employees involved in procurement, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318(c)(1). . Include written policies and procedures requiring affirmative steps to solicit and consider participation by small, minority, women-owned, veteran-owned, and labor surplus area businesses, as specified in 2 CFR 200.321(b). . Add explicit provisions to require sufficient and detailed recordkeeping for all procurement transactions funded with federal awards, addressing the requirements of 2 CFR 200.318(i). Persons responsible for corrective action Jamie Rhodes, Administrative Services Manager Branden Dross, City Administrator Corrective action completion date June 30, 2026

FINDING 2025-002 Finding Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster-Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Contact Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Missy Schultheis Contact Phone Number and Email Address: 812-354-8478 mschultheis@pcsc.k12.in.us Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with the finding. Description of Corrective Action Plan: The School Corporation will review and update the existing procurement policy to ensure it clearly outlines the procedures for different purchasing methods including the specific thresholds. We will establish a procedure requiring the retention of all documentation supporting procurement decisions. We will develop a process to verify that vendors/contractors are not suspended or debarred by any federal or state agency prior to entering into a "covered transaction" or contract. Anticipated Completion Date: This be implemented in the 2025-2026 school year and will continue for future years.

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (Concerning Finding 2025-001) Contact Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Meghan Butts, Executive Director Corrective Action: The Upper Valley Lake Sunapee Regional Planning Commission will take the following actions to address finding 2025-001: We will revise our existing procurement policy to align with the current requirements outlined in 2 CFR 200. Anticipated Completion Date: February 11th, 2026

The District Cafeteria Manager, Melanie Pardini, corrected this procedure for fiscal year 2025-26 and has the process in place going forward for each fiscal year.

Condition: The School District's internal controls did not effectively identify the required formal solicitation. The School District did not utilize the appropriate competitive procurement methods and did not retain suspended or debarred verification documentation. Planned Corrective Action: The School District will ensure that the proper procurement methods are adhered to, prior to executing future contracts. This includes also reviewing to ensure that vendors are not suspended or debarred, prior to awarding the contract. To accomplish this, the School District will use their grant budget process as a control for identifying the population of applicable expenditures that will be subject to procurement compliance requirements for federal programs. Contact person responsible for corrective action: Kyle Jen, Chief Financial and Operations Officer Anticipated Completion Date: 6/30/2026

Finding 2025-001 Lack of Internal Control Over Procurement Name of Contact: Rayna Bowdre Corrective Action: The District will ensure all procurements follow Board polices relating to bids and procurement, including written documentation for sole source and procurements and exemptions. Proposed Completion Date: December 31, 2025.

Condition: The School District's internal controls did not effectively identify all of the required components necessary in formal solicitation documents for food service/cost reimbursable contracts and when using a third party entity (e.g., consortium) and did not utilize competitive procurement methods. Planned Corrective Action: The School District is revising its food service procurement documents to explicitly include all required contract provisions under the Uniform Guidance. The School District is also incorporating recent interpretations and guidance from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), as communicated through MDE, particularly regarding cooperative purchasing and pricing structures for federal compliance. These actions are intended to strengthen the procurement controls to ensure all future food service contracts meet the compliance requirements of the Uniform Guidance and USDA regulations. Contact person responsible for corrective action: Danielle Jacobs, Director of Business Services Anticipated Completion Date: 8/15/2025

We acknowledge the audit finding and agree that, for the two vendors identified, documentation of suspension and debarment verification was not completed or retained in accordance with proper internal controls for our federal programs. This was an oversight in our procurement documentation process and not an intentional omission. Neither vendor had any exclusions based on the SAM.gov database record. Since becoming aware of this issue, the organization is in the midst of implementing the following corrective actions to strengthen compliance with suspension and debarment requirements: (1) Revised Procurement Procedures- We will update our written procurement policies and procedures to explicitly require and document suspension and debarment checks prior to the execution of any contract using federal funds. This includes checking the federal SAM.gov database or obtaining a signed certification from the vendor, as permitted. (2) Standardized Documentation- We will create a standardized checklist that must be completed and filed in the procurement record for each vendor before payment of federal funds. This form documents the date, verification method, and staff member responsible. (3) Staff Training- All staff involved in procurement and accounts payable will complete training on federal procurement requirements, including suspension and debarment verification. This training will be repeated annually and upon onboarding of new staff. (4) Internal Control Review- A secondary review step has been added. Before any payment of federal funds is processed, our finance team will verify that the suspension and debarment check is on file. This dual review adds an additional layer of assurance.

We agree with auditor's comments, and the following actions have or will be taken to ensure the procurement of goods and services for the nutrition services department follows all applicable steps according to Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR) sections 200.317 -200.327; Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR), parts 210 and 220; and all applicable state and local rules: 1. During the school year 2024/2025, changes were made to staff to allow for additional oversight. A Procurement Specialist reporting directly to the Director of Purchasing was added to staff in lieu of a Buyer that had previously reported to the Director of Nutrition Services. This move allowed for an additional step to ensure proper procurement is happening. 2. All purchasing methods, including Micropurchase, Simplified Acquisition, and Formal, will be followed in accordance with all applicable regulations, in line with RUSD's written procurement procedures. 3. Any noncompetitive procurement will only occur if the conditions outlined in applicable regulations are met and sufficient evidence and documentation is received and retained, including participating in performing due diligence to ascertain whether a single source document is accurate from any given vendor. 4. In addition documented annual training will take place for all staff involved in the procurement process. This procedure includes a review and annual update of procurement procedures, if applicable, and an acknowledgement of the nutrition services code of conduct in regards to purchasing. Please reach out to us with any questions.

Management will update written procurement policy that conforms with the Uniform Guidance and implement procedures and control processes to retain documentation supporting compliance with major federal program compliance requirements regarding suspension and debarment. Our HUD program currently checks certificates of occupancy through the City of Rochester and Towns to ensure that the properties do not have violations. Moving forward, we will also check new landlords and or contractors through the central contractor registry to be following federal requirements regarding suspension and debarment.

Condition 1: The Ministry disagrees with this finding. The revised procurement threshold of $25,000 to $50,000 became effective upon adoption of the Procurement Code of 2023 on October 1, 2023, as provided under Section 119(c) Small Purchases. A Regulation is not necessary to support this change. All other provisions of the Procurement Code remain in force and continue to govern procurement activities. Furthermore, an amended Procurement Code was endorsed by Cabinet in March 2026 and will be introduced to Parliament during the August session. Upon its adoption, the corresponding Regulation will be formally issued. Condition 2, #1: Except for items #1, #5, #6, #7, #8 & #9, the Ministry of Finance agrees with the finding and will ensure that vendor selection and the justification for the selected vendor are clearly documented in BRVs and TMV to demonstrate compliance with procurement requirements. Condition 2, #2: The Ministry agrees with the finding. Competitive bidding should be undertaken when a multi-year contract expires. Condition 3: At the start of a new fiscal year, the MOF Compliance team will perform an annual screening of all Funder/Client (Supplier) in Bisan against the SAM.gov list of debarred/suspended entities.

Condition 1. The Ministry disagrees with this finding. The revised procurement threshold of $25,000 to $50,000 became effective upon adoption of the Procurement Code of 2023 on October 1, 2023, as provided under Section 119(c) Small Purchases. A Regulation is not necessary to support this change. All other provisions of the Procurement Code remained in force and continue to govern procurement activities. Furthermore, an amended Procurement Code was endorsed by Cabinet in March 2026 and will be introduced to Parliament during the August session. Upon its adoption, the corresponding Regulation will be formally issued. Condition 2. Except for items #1 & #8, the Ministry of Finance agrees with the finding and will ensure that vendor selection and the justification for the selected vendor are clearly documented in all TMVs and BRVs to demonstrate compliance with procurement requirements. Condition 3. Same response as Finding No.: 2024-014 - Condition 3

Condition 1. The Ministry disagrees with this finding. The revised procurement threshold of $25,000 to $50,000 became effective upon adoption of the Procurement Code of 2023 on October 1, 2023, as provided under Section 119(c) Small Purchases. A Regulation is not necessary to support this change. All other provisions of the Procurement Code remained in force and continue to govern procurement activities. Furthermore, an amended Procurement Code was endorsed by Cabinet in March 2026 and will be introduced to Parliament during the August session. Upon its adoption, the corresponding Regulation will be formally issued. Condition 2-1. Items 1-2,7 The Ministry disagrees with the findings. All three purchase orders were supported by the required documentation at the time of review and prior to the issuance of the purchase orders. Items 3-6 The Ministry intends to revisit the existing travel policy and update accordingly. Item 8 The vendor was directly selected as the authorized distributor & service provider for medical equipment & supplies in the Marshall Islands. Going forward, the Ministry will ensure a signed justification letter from the Head of Department is attached to support sole-source procurements. Item 9 The Ministry will return requisitions with insufficient supporting documentation and will conduct a procurement training in October 2026 to reinforce procurement requirements. Condition 2-2 Item 1 The Ministry now requires a Request for Quotation (RFQ) form to be submitted as evidence of compliance with competitive procurement requirements. Items 2-3 The Ministry disagrees with the findings. Supporting documentations can be found on PR 23/00023360 (#2) & PR 23/00001990 (#3) Item 4 Effective in FY2025, the Enewetak/Ujelang Local Government operations were transferred to the Ministry of Finance. As a result, all procurement activities are now processed through the Ministry and are required to comply with the applicable procurement code, established regulations, and the Ministry's internal procurement policies and procedures, thereby strengthening oversight and ensuring compliance. Condition 2-3 1-7 The Ministry now requires a Request for Quotation (RFQ) form to be submitted as evidence of compliance with competitive procurement requirements 8 The Ministry of Finance will require that the PSS Hot Lunch Vendor selection Report (endorsed by the Bid Committee) be submitted with the initial payment to the Hot Lunch Vendors. 9 Once the DLS contract expires, it will be advertised for competitive bidding. Condition 3 At the start of a new fiscal year, the MOF Compliance team will perform an annual screening of all Funder/Client (Supplier) in Bisan against the SAM.gov list of debarred/suspended entities.

Views of Responsible Officials: Management acknowledges the finding and agrees with the recommendation. RoboNation recognizes the importance of maintaining complete procurement records for Federally funded transactions, including documentation of vendor selection, procurement method, basis for price, sole-source justification when applicable, and suspension/debarment verification. Once RoboNation was made aware of the deficiency during the 2023 audit, action was immediately taken and SAM.gov checks were completed in 2025 for all applicable vendors, not only new vendors. Management will further strengthen its procurement and suspension/debarment procedures by implementing a formal checklist requiring documentation of vendor selection, procurement method, basis for price, sole-source justification when applicable, and SAM.gov screening prior to contract execution or payment. Management will also ensure that supporting documentation is retained in the applicable procurement files and will provide comprehensive training and continued guidance to staff involved in Federally funded procurement to support consistent application of these procedures.

Condition During our testing, we noted that the Educational Foundation's written procurement policy did not incorporate all applicable Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Specifically, the policy did not adequately address procurement methods and dollar thresholds, suspension and debarment verification, and required contract provisions. As a result, the Association's written policy was not fully consistent with the requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 Corrective Action Plan Corrective Action Planned: Management acknowledges the auditor's recommendation regarding the enhancement of the Association's procurement policies to ensure full compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (2 CFR §§ 200.317–200.327). LeadingAge Michigan has initiated a comprehensive review of its existing procurement policies and procedures to ensure they fully incorporate all applicable federal procurement requirements. The revised policy will include provisions addressing procurement methods based on established dollar thresholds, competition requirements, documentation and record retention standards, contractor responsibility determinations, suspension and debarment verification, conflict of interest requirements, and all required federal contract provisions applicable to federally funded awards. Management will also establish standardized procurement documentation and review procedures to promote consistent application of the policy and to ensure compliance is adequately documented for all applicable purchases funded through federal awards. In addition, personnel responsible for procurement and grant administration will receive training on the updated procurement policy and the requirements of 2 CFR Part 200. This training will emphasize proper procurement planning, documentation, competitive purchasing requirements, and compliance with federal regulations to ensure consistent implementation throughout the organization. Management is committed to maintaining strong internal controls over federal awards and will periodically review procurement practices to ensure ongoing compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Name(s) of Contact Person(s) Responsible for Corrective Action: David Herbel, President and CEO Dalton Herbel, Vice President of Public Policy Kelly Price, Member Success Coordinator Anticipated Completion Date: 9/30/2026

Finding Number 2024-096 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: Multiple Federal Program name: Multiple Planned Corrective Action The Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES), Central Purchasing Division, respectfully submits this response regarding the use of federal funds in connection with statewide contracts established through the Rolling Request for Proposal (RFP) pilot program. Since the audit period, OMES has implemented significant enhancements to its statewide contracting processes to further strengthen documentation, oversight, and compliance with both state procurement law and Uniform Guidance. These enhancements also address the recommendations identified in this finding. Compliance with Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200) OMES affirms that procurements conducted under the Rolling RFP pilot program were performed in accordance with applicable provisions of Uniform Guidance and the Oklahoma Central Purchasing Act, including but not limited to 2 CFR §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.404. Pursuant to 2 CFR §200.317, OMES follows the same procurement policies and procedures for federal funds as are used for non-federal funds. The Rolling RFP model did not eliminate competitive procurement. Rather, it modified the timing of vendor qualification by allowing qualified vendors to compete for inclusion on the statewide contract throughout the open solicitation period while agencies continued to conduct project specific Statements of Work under those contracts. Consistent with 2 CFR §200.318(a), OMES maintains oversight to ensure that procurements are conducted in a manner providing full and open competition, and that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts. The Rolling RFP model increased vendor participation and competition by allowing qualified suppliers to submit responses on a continuous basis, thereby expanding the competitive pool available to agencies. Further, in accordance with 2 CFR §200.404, OMES ensures that costs are reasonable by requiring evaluation of pricing at both the contract award level and the transaction level. Vendors are vetted through a formal evaluation process, and Statements of Work (SOWs) are developed with agency and subject matter expert involvement to confirm that pricing reflects what a prudent person would incur under similar circumstances. Vendor pricing remained subject to procurement review, agency evaluation, statement-of-work negotiations, market comparisons, procurement approval processes, and applicable fair and reasonable price determinations required under state procurement law and Uniform Guidance. Additionally, OMES Central Purchasing operates under formalized internal procedures, including its Framework Agreement Creation Standard Operating Procedure, which explicitly requires adherence to Uniform Guidance. The SOP mandates vendor vetting, competitive evaluation, including the contract clauses required by 2 CFR §200.327 and Appendix II to Part 200, and documented evaluation methodologies to ensure transparency, consistency, and compliance in all framework (statewide) agreements. In addition, OMES has adopted the first-ever Oklahoma Procurement Manual, which establishes standardized statewide guidance for procurement planning, contract administration, federal grant compliance, documentation standards, and competition requirements. The manual reinforces Uniform Guidance requirements and provides agencies with consistent statewide procurement procedures for acquisitions involving both state and federal funds. Program Structure and Administrative Considerations The Rolling RFP pilot program functioned as a framework agreement structure, wherein suppliers were pre-qualified through a competitive solicitation process and agencies subsequently issued project-specific Statements of Work. This approach was designed to align with allowable procurement methods under Uniform Guidance. OMES recognizes, however, that the continuous open nature of the solicitation created administrative challenges and increased complexity in maintaining consistent documentation and oversight as vendor participation scaled. Documentation and Administrative Enhancements Although the pilot program did not have a standalone written procedure specific to Rolling RFPs during the audit period, it operated under existing procurement statutes, standardized solicitation procedures, evaluation documentation, internal operating procedures, and statewide contract templates. Documentation practices have since been further standardized and consolidated. While the program operated under existing procurement statutes, solicitation procedures, evaluation documentation, and internal operating practices, OMES has since implemented additional written procedures, standardized documentation requirements, and centralized guidance to improve consistency, transparency, and ease of audit review. These enhancements strengthen an already competitive procurement process by providing more comprehensive documentation of procurement decisions and contract administration. Program Closeout Following a comprehensive review, the State Purchasing Director formally determined that the Rolling RFP pilot program would be closed effective July 1, 2024. All resulting contracts have transitioned to standard statewide contract structures, which incorporate defined solicitation periods and controlled opportunities for vendor participation through supplemental solicitations. Because the pilot program has been discontinued and replaced with traditional statewide contracting methods, legislative recommendations regarding continuation of the pilot are no longer necessary. Remedial Actions Aligned to Uniform Guidance In response to audit observations and in furtherance of compliance with Uniform Guidance, OMES is implementing the following corrective actions: 1. Enhanced Competition at the Transaction Level (2 CFR §200.319) For all service-based procurements utilizing statewide contracts, agencies will be required to conduct a documented second level of competition (e.g., multiple quotes, mini-bids, or competitive SOW processes) to ensure full and open competition at the task/order level. 2. Structured Re-Competition of Vendor Pools OMES will replace continuously open solicitations with time-bound supplemental RFPs, ensuring periodic recompetition and maintaining a manageable and auditable procurement environment. 3. Strengthened Cost Analysis and Documentation (2 CFR §200.324) OMES will reinforce requirements for price analysis and cost reasonableness determinations at both the contract and transaction levels, with enhanced documentation standards to support audit review. 4. Formalized Policies and Procedures (2 CFR §200.318(a)) OMES Central Purchasing is dedicated to documenting all procurement processes, particularly those impacting purchases using federal funds. This includes comprehensive SOPs, required contract attachments (including federal terms), and standardized evaluation and recordkeeping practices. Specifically, we have created SOPs for pilot programs and for statewide contracts generally. While comprehensive written procedures specific to the Rolling RFP pilot program had not yet been consolidated into a standalone procedure during the audit period, the program operated under existing procurement statutes, statewide solicitation procedures, evaluation documentation, internal operating procedures, and standardized contract documents. OMES has also implemented standardized procurement templates and required federal contract attachments that incorporate the clauses required under 2 CFR §200.327 and Appendix II to Part 200. These standardized documents promote consistent compliance across procurements utilizing federal funds. 5. Statewide Procurement Manual OMES has recently released the first-ever Oklahoma Procurement Manual, which provides statewide guidance to agencies and includes a dedicated section on federal grant compliance. The manual reinforces Uniform Guidance requirements, including competition, cost reasonableness, and documentation standards. 6. Ongoing Oversight and Training OMES will continue to provide training, procurement memoranda, and guidance to agencies to ensure consistent understanding and application of federal requirements, while reinforcing that subrecipients are responsible for compliance with the specific terms of their federal awards. Anticipated Completion Date Sine Die Responsible Contact Person Amanda Otis, State Purchasing Director for the State of Oklahoma

Finding Number 2024-075 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.027 Federal Program name: Coronavirus State And Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) Planned Corrective Action Office of Management and Enterprise Services – Grants Management Office Response: OMES-GMO respectfully disagrees with several conclusions contained in this finding. The finding concludes that the transfer of CSLFRF funds to the twenty-two (22) state agencies does not create a subrecipient relationship because OMES and the agencies are part of the same State of Oklahoma Single Audit. OMESGMO respectfully disagrees with this conclusion. Pursuant to 62 O.S. § 255.1, “The Legislature authorizes the Office of Management and Enterprise Services to manage federal APRA funds by requiring all receiving entities known as subrecipients to sign a grant agreement. Any entity, without exception, including state agencies receiving an appropriation from the Statewide Recovery Fund or a similar fund with federal requirement attached to its use shall have a fully executed grant agreement in place within sixty (60) days after enactment of any legislation that appropriates funding from the Statewide Recovery Fund of the State Treasury created in Section 1, Chapter 319, O.S.L. 2022, and be in compliance with such agreement before a disbursement can be made.” Under this statutory framework, each agency enters into a Grant Agreement with OMES and is subject to grant-specific terms and conditions, reporting requirements, monitoring, and ongoing oversight. Accordingly, OMES has administered the CSLFRF grant in accordance with state law and consistent with its responsibilities as the State's designated pass-through entity since the inception of the program. The authorization from the Oklahoma State Legislature has provided for a much more extensive oversight of the state entity subrecipients than would exist if OMES followed the model suggested by SAI, as OMES would not be subject to the subrecipient monitoring Federal regulation under 2 CFR § 200.332, for these state entities. By following the state law passed by the Legislature, OMES monitors each state entity subrecipient, and in turn, has signed a grant agreement with these state entity subrecipients that requires them to do the same for any of their subrecipients that are administering projects set out specifically by the State Legislature through appropriation bills. OMES requests SAI to revisit the position that these state entities are not OMES’ subrecipients and consider the implications that if OMES were to treat the state entities as non-subrecipients, OMES would be in direct defiance of state law. OMES-GMO also disagrees with the conclusion that sufficient supporting documentation was unavailable for several of the transactions identified in this finding. OMESGMO is committed to strong documentation standards, reimbursement review procedures, and project oversight to ensure continued compliance with applicable federal and state requirements. Despite OMES-GMO’s request to be included in audit communication with the state entities, SAI’s documentation requests for the sampled expenditures were directed primarily to the individual agencies. Several agencies experienced staffing changes during the audit period, resulting in inconsistencies in responding to documentation requests and, in some instances, uncertainty regarding the specific information being requested by the auditors. In multiple cases, the supporting documentation ultimately existed and was available but was either maintained by OMES-GMO or inadvertently omitted from the agency's initial submission. If OMES-GMO was afforded the opportunity to submit or explain documentation maintained by its office before the finding was finalized, both the administering agency and OMES-GMO would have been able to provide a more complete record for evaluation and may have altered the conclusions reached for certain transactions. OMES-GMO has had recent conversations with SAI regarding this issue, and are encouraged by the willingness of SAI to be open to working with OMES-GMO to facilitate a different process for future audits that involves a coordinated with both the administering agency and OMES-GMO so that auditors have access to the complete record before audit conclusions are finalized. Agency Responses: Agency 025 – Oklahoma Military Department (OMD) OMD partially concurs with the finding regarding the level of supporting documentation submitted with the vendor's invoices for payment. However, the construction contracts in question were executed using Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) contract structures. Under these contracts, the contractor is responsible for maintaining all subcontractor invoices, material invoices, and supporting financial records associated with each progress payment. The contracts require these records to be retained for the applicable record retention period and made available for review by the agency, State, or federal government upon request. Agency 085 – Oklahoma Broadband Office (OBO) Broadband Mapping / Cross-Grant Expenditures The Oklahoma Broadband Office (OBO) requests the transactional detail associated with these findings to allow the agency to fully evaluate the questioned transactions. While OBO agrees that expenditures must be charged to the appropriate federal funding source and class fund, the office respectfully disagrees that the questioned expenditures represented unallowable supplementation of other federal awards. The contracts included shared deliverables necessary to complete the CSLFRF Broadband Mapping project. During contract administration, OBO identified billing discrepancies involving work performed under multiple grant programs. Following approximately eleven months of negotiations, OBO entered into a settlement agreement with the contractor that limited payment to services actually received and excluded services that were not performed. The resulting payments represented services provided under multiple funding sources and were processed together to accurately reflect work completed during FY2024. Procurement Finding – Lee Consulting Contract OBO concurs with the finding that services began prior to the execution of a purchase order for the April 2023 services. Upon identifying the issue, OBO completed the required ABS Form 009 Ratification Agreement to formally document the procurement exception and properly authorize payment. To prevent future occurrences, OBO has: • Hired a full-time General Counsel to oversee contract administration and procurement compliance. • Implemented a policy prohibiting execution of contracts or commencement of work until a purchase order has been fully approved and funds have been encumbered. • Provided procurement training to management and staff regarding Oklahoma encumbrance requirements. Agency 400 – Office of Juvenile Affairs (OJA) OJA partially concurs with the finding. The agency believes the purchase of a Keurig coffee maker and heater towers by Western Plains falls within the approved project scope for the purchase and installation of furniture, fixtures, and equipment. However, OJA acknowledges that decorative wall art purchased by Youth and Family Services of Hughes and Seminole Counties does not appear to fall within the approved project scope. Agency 452 – Oklahoma Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (ODMHSAS) ODMHSAS acknowledges the documentation and procurement concerns identified in the finding. Specifically, the agency recognizes that certain invoices lacked sufficient detail describing services performed and that one expenditure required ratification because services were obligated prior to encumbering funds. ODMHSAS agrees that federally funded expenditures should be supported by documentation demonstrating the services performed, the project purpose, and the relationship to the approved scope of work. ODMHSAS also agrees that obligations should not be incurred before a valid purchase order and encumbrance have been established. Agency 619 – Oklahoma Health Care Workers Training Commission (HWTC) During the period associated with the questioned expenditure, the Care Providers program submitted a significant volume of supporting documentation with each reimbursement request, often consisting of 500 to 1,000 pages transmitted through multiple emails over several days. In some instances, the documentation was not organized sequentially, making it difficult to efficiently compile and review the complete reimbursement package. As staff assembled documentation received through multiple transmissions, a portion of the supporting documentation was inadvertently omitted from the reimbursement file maintained by the agency. Consequently, the complete documentation package was not included in the materials submitted to OMES-GMO with the reimbursement request. To address this issue, management revised its documentation review procedures. Rather than requiring agency staff to reorganize incomplete or disorganized submissions, staff are now instructed to return reimbursement packages that are incomplete or not properly organized and require the submitting entity to provide a revised, complete documentation package. This change places responsibility for maintaining complete supporting documentation with the originating entity and has resulted in more organized reimbursement submissions while reducing the risk of incomplete supporting records. Agency 830 – Oklahoma Department of Human Services (DHS) DHS disagrees that the questioned incentive gift cards were outside the approved project scope. The PCCT Fatherhood Today program is designed to strengthen father-parent-child relationships by engaging fathers through education, support services, and community resources. The program targets fathers residing in underserved communities who often face barriers to participation, including transportation, childcare, financial hardship, and food insecurity. The $100 gift cards are provided only after participants successfully complete the twelve-week 24/7 Dad curriculum. The gift cards serve as an incentive to recruit and retain participants and support the program's objective of increasing father engagement. DHS believes the incentives directly support successful program participation and allow participants to obtain essential household items for their families. DHS further noted that participant outcomes are measured through pre- and post-program assessments demonstrating increased knowledge and engagement among participating fathers. Gift cards are purchased using agency purchasing procedures, maintained in secured storage, and distributed only upon successful completion of all program requirements with appropriate documentation maintained for each recipient Anticipated Completion Date OMES: December 31, 2026 025: Completed 085: Completed 400: Completed 452: December 31, 2026 619: December 31, 2026 830: Completed Responsible Contact Person OMES: Elizabeth Base 025: Angela Tackett 085: Beverlee Harbuck 400: Kevin Haddock 452: Chad Carden 619: Kami Fullingim 830: Lindsey Kanaly

Finding Number 2024-043 Subject Heading (Financial) or AL no. and program name (Federal) ALN: 21.027 Federal Program name: Coronavirus State And Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF) Planned Corrective Action Office of Management Enterprise Services – Grant Management Office Response: The Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) agrees that strong project planning and feasibility evaluations for large-scale capital projects are important processes for each individual agency to implement. OMES also recognizes that certain factors can impact the original evaluation, and if those factors occur, reevaluation of a project’s feasibility is a prudent measure to determine the future direction of a project. The Federal regulation 2 CFR § 200.317, directs that “a State must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements from its non-Federal funds.” Oklahoma has laws in place for state agencies for the purchase of tangible and intangible property, which ensure obligations are properly encumbered by a contract or purchase order. Therefore, OMES agrees that in order to be in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations, each individual agency should have strong internal controls in place to ensure obligations of federal funds are properly encumbered before commitments are made. ODMHSAS Response to Finding No. 2024-043 ODMHSAS partially concurs with Finding No. 2024-043. ODMHSAS agrees that controls should be strengthened for large-scale federally funded capital projects and acknowledges the separate encumbrance issue identified in the finding. ODMHSAS does not concede that the full $6,218,295 questioned amount was wasted, unallowable, or subject to repayment based solely on the later cancellation of the original Donahue new-build project. ODMHSAS acknowledges that the original Donahue Behavioral Health Campus new-build project did not proceed to construction and that the Department later pursued a different facility solution through acquisition and renovation of an existing facility. The Donahue project, however, was an active, legislatively funded capital project intended to replace Griffin Memorial Hospital at the time the expenditures were incurred. Based on the available expenditure detail, the questioned-cost population includes architectural services, site or lease-related payments, consulting services, surveying or mapping services, and other planning and development costs associated with the project. ODMHSAS recognizes that the original project did not result in a completed capital asset. ODMHSAS also recognizes that federal allowability requires more than the existence of an approved project. Costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and adequately documented. For that reason, ODMHSAS will conduct a reasonable transaction-level review using available records to determine what documentation exists for the expenditures identified in this finding, what work was performed, whether any deliverable or work product was received, whether the expenditure provided planning, feasibility, decision-making, or other project value, and whether further coordination with OMESGMO is needed regarding accounting treatment or other resolution. ODMHSAS further notes that the decision to discontinue the original Donahue new-build project should not, by itself, determine whether every planning or development cost incurred before cancellation was wasted or unallowable. ODMHSAS did not pay for a completed building at that stage of the project; it paid for planning, design, cost-estimating, site-evaluation, and feasibility-related services for an authorized replacement hospital project. The SLFRF capitalexpenditure framework recognizes that recipients may evaluate the need addressed, the appropriateness of a capital expenditure, and alternative capital approaches before determining the best path forward. Available information indicates the original concept contemplated moving both Griffin Memorial Hospital and CRC functions to the Donahue site, and the project scope, bed count, and estimated cost were later reevaluated as construction costs increased significantly, including post-COVID construction-cost escalation. Those services produced project information, design materials, cost information, and feasibility analysis that provided decision-making value, including information that helped ODMHSAS determine that the original newbuild approach was not financially feasible and that an alternative facility solution was necessary before substantially greater construction costs were incurred. ODMHSAS will therefore review the expenditures by category and transaction rather than treating the later cancellation of the project as dispositive of the allowability or value of each prior cost. ODMHSAS also notes the timing of the legislative and project changes. On October 5, 2022, the Legislature appropriated $87 million through HB 1013 for construction of a replacement facility for Griffin Memorial Hospital. During SFY 2024, ODMHSAS incurred planning, design, and initial development expenditures for the Donahue Behavioral Health Campus. The original new-build approach later became financially infeasible due to escalating construction costs and budget shortfalls, and by May 2025 ODMHSAS had moved away from the original construction plan and pursued acquisition and renovation of the former SSM Health facility as the successor facility solution. SB 1178 then reappropriated and redesignated $66.5 million of the original $87 million appropriation from construction of a replacement facility for Griffin Memorial Hospital to purchase and renovation of a replacement facility for Griffin Memorial Hospital, within the same thirty (30) mile geographic limitation. SB 1178 also recognized that the original appropriation could be reduced by prior expenditures, encumbrances, and transfers. ODMHSAS does not contend that SB 1178 alone resolves the allowability of prior costs, but it is relevant context showing that the remaining project funding was redirected by legislative action for the same public-health purpose of replacing Griffin Memorial Hospital. ODMHSAS further notes that the successor SSM acquisition and renovation project continued the same underlying public health purpose as the original Donahue project: replacing Griffin Memorial Hospital and expanding behavioral health treatment capacity. Available SSM transaction documents reflect that ODMHSAS pursued the purchase of the property at 2129 S.W. 59th Street for use in addressing the ongoing demand for mental health services, and related lease documentation reflects that ARPA-SLFRF funds used for the lease were designated for behavioral health services expansion. After the original Donahue new-build approach was no longer financially viable, ODMHSAS pursued the SSM acquisition and renovation approach as a feasible alternative to continue the Griffin replacement purpose. ODMHSAS will also review whether any amounts included in the federal questioned-cost population were recovered, refunded, offset, corrected, or otherwise resolved after the original expenditure. Separately, ODMHSAS has identified Donahue-related refund activity associated with private donations and grants, including an Oklahoma State University refund of $4,822,671.93, donor refunds totaling $1,820,000, and a remaining balance of $3,002,671.93 as of March 26, 2026. Based on current information, ODMHSAS understands this activity to relate to private donations and grants, not CSLFRF/ARPA funds. ODMHSAS will review the underlying accounting records to confirm the funding source, deposit, refund, and remaining balance treatment, and to ensure that this private donation and grant activity is treated separately from the federal questioned-cost population. ODMHSAS has also identified local contribution activity within the questioned-cost population that requires further review. Based on initial internal review, approximately $2.5 million of the questioned-cost population appears to relate to Oklahoma County and City of Oklahoma City contributions associated with the Donahue project, including $1.5 million from Oklahoma County and $1 million from the City of Oklahoma City. ODMHSAS understands that the Oklahoma County amount was repaid in December 2025 and that the City of Oklahoma City amount remains associated with the successor OKCBHC/SSM project or related project accounting. ODMHSAS will review the underlying accounting records, funding-source documentation, refund records, and project accounting treatment to determine whether these local contribution amounts should remain in the federal questioned-cost population, should be treated separately, or should otherwise affect the questioned-cost amount. ODMHSAS acknowledges the separate encumbrance issue related to claim 629685. Based on available records, the claim involved an obligation for services that was incurred before the applicable purchase order and encumbrance process was completed, requiring a subsequent ratification. The Department recognizes that obligations should not be incurred before a valid purchase order and encumbrance are in place. As reflected in the finding, the $50,000 claim was corrected by payment with state funds and was not questioned. ODMHSAS will address that issue through strengthened pre-obligation controls, procurement review, and targeted guidance or training for staff responsible for initiating purchases or contracts. Nothing in this response should be construed as an admission that the full questioned-cost amount is unallowable or subject to repayment. ODMHSAS will coordinate with OMESGMO as needed after review of the available records, including any refund, recovery, offset, correction, or other accounting issue relevant to the questioned-cost population. Corrective Action Planned ODMHSAS will take reasonable steps to strengthen controls over planning, documentation, procurement, and encumbrance review for significant federally funded capital projects. ODMHSAS will develop or update internal review procedures for significant federally funded capital-project expenditures. The procedures will address project scope, available funding, estimated project cost, material changes in feasibility, and approval authority before substantial planning, design, development, or construction-related costs are incurred. The review process will be scaled to the size, complexity, and funding source of the project. ODMHSAS will also strengthen documentation expectations for federally funded capital project invoices. For future expenditures, invoices or supporting materials should identify the services performed, billing period, project phase, and connection to the approved project scope. Where invoices contain only general descriptions, such as “progress billing” or “work completed,” ODMHSAS will seek additional support from the vendor, project manager, or available project file before approving the cost for federal reimbursement. ODMHSAS will require program or project-level confirmation that services were received and were related to the approved project before payment or reimbursement is processed. Finance and Procurement will review federally funded capital-project expenditures for appropriate coding, available support, and compliance with applicable funding and encumbrance requirements. ODMHSAS will conduct a risk-based review of the Donahue expenditures identified in Finding No. 2024-043 using available records. The review will focus on identifying the vendor, amount, funding source, available support, and whether any cost was refunded, recovered, offset, corrected, or requires additional accounting review or coordination with OMES-GMO. Because many of the underlying project decisions and records predate current leadership and staff, ODMHSAS will conduct this review based on the documentation reasonably available to the Department. As part of that review, ODMHSAS will review available accounting and reporting records for the Donahue and SSM projects to determine how ARPA-SLFRF funds associated with the replacement-facility work were obligated, reported, redirected, or applied to the successor Griffin replacement facility project, and whether that treatment affects the federal questioned-cost population. ODMHSAS will separately review the Donahue-related private donation and grant refund activity, including the OSU-OKC settlement documentation, to confirm the funding source, deposit, refund, and remaining balance treatment, and to ensure that non-federal donation and grant activity is not included in, or confused with, the federal questioned-cost population. ODMHSAS will also review the Oklahoma County and City of Oklahoma City contribution amounts identified within the questioned-cost population, including documentation of the reported Oklahoma County repayment and the accounting treatment of the City of Oklahoma City contribution, to determine whether those amounts should remain in the federal questioned-cost population, should be treated separately, or otherwise affect the questioned-cost amount. To address the encumbrance concern, ODMHSAS will implement or reinforce a pre-obligation verification process for future procurements. Staff responsible for initiating purchases, contracts, task orders, or service authorizations will be directed to confirm that a valid purchase order and encumbrance are in place before authorizing work. Any transaction requiring ratification will be reviewed to determine the cause and whether additional corrective action is needed. ODMHSAS will provide targeted written guidance and, as needed, training to appropriate staff regarding federal documentation requirements, invoice review, project-scope review, funding-source verification, and state encumbrance requirements. Anticipated Completion Date ODMHSAS anticipates completing updated procedures, review checklists, and targeted written guidance by June 30, 2027. Because the Donahue review requires analysis of historical project expenditures, related accounting and reporting records, multiple funding sources, and coordination with OMESGMO, ODMHSAS anticipates completing the risk-based transaction review and related followup by December 31, 2027. Responsible Contact Person OMES: Elizabeth Base 452: Chad Carden

FINDING 2024-005 Finding Subject: Child Nutrition Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Contact Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Superintendent and Food Service Director Contact Phone Number and Email Address: Kyle Neukam; 812-752-8921; kneukam@scsd2.k12.in.us Tammy Mosier; 812-752-8921; tmosier@scsd2.k12.in.us Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with the finding. Description of Corrective Action Plan: Formal procurement procedures have been established including micro-purchase and small purchase thresholds. Required price quotes are obtained and documented. Procurement history is maintained, including rationale and vendor selection. Vendor suspension and debarment checks are performed using SAM.gov or certifications. OPAA provides oversight of procurement processes and monitoring is ongoing. The School Corporation has implemented procedures designed to strengthen the control environment, improve risk assessment and information and communication processes, enhance procurement control activities, and provide ongoing monitoring to ensure compliance with federal procurement standards, suspension and debarment requirements, and timely identification and correction of deficiencies. Anticipated Completion Date: August 2026

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (Concerning Finding 2024-001) Contact Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Dana L. Gendreau, Interim County Administrator Corrective Action: The County of Aroostook acknowledges the procurement deficiency identified in Finding 2024-001. The County previously developed and formally adopted a Federal Grant Procurement Policy on February 18, 2026, establishing procedures compliant with 2 CFR 200.317–327 and Appendix II, including required procurement methods, documentation standards, and inclusion of applicable federal contract provisions. The finding is reported as a repeat finding of prior years; however, the policy establishing these controls was adopted subsequent to the period in which the procurement activity under review occurred or during early implementation of the policy. As a result, the condition identified reflects a lapse in the consistent application of newly established procedures rather than a deficiency in policy design. To address this, the County has strengthened internal controls by requiring completion of standardized procurement checklists for all federally funded purchases and implementing enhanced supervisory review of procurement files to ensure that contracts and required federal provisions are included prior to execution and reimbursement. Additional guidance has been provided to staff to reinforce compliance expectations and ensure consistent application of procurement procedures. The County will continue to monitor procurement activities to ensure full implementation of established controls and anticipates that this finding will be resolved upon demonstration of consistent compliance in the subsequent audit period. Anticipated Completion Date: February 18, 2026 (Implemented)

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (Concerning Finding 2024-001) Contact Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Dana L. Gendreau, Interim County Administrator Corrective Action: The County of Aroostook acknowledges the procurement deficiency identified in Finding 2024-001. The County previously developed and formally adopted a Federal Grant Procurement Policy on February 18, 2026, establishing procedures compliant with 2 CFR 200.317–327 and Appendix II, including required procurement methods, documentation standards, and inclusion of applicable federal contract provisions. The finding is reported as a repeat finding of prior years; however, the policy establishing these controls was adopted subsequent to the period in which the procurement activity under review occurred or during early implementation of the policy. As a result, the condition identified reflects a lapse in the consistent application of newly established procedures rather than a deficiency in policy design. To address this, the County has strengthened internal controls by requiring completion of standardized procurement checklists for all federally funded purchases and implementing enhanced supervisory review of procurement files to ensure that contracts and required federal provisions are included prior to execution and reimbursement. Additional guidance has been provided to staff to reinforce compliance expectations and ensure consistent application of procurement procedures. The County will continue to monitor procurement activities to ensure full implementation of established controls and anticipates that this finding will be resolved upon demonstration of consistent compliance in the subsequent audit period. Anticipated Completion Date: February 18, 2026 (Implemented)

VIDE has implemented additional system controls to ensure all procurements meet federal documentation standards and to adequately maintain completed contract files. To address documentation gaps and ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements, the department has transitioned to a model where the required contract, along with all necessary supporting documentation (specifically including bids, quotations, justification letters, and evaluation reports), must be attached directly to each invoice entry within the ERP system. This requirement ensures that a complete, centralized procurement file is retained and reviewed for compliance prior to any final disbursement.

VIDE has implemented additional system controls to ensure all procurements meet federal documentation standards and to adequately maintain completed contract files. To address documentation gaps and ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements, the department has transitioned to a model where the required contract, along with all necessary supporting documentation (specifically including bids, quotations, justification letters, and evaluation reports), must be attached directly to each invoice entry within the ERP system. This requirement ensures that a complete, centralized procurement file is retained and reviewed for compliance prior to any final disbursement.

DPNR with the support of the federal agency’s consultant will implement a centralized electronic repository system to serve as the official recordkeeping location for all procurement requests and supporting documentation. This repository will house all documents necessary to substantiate is a vendor is valid or debarred, including but not limited to: • A complete procurement listing for each fiscal year, including all procurements funded by Federal awards; • Documentation of suspension and debarment verification; • Vendor certifications and required Federal assurances; and • Any additional supporting documentation required under Federal regulations and DPNR procurement policies.

DPP has transitioned the Government of the Virgin Islands to a centralized eProcurement system, GVIBuy. Vendor profiles are centralized with all corporate documents attached. Additionally, DPP has published written guidelines that dictate adherence to federal regulations relate to the procurement of goods and services including records retention.