Corrective Action Plans

Asante Health System Corrective Action Plan for FY25 Single Audit Fiscal year end: 09/30/2025 Audit period: 10/01/2024-09/30/2025 Finding 2025-002 Federal Program: FEMA funding is federal financial aid from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Disaster Relief Fund (DRF), providing money for communities to recover from disasters, rebuilding infrastructure, mitigating future risks, and covering essential needs. Duplicate expenditures submitted for FEMA reimbursement resulting in unallowable costs being claimed under the program. Statement of Condition: In six of 40 sample items selected for testwork over activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles related to the program, $469,054 in expenditures out of a total of $1,368,522 expenditures (or 34%) were submitted for reimbursement to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) but were related to the same invoices and therefore were duplicate expenditures. Upon further investigation, management identified that a total of $2,636,044 expenditures out of a total of $14,470,349 expenditures related to the program were duplicate expenditures. Further, management’s review that was performed over the underlying program details was not designed at a sufficient level of precision that enabled the identification of the duplication errors. Further, in management’s review for the completed project certification for one of two projects for the program these duplication errors were not identified. Actions Taken and Status: To address this deficiency, the organization has implemented the following corrective actions: 1. Recovery and Adjustment of Duplicate Claims o A complete review of all FEMA reimbursement submissions was performed to identify duplicate expenditures. o Management will work with FEMA to adjust previous reimbursement requests and return any funds received for duplicate expenditures, as required. 2. Enhanced Reconciliation Controls o A detailed reimbursement tracking log has been implemented to identify each invoice: payment date, reimbursement request number, and reimbursement status. o All expenditures submitted for reimbursement will be reconciled against prior submissions before inclusion in a reimbursement request. 3. Training o Finance personnel responsible for federal grant administration and reimbursement submissions have received training on Uniform Guidance requirements, allowable costs, and reimbursement documentation controls. Corrective action training has been completed as of 9/30/2026. Responsible Contact Person: Name: Heather Rowenhorst Title: Chief Financial Officer Department: Administration Phone/Email: 541-789-5098 / Heather.Rowenhorst@asante.org

We concur with the findingrelated to deficiencies in our approval process and thresholds set bycompany policies. We have documented our approval policies accordingly and implemented anew approval system using email starting in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2026. This systemis designed to accurately capture approvals and expenses by project/grant. Comprehensivetraining sessions will be conducted forall affected employees to ensurethey are proficient in using the new system. We will also research other possible technologies to assist with thedocumentation of approvals.

State of Missouri Single Audit Corrective Action Plan Year Ended June 30, 2025 State Agency: Department of Health and Senior Services Audit Finding Number: 2025-013 - Medicaid Facility Survey Timeliness Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Tracy Niekamp, Administrator, Section for Long Term Care Regulation, Division of Regulation and Licensure Anticipated completion date for corrective action: December 31, 2028 Corrective action planned is as follows: Corrective Action Plan related to the finding regarding revisits not being performed within 60 days. DHSS disagrees with the finding and contends a finding, and corrective action plan is not required related to the three revisits not performed within 60 days. The SAO has determined these exceptions to be nonmaterial noncompliance and as such, a finding in the single audit is not required. In addition, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is well aware of DHSS’ compliance level with this requirement and has deemed it met. During Federal Fiscal Year 2025, DHSS met the performance standard set out by the CMS for onsite revisits as outlined in Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 State Performance Standards System (SPSS) Guidance. Admin Info: 25-03-ALL. The SAO’s exception listing is inaccurate. Despite documentation provided to the SAO, the SAO demonstrated a misunderstanding or disregard of CMS’ grading system. One exception did not fall into the SAO’s cited category and failed to meet the deficiency threshold requiring a 60-day revisit. For the other two exceptions, additional complaints were received between the original visit and revisit which, according to CMS guidelines, had to be resolved before the revisit could occur. Further, DHSS follows CMS’ stated work priorities to conduct surveys and revisits as mandated by CMS Mission and Priority Document. See the explanation below regarding the increase in severe complaints, including immediate jeopardy (IJ) complaints (which require an onsite investigation within 24 hours to seven days), and the impact on SLCR’s decision to address immediate threats to residents as required by CMS. Corrective action plan related to the delayed issuance of Statements of Deficiencies and Plans of Correction (SODs) within the required 10-day timeframe. DHSS partially agrees with this finding. While DHSS agrees that the 14 SODs were not issued within 10 days, DHSS disagrees that, as a nonmaterial noncompliance finding, this issue should be reported in the single audit and therefore disagrees that a corrective action plan is needed. DHSS has continued to make significant progress in meeting expectations since FY2023. During the FY23 audit, 19 of the sampled statements of deficiency did not meet the 10-day timeframe for release to the facility. Results of the FY24 and FY25 audits showed improvement in DHSS performance as the number of sampled statements of deficiency that did not meet the 10-day timeframe for release to the facility decreased to 13 and 14 respectively. As previously stated, since 2019, DHSS has seen increases in the number and severity of complaints, and the severity of violations found in long term care facilities. Complaints increased overall by thirty-six percent (36%) from 9,011 complaints in FY2019 to 12,237 in FY2024. In FY2025, DHSS received 12,203 complaints. The largest increase has been in severe complaints, including immediate jeopardy complaints (which require an onsite investigation within 24 hours to seven days) and non-immediate jeopardy, high priority complaints (require onsite investigation within 15 working days). Because of the seriousness of these complaints, and to adhere to the CMS Mission and Priority document, often surveyors must be reassigned to investigate these complaints, which results in a delay in conducting revisits or sending a statement of deficiencies timely. In addition to frequency and severity of complaints, changes to the survey process, and increased regulatory requirements, DHSS continues to see a high volume of citations issued per recertification survey and complaint investigations. Since 2019, the average number of health citations issued to a facility during a recertification survey has increased by 25% and the number of citations issued from stand-alone complaint findings has increased 100% during the same timeframe. These increases require additional time devoted to investigating often complex violations, increased time spent on write-up activities, including the creation of the Statement of Deficiency, plan of correction review, onsite and offsite revisit activity and communication with complainants and facilities. Increases in this workload often require team members to begin investigating new complaints, prior to the write-up activities or revisits to other processes being completed. Additionally, subsequent complaint investigations often cause revisits to be delayed due to open enforcement cases and substantial compliance date conflicts. Regulatory noncompliance identified during the survey is discussed with administration at the facility while surveyors are on site. Findings of immediate jeopardy require a prompt plan of correction to address the immediacy of the violation prior to surveyors exiting the process. For all violations, facilities typically begin to take immediate corrective action, not waiting for receipt of the written SOD from SLCR. DHSS continues to experience staffing shortages, particularly in the Registered Nurse job classification, which impacts the ability to complete work consistently within the prescribed time frames. Each recertification survey requires at least one team member to be Registered Nurse and due to the nature of many complaints, a Registered Nurse must also complete these investigations. There has been no meaningful increase in the federal budget in more than a decade, which further impacts the ability to hire and retain Registered Nurses. In addition, there is an ongoing shortage in the labor market for these professionals. The shortage has driven salaries well beyond the surveyor salary structure. DHSS has experienced turnover among surveyors leaving for other opportunities at a much higher salary. DHSS has and will continue to request increased funding from CMS to support competitive salaries for Registered Nurses and fully fund the federal portion of the survey and certification workload. DHSS will continue its endeavors to hire retired, federally qualified surveyors part-time to help with survey and complaint backlog. DHSS continually works toward identifying inefficiencies and implementing measures to address them, such as bundling complaint investigations with other regulatory processes. As a short-term, time-limited solution possible through one-time additional funding from the CMS and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention- Epidemiology and Laboratory Capacity (CDC-ELC), DHSS contracted with three third-party contractors to assist with workload completion. (Note: That funding terminated on March 24, 2025.) DHSS will maintain current contracts with the entities so that if funding becomes available contract surveys can be set up shortly after. DHSS will continue to track timeframes for completion of Statements of Deficiencies and revisits and make every effort to meet those timeframes. DHSS will continue to assign workload based on CMS’ stated priorities in the Mission and Priority Document, taking into account the potential for direct impact on residents. DHSS will provide training to surveyors related to writing statements of deficiency to ensure a clear, concise, legally defensible document is produced and to reduce the review time required.

State of Missouri Single Audit Corrective Action Plan Year Ended June 30, 2025 State Agency: Department of Health and Senior Services Audit Finding Number: 2025-011 - CACFP Subrecipient Monitoring Name of the contact person responsible for corrective action: Sarah Walker, Administrator, Bureau of Community Food and Nutrition Assistance (BCFNA), Division of Community and Public Health Anticipated completion date for corrective action: Not Applicable The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS) disagrees with this finding because the BCFNA subrecipient monitoring, claim recoupment and risk assessment procedures comply with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the federal funding agency. In addition, the similar fiscal year 2023 audit finding was closed by the USDA after reviewing DHSS’s corrective action plan and supporting documentation. The SAO stated, “While our review found the sample monitoring reviews were performed in accordance with the policies and procedures outlined in the Internal Nutritionist Manual, we identified areas where these policies and procedures could be strengthened and improved to ensure facilities/sponsors comply with program requirements and submit proper claims.” The SAO is holding DHSS to higher performance audit standards instead of Single Audit compliance audit standards as well as to higher standards than required by federal guidance and regulations. The SAO’s stated, “In May 2024, when the BCFNA changed the risk assessment and scoring system, the BCFNA ceased assigning a grade of A, B, B-, or C to each review and widened the score ranges and associated review requirements. DHSS officials indicated the scores assessed by the new system are frequently higher than those assessed under the previous manual system. The impact of these changes on the frequency and effectiveness of the monitoring reviews is unclear.” While working with the software provider during the development, testing, and implementation stages over the course of several years, the new point range was thoroughly reviewed prior to implementation. This ensured reviews are classified appropriately for risk categories. The new system provides a monitoring process more stringent than USDA requirements. All monitoring is reviewed by supervisory staff to ensure a comprehensive assessment. During testing, it was found that the new system frequently returned a higher point level, as every finding now results in a point. The increased score range was required to more precisely reflect monitoring reviews and reflects an even more stringent monitoring process than is required by USDA. The SAO reported “….BCFNA only identifies and seeks recoupment for the overclaims made during the test month.” As noted in previous CAPs, BCFNA pursues recoupment of overclaims of only the test month per USDA requirements, although when warranted, additional reviews are conducted beyond the test month. In addition, BCFNA officials pursue recoupment of overclaims for facilities/sponsors with terminated contracts on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration various factors. The USDA established an acceptable level of risk with respect to the CACFP program and provided approved risk management processes and requirements. The previous and current risk assessment processes are in compliance with federal requirements. BCFNA has a structured risk assessment process that informs its monitoring extent and frequency, which leads to subrecipients being monitored more frequently than every three years as required by the USDA. The USDA is aware of the risk assessment process used by BCFNA and did not require any changes to the process after the previous three similar findings by the SAO. As stated in previous CAPs on similar findings, the DHSS is in compliance with USDA guidelines and requirements for CACFP and implementing the SAO’s recommendations would cause undue burden on the participants and providers of this program which USDA warns against. In addition, the SAO applied the same testing methodology and error projection approach to determine materiality for this finding as it did for finding 2025-010. Accordingly, DHSS maintains the same position and arguments previously presented.

The BoatU.S. ADVs contract will be amended for fiscal year 2026 contracts to include the ALN, and the need for a Single Audit for subrecipients that expend over $1,000,000 in federal funding in their given fiscal year. BoatU.S. will implement stricter deadlines for subrecipients to submit their biannual reports in 2026. Progress monitoring will be done throughout the year and documented by BoatU.S. personnel. This should also include project cost documentation of the subrecipient is used for authorized purposes. These reports may need to include photos of the tasks completed, if necessary. BoatU.S. plans to only reimburse for progress costs as incurred by the subrecipient.

Significant Deficiency Finding No. 2025-004: Reporting Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurred with the prior year (2024-004) and current year renumbered recommendation (2025-004), acknowledging that the unexpected resignation of the former independent auditor (January 2023), and the domino effect of a delay in securing a new independent auditor (April 2023) and completion of single audits continued to challenge the Organization through the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. The Organization notes the following: A. Status and Progress of Single Audits 1. Single Audit as of fiscal year ended (FYE) June 30, 2022, filed in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC) on February 20, 2025. 2. Single Audit as of FYE June 30, 2023, filed in the FAC on March 9, 2026. 3. Single Audit as of FYE June 30, 2024, filed in the FAC on June 20, 2026. 4. Single Audit as of FYE June 30, 2025, projected for filing in the FAC no later than September 30, 2026. Note: Once the FYE June 30, 2025, single audit is filed, the Organization will no longer be delinquent in filing its single audit in the FAC. 5. Single Audit as of FYE June 30, 2026, engagement letter signed with scheduled field work to commence after the June 30, 2025, FAC filing (e.g., November 2026); with a projected on-time FAC filing no later than March 31, 2027, in compliance with 2 CFR §200.514 – Standards and scope of audit; and 2 CFR §200.512 – Report submission via Form SF-SAC: Data Collection Form, nine months after year end of the audit period. B. Policy, Process and Communications re: Single Audits, the Organization implemented the following policy, process and communications practices: 1. Financial Policies: Internal Control Environment Policy, Implementation of Significant Accounting Policies. 2. Process: Review and Approve Audit Report, including Financial Statements. 3. Communication of the status of the single audit(s) via Memo to the Board occurred in February, March, May, June and August 2026; and as a continuing practice will be completed for each Board meeting.Finding No. 2025-004: Reporting Contact Person(s) Responsible for Corrective Action: Sheri Daniels, Ed.D., Chief Executive Officer, Marisa Wilson, Director of Administrative Operations and Sylvia Hussey, Ed.D., Chief of Staff.

THE COALITION WILL MAINTAIN A CENTRALIZED GRANT REGISTER IDENTIFYING EACH AWARD NUMBER, PROJECT CODE, BEGINNING DATE, ENDING DATE, AND APPROVED PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE. FINANCE WILL USE THE REGISTER DURING MONTHLY CLOSE AND GRANT REVIEW TO VERIFY THAT PAYROLL AND NON-PAYROLL EXPENDITURES ARE CHARGED TO THE CORRECT ACTIVE GRANT/PROJECT. BEFORE AND AFTER AN AWARD END DATE, FINANCE WILL REVIEW PROJECT ACTIVITY FOR COSTS POSTED OUTSIDE THE APPROVED PERIOD, CONFIRM WHETHER ANY PRE-AWARD OR CLOSEOUT COST IS AUTHORIZED, AND RECLASSIFY MISCODED TRANSACTIONS BEFORE GRANT REPORTING IS FINALIZED. NEW AWARD/PROJECT CODES WILL BE ESTABLISHED AND COMMUNICATED BEFORE COSTS ARE CHARGED TO A SUCCESSOR AWARD. IN ADDITION, AFTER THE MONTHLY CLOSE PROCESS IS COMPLETE, FINANCE WILL DISTRIBUTE GRANT STATEMENTS TO ADMINISTRATION TO REVIEW EXPENDITURES AND REMAINING GRANT BALANCES FOR REASONABLENESS. THIS PROVIDES AN ADDITIONAL LAYER OF OVERSIGHT TO VERIFY THAT GRANT-RELATED EXPENSES HAVE BEEN RECORDED ACCURATELY.

THE COALITION WILL REQUIRE DOCUMENTED REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF EMPLOYEE TIME FOR EVERY PAYROLL PERIOD AND WILL RETAIN PAYROLL AND TIMEKEEPING RECORDS IN AN AUDIT-ACCESSIBLE LOCATION. BEFORE PAYROLL IS PROCESSED, DESIGNATED MANAGEMENT WILL REVIEW TIME ENTRIES FOR COMPLETENESS, FUNDING ALLOCATION, LEAVE, AND APPROVAL STATUS. THE PAYROLL FILE RETAINED FOR EACH PERIOD WILL INCLUDE THE APPROVED TIME RECORD, PAYROLL REGISTER, ALLOCATION DETAIL, AND EVIDENCE OF PREPARER/REVIEWER APPROVAL. WHEN TIMEKEEPING OR PAYROLL SYSTEMS CHANGE, THE COALITION WILL EXPORT AND PRESERVE HISTORICAL REPORTS AND APPROVAL RECORDS FOR THE APPLICABLE RECORD-RETENTION PERIOD BEFORE ACCESS TO THE PRIOR SYSTEM ENDS.

THE COALITION WILL FORMALIZE AND RETAIN A DOCUMENTED ALLOCATION CONTROL PROCESS FOR EXPENSES CHARGED TO FEDERAL PROGRAMS. ON A MONTHLY BASIS, FINANCE WILL RECONCILE PAYROLL REPORTS FROM GUSTO TO THE GENERAL LEDGER TO ENSURE PAYROLL ENTRIES POSTED TO THE GL AGREE TO THE PAYROLL REGISTER FOR THE APPLICABLE PAY PERIOD. THESE RECONCILED PAYROLL ENTRIES WILL SERVE AS THE BASIS FOR ALL PAYROLL ALLOCATIONS. FOR PAYROLL ALLOCATIONS, THE PAYROLL REGISTER WILL SERVE AS THE SOURCE DOCUMENT AND WILL BE RECONCILED TO THE ALLOCATION WORKSHEET AND THE CORRESPONDING JOURNAL ENTRY POSTED TO THE GENERAL LEDGER. THE RECONCILIATION WILL IDENTIFY THE PAYROLL PERIOD, EMPLOYEE, SOURCE PAYROLL AMOUNT, ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY, FUNDING SOURCE OR PROJECT, AND RESULTING JOURNAL ENTRY. A PREPARER AND AN INDEPENDENT REVIEWER WILL DOCUMENT COMPLETION AND APPROVAL, AND THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION WILL BE RETAINED WITH THE JOURNAL ENTRY TO ENSURE ALLOCATED AMOUNTS CAN BE TRACED BACK TO THE ORIGINATING PAYROLL RECORDS. IN ADDITION, FINANCE WILL RECONCILE ON A MONTHLY BASIS, THE PAYROLL REPORTS FROM GUSTO TO THE GENERAL LEDGER, ENSURING THAT THE PAYROLL ENTRIES POSTED TO THE GL TIE DIRECTLY BACK TO THE PR REGISTER FOR THAT TIME PERIOD. THESE PAYROLL ENTRIES (FROM GUSTO) ARE THEN WHAT IS USED TO CREATE THE ALLOCATIONS. ANY UNEXPLAINED VARIANCE WILL BE RESOLVED BEFORE THE JOURNAL ENTRY IS FINALIZED

Condition – The data collection form was not submitted within the required time as required by 2 CFR 200.512 for the year ended June 30, 2025. Planned Corrective Action – The Agency will take all reasonable measures to work with the new auditors to complete the audit process and submit the data collection report within the required time period. Anticipated Date of Correction – The 2026 data collection form for the year ended June 30, 2026, will be issued to GSA within the required deadline of the earlier of thirty days after issuance of the 2026 audit or prior to March 31, 2027. Point of Contact: James Williams, Fiscal Officer/Program Director

Finding No. 2025-002 Corrective Action: The Authority will implement the following corrective actions for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2025 (audit period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025): 1. Standardize rent reasonableness documentation. Implement a standardized rent reasonableness form (or system-generated report) required at initial lease-up, rent increases, and other required points, and retain it in the tenant file. 2. Pre-approval control for HAP initiation/changes. Require supervisory verification that rent reasonableness support and inspection/HQS documentation are present prior to (a) initial HAP execution, (b) annual recertification processing where applicable, and (c) approval of rent increases. 3. Inspection scheduling and follow-up procedures. Implement a scheduling log and follow-up protocol to ensure (a) initial inspections, (b) annual/biennial inspections (as applicable), and (c) re-inspections are performed and documented timely; rejected/failed inspections will be tracked until resolved. 4. Quality control reviews. Perform periodic internal quality control reviews (e.g., quarterly) of a sample of active tenant files to verify the presence of rent reasonableness and inspection documentation and to identify trends requiring corrective action. 5. Training and written procedures. Update written procedures and provide training to HCV staff and inspectors on documentation standards, retention requirements, and supervisory review expectations. 6. Corrective review of affected files. Review the tenant files identified during audit testing and any similar files from the audit period to obtain/prepare missing rent reasonableness support and ensure inspections were performed/documented; take corrective action for any issues identified. Implementation timeline: • Standard form/procedure updates: within [30] days of report issuance • Supervisory pre-approval control implemented: within 45 days of report issuance • Inspection log and follow-up protocol implemented: within 60 days of report issuance • Staff/inspector training completed: within 90 days of report issuance • First quarterly QC review completed: by September 30, 2026 • Corrective review of affected files completed: by September 30, 2026. Contact Information: Rosario Contero-Oropeza, Executive Director Housing Authority of the City of Poteet 120 Avenue E Poteet, TX 78065 (830)742-3589

CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN FOR THE YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2025 Finding No. 2025-001 Corrective Action: The Authority will implement the following corrective actions for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2025 (audit period October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025): 1. PIC/HUD-50058 submission tracking and accountability. Implement a tracking log (system report or spreadsheet) for all tenant actions requiring PIC/HUD-50058 reporting, including tenant name/ID, action type, effective date, due date, submission date, and evidence of HUD acceptance. 2. Supervisory review prior to file closeout. Require a supervisor to review and initial/approve each tenant action package to confirm PIC/HUD-50058 submission evidence and HUD acceptance confirmation are present before the file is closed, payments are continued, or the action is considered complete. 3. Monthly exception reporting and resolution. Run a monthly PIC exception report (or equivalent system query) to identify missing, rejected, or pending submissions. Assign exceptions to staff for corrective action, document resolution, and retain evidence of follow-up. 4. Tenant file checklist update. Update the tenant file checklist to include PIC/HUD-50058 submission evidence and HUD acceptance confirmation as required elements for applicable actions. 5. Staff training and written procedures. Update written procedures and provide refresher training to staff responsible for reexaminations, interim changes, move-ins, move-outs, and other actions that trigger PIC/HUD-50058 reporting, including documentation retention standards. 6. Lookback/corrective review of the audit-period exceptions. Perform a lookback review of tenant actions processed during the audit period to determine whether additional PIC/HUD-50058 submissions were missed and submit/correct outstanding items, as applicable. Retain documentation of the corrective submissions and acceptance. Monitoring procedures: Management will monitor ongoing compliance by (a) reviewing the monthly exception report and documenting sign-off, (b) performing quarterly quality control reviews of a sample of completed tenant actions to verify PIC/HUD-50058 submission evidence and acceptance confirmation are present, and (c) tracking aging of open exceptions to ensure timely resolution. Statement of ongoing compliance: The Authority will ensure timely and complete PIC/HUD-50058 submissions going forward by requiring each tenant action to be logged and reconciled to PIC submission/acceptance status, enforcing supervisory sign-off prior to action closeout, and promptly resolving any rejected or pending items identified through monthly exception reporting. Implementation timeline: • Tracking log/checklist updates and procedure revisions: within 30 days of report issuance • Supervisory review control implemented: within 45 days of report issuance • Monthly exception reporting and management sign-off begins: within 60 days of report issuance • Staff training completed: within 90 days of report issuance • Lookback review completed: by September 30, 2026. • First quarterly QC review completed: by September 30, 2026

Corrective actions were delayed due to the anticipated implementation of a new system that ws expected to address access and segregation of duties concerns. Since the new system will not be imiplemented immediately, management is proceeding with corrective action under the current system. Management is working to define and separate HR and Payroll rolls and access responsibilities so that employee information, pay rates, and payroll related functions are restricted to authorized personnel based on job duties. In the interim, periodic reviews of employee information, user access, and payroll related transactions will be performed. Any unauthorized changes will be documented and retained.

A. OBJECTION On December 29, 2025, following LPSB’s submission of its Response to the Draft Findings of Kolder, Slaven, and Company, LLC (“KS&C”) relating to its 2024-2025 Annual Audit, LPSB received two additional findings characterized as Disclaimers of Opinion. The issuance of these post-response Disclaimers of Opinion regarding the findings highlights KS&C’s apparent lack of objectivity and its failure to adhere to generally accepted government auditing standards in conducting the 24-25 audit. A Disclaimer of Opinion “is expressed when the auditor is unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence on which to base the opinion, and the auditor concludes that the possible effects on the financial statements of undetected misstatements, if any, could be both material and pervasive.”1 According to LLA, “a local auditee that provides for an audit report with a disclaimer of opinion” is regarded as being in noncompliance with its reporting requirements to LLA under the audit law (Louisiana Revised Statute 24:513). LLA further expects the CPA to include in such a report a finding that provides a full explanation for the disclaimer of opinion.2 The two supplemental responses provided are, however, substantially lacking the “full explanation” mandated by the Legislative Auditors for the serious allegations being presented by KS&C. As with its other findings, these recent findings fail to cite any specific conditions present during the audit period that would have precluded KS&C from forming a conclusion. Therefore, as with the original findings, LPSB, on January 6, 2026, again requested that KS&C provide supporting evidence for its claim that it was unable to obtain “evidence regarding significant financial statement balances, transactions, and disclosures.” KS&C responded by stating that these new findings were based on Finding 16 - Invoices Paid Without Sufficient Supporting Detail (IC & C), Finding 26 - Management Override of Established Internal Controls (IC), Finding 31 - Unsupported Experience-Based Pay Increases (IC), and other undisclosed matters. Notably, none of these specific findings are instances where KS&C was prevented from forming a conclusion. To the contrary, the original findings identified by KS&C reflect otherwise. For instance, in Finding 16, KS&C notes it “tested 539 and identified 213 in which invoices were paid without sufficient documentation.” Despite KS&C’s assertions, LPSB has at no point failed to provide information to KS&C upon request (see Corrective Action sections below). In fact, KS&C issued 33 Findings, each purportedly substantiated by documentation. As stated in LPSB’s Response, a request was made by LPSB for KS&C to produce the referenced specific supporting documentation. However, KS&C declined to provide the documentation. Auditing standards stipulate: “Auditors should document supervisory review, before the report release date, of the evidence that supports the findings and conclusions contained in the audit report.”3 They further require: “Auditors should document any departures from the GAGAS requirements and the effect on the audit and on the auditors’ conclusions when the audit is not in compliance with applicable GAGAS requirements because of law, regulation, scope limitations, restrictions on access to records, or other issues affecting the audit.”4 Despite LPSB, in its Response and communications prior thereto pointing out erroneous references to the law and facts, KS&C refused to modify its findings. Instead, it introduced these two ambiguous Disclaimers of Opinion, alleging that LPSB failed to provide necessary information for KS&C to reach a conclusion. However, a cursory review of its original findings clearly reflect that KS&C did reach conclusions, which they assert were based upon conditions found during their investigation. Which is it? Are KS&C’s findings supported or not? KS&C’s ex post Disclaimers of Opinion not only misrepresent LPSB’s cooperation and full disclosure of information, but they are also predicated upon the unfounded assertion that LPSB’s “representations, including written representations required under auditing standards, could not be relied upon due to concerns regarding the reliability of management representations.” After 33 years of engagement with LPSB audits, KS&C has now made the unwarranted claim that LPSB’s representations are unreliable, without pointing to a specific instance of unreliability. Ironically, it is the auditor’s own representations that are demonstrated to be unreliable, as evidenced by the submission of these two vague and contradictory Disclaimers of Opinion. “[A] CPA cannot enter into the engagement with a pre-conceived notion that the local auditee is doing everything wrong. Going into an engagement with [this] attitude impairs the independence of the CPA firm.” The two findings, submitted after LPSB responded to its original findings, do not meet the standards set forth in the Louisiana Governmental Audit Guide. They contradict the original findings, misrepresent LPSB’s cooperation throughout the audit, insert slanderous statements as to the reliability of LPSB’s representations, and fail to provide a full explanation for the disclaimer of opinion. KS&C should remove these findings from its report. 1 LGAG 400-1160, Types of Auditor’s Opinions 2 LGAG 400-1160, Types of Auditor’s Opinions 3 GAO-24, Sections 6.31 (emphasis added) 4 GAO-24, Sections 6.32 B. CORRECTIVE ACTION Prior to the financial audit, Lafayette Parish School Board (LPSB) staff prepared reports and documentation for at least 185 requests that were made by the external auditors. These requests consisted of, but were not limited to, all General Ledger data and information on all Major and Non Major Funds (i.e. General Fund, Construction Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Special Revenue funds), worksheets, personnel records, copies of checks, copies of invoices, grant reimbursement requests, expenditure detail reports, capital asset data and reports, accounts payable data and reports, the type of computer equipment used (including the software and operating systems), construction related documents, copies of contracts, insurance invoices, schedules of judgments and agreements, check registers, calendars, securities pledged, accounts payable details, financial statements, schedule of construction contracts, retirement reports, listing of new hires, purchase orders, check requests, financial reconciliations, sales tax reports and documents, other insurance related documents, insurance policies, monitoring reports, AFR report, arbitrage documentation, copies of deposits receipts, copies of budgets, outstanding checks, revenue reports, expenditure reports, and balance sheet reports. Under the Department of Education agreed upon procedures audit, LPSB staff provided Class size data, PEP data and a user guide. Under the Statewide Agreed Upon procedure, LPSB staff provided proof of required trainings such as ethics, bond insurance policies, list of all bank accounts, a listing of employees, officials employed during the year, and a list of deposit and collection sites. Other requests from our external auditors may come via email throughout the audit process and responses are provided likewise. All of the items listed above, and other items that were not listed above, are routinely provided each year. For several decades this has been the standard and nothing has changed in terms of provided supporting documentation within this particular audit. Internal controls have been in place for many decades. The external auditors have been reviewing, studying and auditing our internal controls for three decades. Over the years, LPSB internal controls have been adjusted, strengthened or heighten to prevent operational deficiencies, fraud and/or non-compliance of which the auditors have contributed to its advancement. Substantially, there has been no change to internal controls as they are in place for a reason. Systematically, internal controls are planted and executed in various areas and departments for various functions and/or lawful requirements. The biggest threats to any organization are misappropriation or improper disbursement of funds. Neither have occurred, because internal controls such as the utilization of electronic requisitions and check request processes were in place to ensure goods and services were precured properly and vendor payments were substantiated. LPSB stands by its management representations that have been provided to the auditors. We acknowledge our responsibility for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal controls relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. In addition to supporting documentation, the external auditors had complete access to our financial software to ascertain the completeness and accuracy of our financial records.

A. OBJECTION On December 29, 2025, following LPSB’s submission of its Response to the Draft Findings of Kolder, Slaven, and Company, LLC (“KS&C”) relating to its 2024-2025 Annual Audit, LPSB received two additional findings characterized as Disclaimers of Opinion. The issuance of these post-response Disclaimers of Opinion regarding the findings highlights KS&C’s apparent lack of objectivity and its failure to adhere to generally accepted government auditing standards in conducting the 24-25 audit. A Disclaimer of Opinion “is expressed when the auditor is unable to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence on which to base the opinion, and the auditor concludes that the possible effects on the financial statements of undetected misstatements, if any, could be both material and pervasive.”1 According to LLA, “a local auditee that provides for an audit report with a disclaimer of opinion” is regarded as being in noncompliance with its reporting requirements to LLA under the audit law (Louisiana Revised Statute 24:513). LLA further expects the CPA to include in such a report a finding that provides a full explanation for the disclaimer of opinion.2 The two supplemental responses provided are, however, substantially lacking the “full explanation” mandated by the Legislative Auditors for the serious allegations being presented by KS&C. As with its other findings, these recent findings fail to cite any specific conditions present during the audit period that would have precluded KS&C from forming a conclusion. Therefore, as with the original findings, LPSB, on January 6, 2026, again requested that KS&C provide supporting evidence for its claim that it was unable to obtain “evidence regarding significant financial statement balances, transactions, and disclosures.” KS&C responded by stating that these new findings were based on Finding 16 - Invoices Paid Without Sufficient Supporting Detail (IC & C), Finding 26 - Management Override of Established Internal Controls (IC), Finding 31 - Unsupported Experience-Based Pay Increases (IC), and other undisclosed matters. Notably, none of these specific findings are instances where KS&C was prevented from forming a conclusion. To the contrary, the original findings identified by KS&C reflect otherwise. For instance, in Finding 16, KS&C notes it “tested 539 and identified 213 in which invoices were paid without sufficient documentation.” Despite KS&C’s assertions, LPSB has at no point failed to provide information to KS&C upon request (see Corrective Action sections below). In fact, KS&C issued 33 Findings, each purportedly substantiated by documentation. As stated in LPSB’s Response, a request was made by LPSB for KS&C to produce the referenced specific supporting documentation. However, KS&C declined to provide the documentation. Auditing standards stipulate: “Auditors should document supervisory review, before the report release date, of the evidence that supports the findings and conclusions contained in the audit report.”3 They further require: “Auditors should document any departures from the GAGAS requirements and the effect on the audit and on the auditors’ conclusions when the audit is not in compliance with applicable GAGAS requirements because of law, regulation, scope limitations, restrictions on access to records, or other issues affecting the audit.”4 Despite LPSB, in its Response and communications prior thereto pointing out erroneous references to the law and facts, KS&C refused to modify its findings. Instead, it introduced these two ambiguous Disclaimers of Opinion, alleging that LPSB failed to provide necessary information for KS&C to reach a conclusion. However, a cursory review of its original findings clearly reflect that KS&C did reach conclusions, which they assert were based upon conditions found during their investigation. Which is it? Are KS&C’s findings supported or not? KS&C’s ex post Disclaimers of Opinion not only misrepresent LPSB’s cooperation and full disclosure of information, but they are also predicated upon the unfounded assertion that LPSB’s “representations, including written representations required under auditing standards, could not be relied upon due to concerns regarding the reliability of management representations.” After 33 years of engagement with LPSB audits, KS&C has now made the unwarranted claim that LPSB’s representations are unreliable, without pointing to a specific instance of unreliability. Ironically, it is the auditor’s own representations that are demonstrated to be unreliable, as evidenced by the submission of these two vague and contradictory Disclaimers of Opinion. “[A] CPA cannot enter into the engagement with a pre-conceived notion that the local auditee is doing everything wrong. Going into an engagement with [this] attitude impairs the independence of the CPA firm.” The two findings, submitted after LPSB responded to its original findings, do not meet the standards set forth in the Louisiana Governmental Audit Guide. They contradict the original findings, misrepresent LPSB’s cooperation throughout the audit, insert slanderous statements as to the reliability of LPSB’s representations, and fail to provide a full explanation for the disclaimer of opinion. KS&C should remove these findings from its report. 1 LGAG 400-1160, Types of Auditor’s Opinions 2 LGAG 400-1160, Types of Auditor’s Opinions 3 GAO-24, Sections 6.31 (emphasis added) 4 GAO-24, Sections 6.32 B. CORRECTIVE ACTION Prior to the financial audit, Lafayette Parish School Board (LPSB) staff prepared reports and documentation for at least 185 requests that were made by the external auditors. These requests consisted of, but were not limited to, all General Ledger data and information on all Major and Non Major Funds (i.e. General Fund, Construction Funds, Debt Service Funds, and Special Revenue funds), worksheets, personnel records, copies of checks, copies of invoices, grant reimbursement requests, expenditure detail reports, capital asset data and reports, accounts payable data and reports, the type of computer equipment used (including the software and operating systems), construction related documents, copies of contracts, insurance invoices, schedules of judgments and agreements, check registers, calendars, securities pledged, accounts payable details, financial statements, schedule of construction contracts, retirement reports, listing of new hires, purchase orders, check requests, financial reconciliations, sales tax reports and documents, other insurance related documents, insurance policies, monitoring reports, AFR report, arbitrage documentation, copies of deposits receipts, copies of budgets, outstanding checks, revenue reports, expenditure reports, and balance sheet reports. Under the Department of Education agreed upon procedures audit, LPSB staff provided Class size data, PEP data and a user guide. Under the Statewide Agreed Upon procedure, LPSB staff provided proof of required trainings such as ethics, bond insurance policies, list of all bank accounts, a listing of employees, officials employed during the year, and a list of deposit and collection sites. Other requests from our external auditors may come via email throughout the audit process and responses are provided likewise. All of the items listed above, and other items that were not listed above, are routinely provided each year. For several decades this has been the standard and nothing has changed in terms of provided supporting documentation within this particular audit. Internal controls have been in place for many decades. The external auditors have been reviewing, studying and auditing our internal controls for three decades. Over the years, LPSB internal controls have been adjusted, strengthened or heighten to prevent operational deficiencies, fraud and/or non-compliance of which the auditors have contributed to its advancement. Substantially, there has been no change to internal controls as they are in place for a reason. Systematically, internal controls are planted and executed in various areas and departments for various functions and/or lawful requirements. The biggest threats to any organization are misappropriation or improper disbursement of funds. Neither have occurred, because internal controls such as the utilization of electronic requisitions and check request processes were in place to ensure goods and services were precured properly and vendor payments were substantiated. LPSB stands by its management representations that have been provided to the auditors. We acknowledge our responsibility for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal controls relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error. In addition to supporting documentation, the external auditors had complete access to our financial software to ascertain the completeness and accuracy of our financial records.

Ignacio School District has already taken steps in changing the overall process of managing our Federal Award grants and overall year-end closing entries. The district will be working closely with our new auditors to ensure that Single Audits are completed annually moving forward. Our district has implemented scheduled monthly Requests For Funds and budget reviews for each grant to confirm that the grants are being spent according to their approved applications. The Superintendent and Finance Director meet to review the overall process to ensure grant compliance. This includes, but is not limited to assuring that the district charges a de minimis indirect cost rate and submitting End of Year reports to CDE. The district has assigned responsibility of Federal Grant oversight to new personnel. To assure a segregation of duties, there are three district office personnel involved in the management and oversight of the grants. The district has also been trained on proper closing entry procedures for all year-end closing entries and year-end Annual Financial Reporting of grants.

Program: AL 84.010 – Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies – Subrecipient Monitoring Corrective Action Plan: The Agency will strengthen both its fiscal monitoring and Single Audit tracking processes to ensure full compliance with 2 CFR §200.332 and §200.501. The Agency will update its fiscal monitoring procedures to ensure timely, well documented, and risk responsive reviews. Key actions include: • Updating the fiscal monitoring SOP to require complete documentation of all procedures performed, including use of the fiscal monitoring worksheet. • Implementing a monitoring calendar with automated reminders to ensure subrecipients are reviewed within the three year cycle and that higher risk entities receive additional attention. • Requiring supervisory review of all monitoring files to confirm completeness and adequacy. • Strengthening documentation standards so that all items reviewed and conclusions reached are clearly recorded. • Providing refresher training to staff on federal cost principles and monitoring expectations. • Introducing standardized naming conventions and consistent terminology aligned with 2 CFR Part 200 to ensure clarity, uniformity, and ease of review across all monitoring files. This includes consistent labeling of subprograms, transaction samples, supporting documentation, and references to applicable regulatory requirements. The Agency will reinforce its Single Audit tracking and verification procedures to ensure accurate identification and documentation of audit requirements. Key actions include: • Creating a standardized Single Audit tracking log capturing fiscal year end, total federal expenditures, audit requirement status, and follow up actions. • Revising SOPs to require documented verification when a subrecipient exceeds the $1,000,000 threshold but reports that no Single Audit is required. • Implementing system alerts to flag subrecipients approaching or exceeding the audit threshold. • Ensuring timely review and documentation of all submitted Single Audits, including any findings and resolutions. • Providing staff training on Single Audit requirements and updated procedures. These actions will strengthen internal controls, improve documentation, and ensure consistent compliance with federal subrecipient monitoring and audit requirements. Contact: Victoria Katzberg, Director of Grants Compliance Anticipated Completion Date: 6/30/2026

Department will strengthen controls to ensure that the required award information is provided, once available. Certain information such as Federal Award Identification Number and Federal Transit Administration and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration award date are not available at the time of contracting CDOT is working on a process to provide this information, once it is available in a publicly available format on CDOT’s website or on a subrecipient facing grant management site. We will add a note to the contract explaining where the information will be posted on our site when it becomes available. The Department will also identify staff requiring additional training on classification and coding for contractors vs. subrecipients.

Finding 2025-003 Program: Grants to States for Medicaid Assistance Listing No.: 93.778 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award Year: FY 2024 – 2025 Compliance Requirement: Consistent with the requirements of the subaward agreement, the University is required to submit compliance reporting to the grantor annually beginning in the year the funds were received. University’s Response: The University was not provided with the required compliance reporting templates at the time the subaward was issued. As a result, the University was unable to submit the required reports during the applicable reporting period. The grantor did not request submission of the reports during this time. Upon becoming aware of the reporting requirement during the Single Audit process, the University requested the appropriate templates and reporting guidance from the grantor. The templates were subsequently provided, and the University is continuing to work with the grantor to ensure accurate completion and submission of the required compliance reporting. The University confirms that grant funds were used in accordance with the terms and allowable activities of the subaward agreement. Corrective Action Plan: The University will continue to seek clarification and guidance from the grantor regarding required compliance reporting and the appropriate format for submission. If sufficient guidance is not provided, the University will submit the required compliance reporting to the best of its ability based on available information, understanding that the submission may be subject to review or revision by the grantor. No additional corrective action is planned at this time. The University will continue to work with the grantor to address reporting requirements as information becomes available. Name of the responsible person: Brian Shollenberger, Vice President for Financial Affairs and University Development Anticipated completion date: May 31, 2026

Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management acknowledges the material weakness identified regarding the lack of sufficient appropriate audit evidence to support compliance with federal program requirements for the Special Education Cluster (IDEA) and the Child Nutrition Cluster. We recognize that the inability to provide certain customary accounting records and supporting documentation resulted in a disclaimer of opinion on the District’s compliance. We take this finding seriously and are committed to strengthening our internal controls and recordkeeping practices. To address this issue, management has implemented the following corrective actions: 1. Enhanced Recordkeeping Procedures: We have established and communicated clear procedures to ensure that all financial transactions and program activities are properly documented and that supporting records are maintained in accordance with federal and state requirements. Management is committed to maintaining the integrity of our financial reporting and compliance with all applicable federal program requirements. We believe these corrective actions will address the material weakness and prevent recurrence in future periods. 2. Staff Training: Relevant staff have received additional training on documentation standards and compliance requirements for federal programs to ensure understanding and consistent application of these procedures. 3. Periodic Internal Reviews: Management will conduct periodic internal reviews to verify that records are being maintained appropriately and are readily available for audit purposes. 4. Ongoing Monitoring: We will continue to monitor compliance with these procedures and make improvements as necessary to ensure that all required documentation is available for future audits.

The County acknowledges the delay in submitting the Data Collection Form within the required timeframe. The delay was primarily attributable to unresolved financial data and reconciliation issues resulting from the September 2023 transition to the Workday ERP system. Additional time was necessary to resolve these issues and ensure accurate financial information was provided for the audit and subsequent filing. The County continues to strengthen reconciliation and year-end closing procedures and refine processes within Workday. With these improvements, the County anticipates the 2025 audit and related filings will be completed within the required timeframes.

Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurred with the prior year (2023-004) and current year renumbered recommendation (2024-004), acknowledging that the unexpected resignation of the former independent auditor (January 2023), and the domino effect of a delay in securing a new independent auditor (April 2023) continue to challenge the Organization, however, the Organization notes the status and progress of the following single audits: • June 30, 2022, filed in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC) in February 2025. • June 30, 2023, filed in the FAC in March 2026. • June 30, 2024, final review by Board in progress, projected filing in the FAC in June 2026. • June 30, 2025, engagement field work in progress with projected filing date no later than September 2026. • June 30, 2026, engagement letter signed with scheduled field work to commence after the June 30, 2025, audit FAC filing; projected to be completed with related FAC filing, no later than March 2027. The Organization notes the corrective actions that have been implemented, regarding internal controls to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance with respect to the submission deadline of single audit reports and the Data Collection Form: A. Internal Controls in Practice Since Inception of New Auditor Engagement – April 2023. As noted in the prior year corrective action response, the Organization established internal compliance controls related to the timely submission of single audit reports. Such process and review controls are implemented by the director of administrative operations, chief of staff (since December 2024), and chief executive officer; and subsequently communicated to the Board finance sub-committee and full Board, including the documented Board action(s) taken (e.g., Board agenda, minutes). B. Financial Policies and Procedures – May 2025. By May 2025, the Organization completed financial policies related to: implementation of significant accounting policies, internal control environment, cash and banking, cash disbursements and check issuance, payroll processes, procure to pay and revenue recognition policies, processes and procedures. Note the internal control policy of the Organization documents process and review controls, which were already in practice, applying to the timely filing of single audit reports. The current practices of the Organization, to the present period of the report dated June 17, 2026 is consistent with established process and review controls for timely submission of single audit reports.

Schedule of Corrective Action Plan For the Year Ended June 30, 2024 Finding 2024-003: Significant Deficiency and Noncompliance over Eligibility Responsible Official’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: We concur with the findings related to deficiencies in Internal Controls and Noncompliance over Eligibility related to our federal grant. In response, BCI has streamlined document collection and tracking and has strengthened its onboarding and document retention procedures to ensure all member files include the required documentation, including the signed member agreements. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action Plan September 1, 2024 Person Responsible for Corrective Action Plan Caryn York, President & CEO

Schedule of Corrective Action Plan For the Year Ended June 30, 2024 Finding 2024-002: Material Weakness in internal controls over Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Cost/Cost Principle (Payroll) Responsible Official’s Response and Corrective Action Plan We concur with the finding related to deficiencies in our time tracking process. We have implemented a time tracking system using QuickBooks Time starting in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2025. This system is designed to accurately capture and record employees’ hours worked by project/grant. Comprehensive training sessions have been conducted for all affected employees to ensure they are proficient in using the new time tracking system. Supervisors have received additional training on monitoring and verifying time entries. Planned Implementation Date of Corrective Action Plan September 1, 2024 Person Responsible for Corrective Action Plan Caryn York, President & CEO

TOFMHS concurs with the finding. The agency retained new auditors for the June 30,2024 fiscal year, subsequent to the due date for submission of the data collection reports. Corrective Action to be Taken: The Agency will take all reasonable measures to work with the new auditors to complete the audit process and submit the data collection report within the required time period. Responsible Person: Fiscal Officer/Program Director Completion Date: January 1, 2025