Reporting Responses CSN – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; CSN Office of Grants and Contracts Post-Award Management has advised the grant’s principal invest...
Reporting Responses CSN – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; CSN Office of Grants and Contracts Post-Award Management has advised the grant’s principal investigator (PI) that underlying documentations must match the data reported on the Annual Performance Reports submitted to the award sponsor. The CSN GEAR UP PI and GEAR UP First Year College Advisor have refined the reporting and record keeping process to ensure accurate reporting and supporting documentation is kept in compliance with the grant. The Senior Accountant of Grants and Contracts also reviews the data before each report is submitted to the sponsor. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. CSN GEAR UP PI and GEAR UP First Year College Advisor will continue to ensure accurate reporting and supporting documentation is kept in compliance. CSN Office of Grants and Contracts Post-Award Management will continue to communicate with PIs to ensure all reports have been reviewed for adequate and accurate supporting documentation prior to submission to the sponsor. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. CSN Program Director, who is the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) Principal Investigator (PI), is accountable for exercising oversight and responsibility. GBC – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; o Establishment of a formal review and approval workflow requiring secondary review by the Grants Office of participants numbers prior to submission of any financial or performance report. This will require: (1) Identification of the reporting period; (2) Review of all source documents supporting reported totals; and, (3) Mathematical reconciliation of reported figures o Training provided to grant program staff and administrative personnel on documentation standards and reporting accuracy expectations. o All corrective actions were implemented immediately upon identification of the finding and will be fully in place within 30 days of notification. The revised procedures are now standard practice for all grants reporting participant numbers. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. o Reports may not be submitted to the pass-through entity without documented secondary review and written approval from the Grants Director or the Grant and Asset Coordinator. o Interim and final program reports will be reviewed to ensure: (1) Participant totals match underlying documentation; (2) Source documentation is retained and accessible; and, (3) Approval signatures are present prior to submission. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. o The Grants Director and the Director of Business Operations are responsible for oversight of grant compliance. NSU – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; NSU has reviewed the finding and has put additional measures in place to ensure compliance. Staff responsible for preparing reports were retrained and multi-layered quality checks have been implemented to safeguard integrity of data entered in shared databases. NSU’s multi-layered quality checks include written confirmations from staff involved in service activities and backup of documentation within NSU’s local storage to support the numbers being reported. The latter represents a move away from using a database that is accessible to multiple institutions to a centrally controlled location within NSU. This process outlined herein was implemented in August 2025 and ensures that the source documentation reconciles with reports and is available for auditing purposes. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. To ensure compliance, NSU staff who are responsible for the program and technical reporting have reviewed and updated internal policies and procedures relating to reporting. Performance targets and benchmarks have been reestablished and will be measured at set intervals. Any errors detected will be documented and remedied. Additionally, errors will serve as the basis for continuous improvement processes and retraining as needed. These will be documented in performance reviews. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. The NSU GEAR UP Principal Investigator and First-Year College Advisor Supervisor are responsible and accountable for ensuring reporting is supported by underlying records. TMCC – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; TMCC reports on the number of participants for all services rendered under the GEAR UP grant through both the Interim Progress Report (IPR) and the Final Progress Report (FPR). The identified issue concerns a discrepancy between the reported participant count on the IPR and the underlying supporting records. To ensure data accuracy going forward, TMCC will implement an additional review of participant reporting. Prior to the submission of progress reports, a second technical reviewer within the GEAR UP team would verify the participant counts entered into GEARS (GEAR UP’s designated data-reporting platform) against the supporting documentation (the attendance sheet). Should a discrepancy be identified, the GEAR UP team will follow up with the individual responsible for the data entry on GEARS to reconcile the difference. This may include requesting correction of data entry errors or obtaining additional documentation to support the reported participant count, as appropriate. Additionally, attendance sign-in sheets will be collected and retained by TMCC staff to allow for direct verification prior to reporting. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. Compliance and performance will be measured by the implementation of a second reviewer for the participant data reported through GEARS and included in the progress reporting. This review can be documented through an internal checklist, internal communication, or other appropriate records demonstrating that the participant data was reviewed and validated prior to the submission of progress reports. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. Primary responsibility for accurate participant reporting will remain with the TMCC First Year College Advisor (FYCA) or other designated staff responsible for preparing grant performance reports. Responsibility for completing the secondary verification review will be assigned to a designated GEAR UP technical reviewer or program staff member who is independent of the initial data entry and report preparation. If repeat or similar observations occur, program leadership will evaluate adherence to established procedures and implement additional corrective actions, which may include staff retraining, revision of internal procedures, or reassignment of reporting responsibilities, as appropriate. UNLV agrees with this finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; The UNLV OSP will continue to work with PIs to ensure there is a documented review of progress reports. PIs will be expected to demonstrate review of progress reports and provide supporting documentation for data. Additionally, if reports require financial expenditures, the Office of Sponsored Programs will require validation before submission. Communication dissemination will occur twice within the academic year. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. UNLV OSP will continue communications through Research Weekly (an internal communication newsletter) to remind PIs to ensure timely submission of progress reports and retention of records such as, lab notes, testing, populations served, activities performed, etc. to demonstrate activities supported by the grant. UNLV OSP will maintain communications with PIs to perform monitoring throughout the life of the award. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. The UNLV OSP Executive Director is accountable for exercising oversight and responsibility along with the applicable Deans. UNR – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; All participant counts reported in Interim Progress Reports will be supported by retained underlying source documentation that directly reconcile to the reported totals. Standard documentation expectations and retention requirements will be communicated to program staff. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. Compliance will be measured through pre-submission review of reported participant data against underlying records and through post-submission spot checks conducted by Program Director. Documentation supporting reported counts will be retained in the official project file and made available for future audit, management review, and internal monitoring. Evidence of reconciliation will be documented via checklists or certifications retained with the report. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. Program Director WNC – Agrees with the finding. ● Detailed corrective action taken, including what will be done to avoid the identified issues in the future, and when these measures will be in place; Sponsors have determined grant practices and required reporting documentation, which have not been consistently required or expected of subrecipients. WNC will maintain its own sign-in sheets and documentation for all grant-sponsored activities to ensure compliance with overall grant requirements. The corrective action was implemented in July 2025. ● How compliance and performance will be measured and documented for future audit, management and performance review. The GEAR Up coordinator will create and maintain sign-in sheets or other documentation for every grant-sponsored activity. The coordinator will maintain records in accordance with federal and state guidance and will ensure that supporting documentation is sufficient to support the reported figures. ● Who will be responsible and may be held accountable in the future if repeat or similar observations are noted. Final responsibility and accountability fall on the GEAR Up coordinator and grant administrator. Official Contact: Rhett R. Vertrees, Assistant Chief Financial Officer 2601 Enterprise Road, Reno NV 89512-1666 Phone: (775)784-3409, Fax: (775)784-1127 Email: rvertrees@nshe.nevada.edu