FINDING 2024-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States Assistance Listings Number: 84.027 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BOONE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01 and 22611-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-046-PN01 and 22611-046-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 24 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BOONE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States Assistance Listings Number: 84.027 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BOONE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01 and 22611-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-046-PN01 and 22611-046-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 24 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BOONE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States Assistance Listings Number: 84.027 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BOONE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01 and 22611-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-046-PN01 and 22611-046-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 24 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF BOONE TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
Various Agencies Finding 2024 ¬– 015: ALN 10.565, 10.568, 10.569 – Food Distribution Cluster ALN 15.252 – Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR) ALN 21.027 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN 84.425C – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – GEER Fund ALN 84.425D – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ESSER Fund ALN 84.425R – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – CRRSA EANS Program ALN 84.425U – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER ALN 84.425V – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP EANS Program ALN 84.425W – COVID 19 – Education Stabilization Fund – ARP ESSER HCY ALN 93.044, 93.045, 93.053 – Aging Cluster (including COVID-19) ALN 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ALN 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant A Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Exist in the Commonwealth’s Subrecipient Audit Resolution Process (A Similar Condition Was Noted in Prior Year Finding 2023-024) Federal Grant Number(s) and Year(s): 228PA100I1003 (6/13/2022 – 6/30/2025), 231PA445Q2204 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8005 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 231PA825Y8105 (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 241PA825Y8005 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 241PA825Y8105 (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), S18AF20004 (11/01/2017 – 10/31/2025), S19AF20004 (12/01/2018 – 11/30/2025), S21AF10015 (1/01/2021 – 12/31/2023), S22AF00017 (1/01/2022 – 12/31/2024), S23AF00002 (11/01/2022 – 10/31/2027), TN75GJE1S7G3 (3/03/2021 – 12/31/2024), S425W210039 (4/23/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425U210028 (3/24/2021– 9/30/2024), S425D210028 (1/05/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C200013 (5/18/2020 – 4/01/2024), S425R210037 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), S425V210037 (11/16/2021 – 9/30/2024), S425C210013 (3/13/2020 – 9/30/2024), 2101PACMC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAHDC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PAPHC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2101PASSC6 (4/01/2021 – 9/30/2024), 2201PAOASS (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2023), 2201PASTPH (1/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOACM (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOAHD (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOANS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2301PAOASS (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PAOACM (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOAHD (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOANS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2401PAOASS (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2101PATANF (10/01/2020 – 9/30/2021), 2201PATANF (10/01/2021 – 9/30/2022), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2023), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2024), 2301PASOSR (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PASOSR (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025), 2301PATANF (10/01/2022 – 9/30/2024), 2401PATANF (10/01/2023 – 9/30/2025) Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters for Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation (AMLR), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and Social Services Block Grant Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance for Food Distribution Cluster, Education Stabilization Fund, and Aging Cluster Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Condition: Under the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's (Commonwealth) implementation of the Single Audit Act, review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audit reports is split into two stages. The Office of the Budget’s Bureau of Accounting and Financial Management (OB-BAFM) ensures the reports meet technical standards through a centralized desk review process. The various funding agencies in the Commonwealth are responsible for making a management decision on each finding within six months of the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s (FAC) Acceptance date for audits subject to Uniform Guidance and to ensure appropriate corrective action is taken by the subrecipient (except for Uniform Guidance Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) audits under U.S. Department of Labor programs which are permitted 12 months for management decisions in accordance with 2 CFR Section 2900.21). Each Commonwealth agency is also responsible for reviewing financial information in each audit report to determine whether the audit included all pass-through funding provided by the agency to ensure pass-through funds were subject to audit. Most agencies meet this requirement by performing Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) reconciliations. The agency is also required to adjust Commonwealth records, if necessary. Our fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 audit of the Commonwealth’s process for review and resolution of subrecipient Single Audits included an evaluation of the Commonwealth’s fiscal year ended June 30, 2023 subrecipient audit universe for audits due for submission to the FAC during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. We also evaluated the Commonwealth’s review of 45 subrecipient audit reports with findings in major programs/clusters which were identified on the Commonwealth agencies’ tracking lists during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024 and required management decisions by Commonwealth agencies. Our testing disclosed the following audit exceptions regarding the Commonwealth agencies’ review of subrecipient audit reports: • Pennsylvania Department of Aging (PDOA): Our testing disclosed that PDOA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 17.6 months to over 18 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. There was also a delay in PDOA’s procedures to ensure the subrecipient SEFAs were accurate so that major programs were properly determined and subjected to audit. • Department of Agriculture (PDA): Our testing disclosed that PDA did not have procedures in place to track audit reports including having an audit tracking list. The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 8.7 months to over 16 months after the FAC Acceptance date for four out of four audit reports with findings. • Department of Education (PDE): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.8 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for seven out of 22 audit reports with findings. There were additional audit reports with findings listed on PDE’s audit tracking list where management decisions were not made timely. • Department of Environmental Protection (DEP): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 11.6 months to over 12 months after the FAC Acceptance date for two out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the two late audit reports, DEP made management decisions timely. However, DEP did not notify the subrecipients of the management decisions within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. • Department of Human Services (DHS): The time period for making a management decision on findings was approximately 7.2 months after the FAC Acceptance date for one out of two audit reports with findings. Our testing disclosed for the one late audit report DHS made a management decision timely. However, DHS did not notify the subrecipient of the management decision within the required six month time period after the audit reports FAC Acceptance date. Criteria: 2 CFR §200.332, Requirements for pass-through entities, states in part: All pass-through entities must: (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward, and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521 [Management decision]. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F [Audit Requirements] of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501 [Audit requirements]. (g) Consider whether the results of the subrecipient’s audit, on-site review, or other monitoring indicate conditions that necessitate adjustments to the pass-through entity’s own records. (h) Consider taking enforcement action against noncompliant subrecipients as described in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance] of this part and in program regulations. In order to carry out these responsibilities properly, good internal control dictates that state pass-through agencies ensure subrecipient Single Audit SEFAs are representative of state payment records each year, and that the related federal programs have been properly subjected to Single Audit procedures. 2 CFR §200.512, Report submission, states in part: (a) General. (1) The audit must be completed and the data collection form described in paragraph (b) of this section and reporting package described in paragraph (c) of this section must be submitted within the earlier of 30 calendar days after receipt of the auditor’s report(s), or nine months after the end of the audit period. If the due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the reporting package is due the next business day. 2 CFR §200.521, Management decision, states in part: (a) General. The management decision must clearly state whether or not the finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action. (d) Time requirements. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity responsible for issuing a management decision must do so within six months of acceptance of the audit report by the FAC. The auditee must initiate and proceed with corrective action as rapidly as possible and corrective action should begin no later than upon receipt of the audit report. 2 CFR §200.505, Sanctions, states: In cases of continued inability or unwillingness to have an audit conducted in accordance with this part, Federal agencies and pass-through entities must take appropriate action as provided in §200.339 [Remedies for noncompliance]. 2 CFR §200.339, Remedies for noncompliance, states in part: If a non-Federal entity fails to comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may impose additional conditions, as described in §200.208 [Specific conditions]. If the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity determines that noncompliance cannot be remedied by imposing additional conditions, the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may take one or more of the following actions, as appropriate in the circumstances. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) (a) Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the non-Federal entity or more severe enforcement action by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. (b) Disallow (that is, deny both use of funds and any applicable matching credit for) all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance. (c) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the Federal award. (d) Initiate suspension or debarment proceedings as authorized under 2 CFR Part 180 and Federal awarding agency regulations (or in the case of a pass-through entity, recommend such a proceeding be initiated by a Federal awarding agency). (e) Withhold further Federal awards for the project or program. (f) Take other remedies that may be legally available. To ensure Commonwealth enforcement of federal regulations for subrecipient noncompliance with audit requirements, Commonwealth Management Directive 325.08, Amended – Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, Section 5 related to policy, states in part: (a) Agencies must develop and implement remedial action that reflects the unique requirements of each program… (b) The remedial action should be implemented within six months from the date the first remedial action is initiated. At the end of the six-month period, the recipient should take the appropriate corrective action or the final stage of remedial action should be imposed on the recipient. Examples of remedial action include, but are not limited to: (1) Meeting or calling the recipient to explain the importance and benefits of the audit and audit resolution processes, emphasizing the value of the audit as an administrative tool and the Commonwealth’s reliance on an acceptable audit and prompt resolution as evidence of the recipient’s ability to properly administer the program. (2) Encouraging the entity to establish an audit committee or designate an individual as the single point of contact to: (a) Communicate regarding the audit. (b) Arrange for and oversee the audit. (c) Direct and monitor audit resolution. (3) Providing technical assistance to the recipient in devising and implementing an appropriate plan to remedy the noncompliance. (4) Withholding a portion of assistance payments until the noncompliance is resolved. (5) Withholding or disallowing overhead costs until the noncompliance is resolved. (6) Suspending the assistance agreement until the noncompliance is resolved. (7) Terminating the assistance agreement with the recipient and, if necessary, seeking alternative entities to administer the program. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) Management Directive 325.09, Amended – Processing Subrecipient Single Audits of Federal Pass-Through Funds, Section 7 related to procedures, states in part: c. Agencies. (2) Evaluate single audit report submissions received from BAFM to determine program purpose acceptability by verifying, at a minimum, that all agency-funded programs are properly included on the applicable financial schedules; that findings affecting the agency contain sufficient information to facilitate a management decision; and that the subrecipient has submitted an adequate corrective action plan. (5) Issue management decisions relative to audit findings and crosscutting findings assigned to the agency for resolution, as required by 2 CFR §200.521. If responsible for the resolution of crosscutting findings, notify the affected agency or agencies upon resolution of such findings. (6) Impose or coordinate the imposition of remedial action in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200.339 and Management Directive 325.08 Amended, Remedies for Recipient Noncompliance with Audit Requirements, when subrecipients fail to comply with the provisions of Subpart F. Management Directive 325.12, Amended – Standards for Enterprise Risk Management in Commonwealth Agencies, adopted the internal control framework outlined in the United States Government Accountability Office’s, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government (Green Book). The Green Book states in part: Management should establish and operate monitoring activities to monitor the internal control system and evaluate the results. Management should remediate identified internal control deficiencies on a timely basis. Cause: One reason provided by Commonwealth management for untimely audit resolution in the various agencies, including making management decisions, approving corrective action, and performing procedures to ensure the accuracy of subrecipient SEFAs, was either a change in staff or a lack of staff to follow up and process subrecipient audit reports more timely. Effect: Since required management decisions were not made within six months to ensure appropriate corrective action was taken on audits received from subrecipients, the Commonwealth did not comply with federal regulations, and subrecipients were not made aware of acceptance or rejection of corrective action plans in a timely manner. Further, noncompliance may recur in future periods if control deficiencies are not corrected on a timely basis, and there is an increased risk of unallowable charges being made to federal programs if corrective action and recovery of questioned costs is not timely. Regarding the SEFA reviews or alternate procedures which are not being performed timely, there is an increased risk that subrecipients could be misspending and/or inappropriately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by agency personnel on a timely basis as required. Recommendation: We recommend that the above weaknesses that cause untimely subrecipient Single Audit resolution, including untimely management decisions on findings, and untimely review of the SEFA or alternate procedures be corrected to ensure compliance with federal requirements and Commonwealth Management Directives, and to better ensure timelier subrecipient compliance with program requirements. PDOA Response: PDOA agrees with the finding. PDA Response: PDA agrees with the finding. PDE Response: PDE agrees with the finding. DEP Response: DEP agrees with the finding. Finding 2024 ¬– 015: (continued) DHS Response: DHS agrees that there was an exception where human error caused a management decision on one single audit report to be issued untimely; in this instance, the decision itself was made timely but was not communicated in a timely manner. DHS disagrees that an isolated incident due to human error signifies a weakness in internal controls. This was not a systemic issue and therefore should not have been considered a significant deficiency in internal controls, and DHS should not have been included in this finding. Auditors’ Conclusion: The agency responses from PDOA, PDA, PDE, and DEP indicate agreement with the finding. DHS agrees that an error occurred resulting in untimely submission of one management decision, DHS disagrees that the error represents a significant deficiency. We acknowledge the error occurred due to an oversight and is not a systemic error, however, the error resulted in noncompliance with one of two audit reports that required timely management decisions. We will evaluate corrective action in the subsequent audit. The finding remains as stated. Questioned Costs: The amount of questioned costs cannot be determined.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
CONDITION The Department of Public Instruction (DPI) did not report Child Nutrition Cluster subawards to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) correctly. After testing FFATA reporting for the Child Nutrition Cluster, it was discovered that there were FFATA errors in the following areas: 1. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.559) for the 2023 grant year awards (October 2022-September 2023). After an analysis of grants awarded in 2023, we randomly sampled and pulled 11 awards to test. We found that all 11 were not submitted timely. The samples we pulled should have been reported by 4/30/23, 6/30/23, 7/31/23, 9/30/23, 11/30/23, and 1/31/24, but were not reported until 4/3/24 or 4/5/24. DPI explained that this occurred because all CNP reports from March to October of 2023 had to be resubmitted due to the wrong FEIN # being used on the reports. DPI resubmitted these reports on 4/3/24 and 4/5/24. The resubmitting of reports over a year later and without evidence that the reports were initially submitted timely is the reason for the audit finding. Those grant awards totaled $328,815.19. 2. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information timely for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for the 2024 grant year awards (October 2023-September 2024). After an analysis of grant awards awarded in 2024, we randomly sampled and pulled 4 awards to test. We found one of the four was not reported timely to FFATA. The report should have been submitted by 1/31/24 but it wasn't reported until 3/4/24. 3. The Department of Public Instruction did not report the subaward information for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559) for program months November and December of 2023 of the October 2023-September 2024 grant year. After an analysis of grant awards for that grant year and as reported to the auditor by DPI, it was discovered that 133 subawards should have been reported to FFATA, totaling $1,437,209.93. 4. The Department of Public Instruction did not properly report the subaward action/obligation date in the FSRS system for the Child Nutrition Cluster (Assistance Listing number 10.553, 10.555, 10.556, 10.559, 10.582). DPI staff run the FFATA report from the ND Foods system at the end of every month which is then uploaded into the FSRS system. In the FSRS system, it is listing the subaward action /obligation date as the day the report was pulled which is not the same day that payments are actually made. DPI reported the wrong subaward action/obligation date for all Child Nutrition Cluster samples that were pulled. There is no dollar error for these awards, only the obligation date. CRITERIA Federal regulation 2 CFR 170, Appendix A requires a Federal Financial Assistance Transparency Act (FFATA) report for each subaward that equals or exceeds $30,000 no later than the end of the month following the month in which the obligation was made. 2 CFR 200.303(a) states that non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. CAUSE DPI does not have adequate policies and procedures to ensure accurate and timely reporting for FFATA EFFECT Not meeting the FFATA requirements increases the likelihood that the public will not have access to transparent and accurate information regarding expenditures of federal awards. Additionally, federal regulations address actions that federal agencies may impose if a state entity does not comply with the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of a federal award. According to 2 CFR 200.208(c), “Specific conditions,” these actions may include • requiring reimbursement instead of advance payments; • not allowing the agency to proceed to the next phase until it submits evidence of acceptable performance; • requiring additional, more detailed financial reports or additional project monitoring; • requiring the agency to obtain technical or management assistance; or • establishing other prior approvals. If the federal agency determines the state agency cannot remedy its noncompliance through the above actions, 2 CFR 200.339, “Remedies for noncompliance,” outlines additional actions the federal agency may take. Depending on the circumstances, these actions may include: • temporarily withholding payments until the noncompliance has been corrected, • Denying the use of funds, • partly or fully suspending or terminating the federal award, • suspending or debarring the agency, • withholding further awards for the project or program, or • pursuing other available legal remedies. CONTEXT During our audit period, there were 407 subrecipients receiving Federal grant awards for the Child Nutrition Cluster program totaling $68,351,704. Out of the 407 subrecipients, 309 were over the $30,000 threshold and should have been reported to FFATA. In 2023, there were 164 subrecipients and, in 2024, 145 subrecipients that met the threshold, for a total of $66,879,778. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. IDENTIFICATION AS A REPEAT FINDING Finding 2022-022 was reported in the immediate prior year. The prior audit finding was reported as implemented on the summary schedule of prior audit findings. This materially misrepresents the status of the finding. RECOMMENDATION We recommend the Department of Public Instruction implement policies and procedures to ensure timely and accurate submission of FFATA reports in accordance with federal regulations. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION RESPONSE The Department of Public Instruction agrees with the issues identified. See “Management’s Response and Corrective Action” section of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Indiana Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-144-PN01, 22619-144-PN01, 23611-144-PN01, 23619-144-PN01, 22611-144-ARP, 22619-144-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure that the School Corporation complied with Earmarking compliance requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students was met. The School Corporation's payroll-related disbursements for Non-Public Proportionate Share were estimated based on actual hours worked by School Corporation staff at nonpublic schools in the previous school year. This amount was allocated over the biweekly salaries of employees providing services at the nonpublic schools. This resulted in a fixed amount of each biweekly pay being charged to the nonpublic accounts regardless of actual time spent by employees with nonpublic students in the given pay period. There was no reconciliation process between budgeted hours and actual hours worked with nonpublic students during each pay period. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 GREENSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed, . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Management of the School Corporation had not designed a system of internal controls that would have ensured that time worked by certified staff for nonpublic schools was properly identified. Internal controls in place did not identify that an improper method was used to identify expenditures for nonpublic students with disabilities. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the proportionate share required to be expended for nonpublic students was met. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure the Non-Public Proportionate Share amounts are spent based on actual charged time by staff working with the nonpublic students. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Indiana Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-144-PN01, 22619-144-PN01, 23611-144-PN01, 23619-144-PN01, 22611-144-ARP, 22619-144-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure that the School Corporation complied with Earmarking compliance requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students was met. The School Corporation's payroll-related disbursements for Non-Public Proportionate Share were estimated based on actual hours worked by School Corporation staff at nonpublic schools in the previous school year. This amount was allocated over the biweekly salaries of employees providing services at the nonpublic schools. This resulted in a fixed amount of each biweekly pay being charged to the nonpublic accounts regardless of actual time spent by employees with nonpublic students in the given pay period. There was no reconciliation process between budgeted hours and actual hours worked with nonpublic students during each pay period. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 GREENSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed, . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Management of the School Corporation had not designed a system of internal controls that would have ensured that time worked by certified staff for nonpublic schools was properly identified. Internal controls in place did not identify that an improper method was used to identify expenditures for nonpublic students with disabilities. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the proportionate share required to be expended for nonpublic students was met. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure the Non-Public Proportionate Share amounts are spent based on actual charged time by staff working with the nonpublic students. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Indiana Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-144-PN01, 22619-144-PN01, 23611-144-PN01, 23619-144-PN01, 22611-144-ARP, 22619-144-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure that the School Corporation complied with Earmarking compliance requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students was met. The School Corporation's payroll-related disbursements for Non-Public Proportionate Share were estimated based on actual hours worked by School Corporation staff at nonpublic schools in the previous school year. This amount was allocated over the biweekly salaries of employees providing services at the nonpublic schools. This resulted in a fixed amount of each biweekly pay being charged to the nonpublic accounts regardless of actual time spent by employees with nonpublic students in the given pay period. There was no reconciliation process between budgeted hours and actual hours worked with nonpublic students during each pay period. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 GREENSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed, . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Management of the School Corporation had not designed a system of internal controls that would have ensured that time worked by certified staff for nonpublic schools was properly identified. Internal controls in place did not identify that an improper method was used to identify expenditures for nonpublic students with disabilities. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the proportionate share required to be expended for nonpublic students was met. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure the Non-Public Proportionate Share amounts are spent based on actual charged time by staff working with the nonpublic students. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Indiana Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-144-PN01, 22619-144-PN01, 23611-144-PN01, 23619-144-PN01, 22611-144-ARP, 22619-144-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure that the School Corporation complied with Earmarking compliance requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students was met. The School Corporation's payroll-related disbursements for Non-Public Proportionate Share were estimated based on actual hours worked by School Corporation staff at nonpublic schools in the previous school year. This amount was allocated over the biweekly salaries of employees providing services at the nonpublic schools. This resulted in a fixed amount of each biweekly pay being charged to the nonpublic accounts regardless of actual time spent by employees with nonpublic students in the given pay period. There was no reconciliation process between budgeted hours and actual hours worked with nonpublic students during each pay period. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 GREENSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed, . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Management of the School Corporation had not designed a system of internal controls that would have ensured that time worked by certified staff for nonpublic schools was properly identified. Internal controls in place did not identify that an improper method was used to identify expenditures for nonpublic students with disabilities. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the proportionate share required to be expended for nonpublic students was met. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure the Non-Public Proportionate Share amounts are spent based on actual charged time by staff working with the nonpublic students. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Indiana Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-144-PN01, 22619-144-PN01, 23611-144-PN01, 23619-144-PN01, 22611-144-ARP, 22619-144-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure that the School Corporation complied with Earmarking compliance requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students was met. The School Corporation's payroll-related disbursements for Non-Public Proportionate Share were estimated based on actual hours worked by School Corporation staff at nonpublic schools in the previous school year. This amount was allocated over the biweekly salaries of employees providing services at the nonpublic schools. This resulted in a fixed amount of each biweekly pay being charged to the nonpublic accounts regardless of actual time spent by employees with nonpublic students in the given pay period. There was no reconciliation process between budgeted hours and actual hours worked with nonpublic students during each pay period. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 GREENSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed, . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Management of the School Corporation had not designed a system of internal controls that would have ensured that time worked by certified staff for nonpublic schools was properly identified. Internal controls in place did not identify that an improper method was used to identify expenditures for nonpublic students with disabilities. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the proportionate share required to be expended for nonpublic students was met. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure the Non-Public Proportionate Share amounts are spent based on actual charged time by staff working with the nonpublic students. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Indiana Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-144-PN01, 22619-144-PN01, 23611-144-PN01, 23619-144-PN01, 22611-144-ARP, 22619-144-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure that the School Corporation complied with Earmarking compliance requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students was met. The School Corporation's payroll-related disbursements for Non-Public Proportionate Share were estimated based on actual hours worked by School Corporation staff at nonpublic schools in the previous school year. This amount was allocated over the biweekly salaries of employees providing services at the nonpublic schools. This resulted in a fixed amount of each biweekly pay being charged to the nonpublic accounts regardless of actual time spent by employees with nonpublic students in the given pay period. There was no reconciliation process between budgeted hours and actual hours worked with nonpublic students during each pay period. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 GREENSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed, . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Management of the School Corporation had not designed a system of internal controls that would have ensured that time worked by certified staff for nonpublic schools was properly identified. Internal controls in place did not identify that an improper method was used to identify expenditures for nonpublic students with disabilities. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the proportionate share required to be expended for nonpublic students was met. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure the Non-Public Proportionate Share amounts are spent based on actual charged time by staff working with the nonpublic students. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-046-PN01, 22619-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During the audit period, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-46-PN01, and 22619-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 14 DUNELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements, and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-046-PN01, 22619-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During the audit period, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-46-PN01, and 22619-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 14 DUNELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements, and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-046-PN01, 22619-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During the audit period, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-46-PN01, and 22619-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 14 DUNELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements, and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-046-PN01, 22619-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During the audit period, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-46-PN01, and 22619-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 14 DUNELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements, and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-046-PN01, 22619-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During the audit period, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-46-PN01, and 22619-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 14 DUNELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements, and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-046-PN01, 22619-046-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Porter County Education Services (Cooperative). During the audit period, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 22611-046-PN01, 22611-046-ARP, 22619-46-PN01, and 22619-046-ARP grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 14 DUNELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause Through inquiry of the Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member schools starting in July 2022, all of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure the Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements, and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, 22619-043-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Significant Deficiency, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northwest Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2022-2023 the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The nonpublic expenditures spent did not meet the earmarking requirements for grant award numbers 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP. From the beginning of the grant awards until September 2022, total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. Beginning in September 2022, the Cooperative began tracking expenditures by member school for the nonpublic services. As such we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE from the beginning of the grant awards through September 2022, as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-043-PN01, 2611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member school starting in September 2022, most of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation Management of the School Corporation should develop written policies and procedures which would require tracking of actual nonpublic proportionate share expenditures by member school by the Cooperative. Documentation should be maintained to show how these expenditures are being tracked to ensure compliance with the Earmarking compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, 22619-043-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Significant Deficiency, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northwest Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2022-2023 the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The nonpublic expenditures spent did not meet the earmarking requirements for grant award numbers 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP. From the beginning of the grant awards until September 2022, total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. Beginning in September 2022, the Cooperative began tracking expenditures by member school for the nonpublic services. As such we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE from the beginning of the grant awards through September 2022, as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-043-PN01, 2611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member school starting in September 2022, most of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation Management of the School Corporation should develop written policies and procedures which would require tracking of actual nonpublic proportionate share expenditures by member school by the Cooperative. Documentation should be maintained to show how these expenditures are being tracked to ensure compliance with the Earmarking compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, 22619-043-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Significant Deficiency, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northwest Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2022-2023 the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The nonpublic expenditures spent did not meet the earmarking requirements for grant award numbers 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP. From the beginning of the grant awards until September 2022, total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. Beginning in September 2022, the Cooperative began tracking expenditures by member school for the nonpublic services. As such we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE from the beginning of the grant awards through September 2022, as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-043-PN01, 2611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member school starting in September 2022, most of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation Management of the School Corporation should develop written policies and procedures which would require tracking of actual nonpublic proportionate share expenditures by member school by the Cooperative. Documentation should be maintained to show how these expenditures are being tracked to ensure compliance with the Earmarking compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, 22619-043-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Significant Deficiency, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northwest Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2022-2023 the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The nonpublic expenditures spent did not meet the earmarking requirements for grant award numbers 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP. From the beginning of the grant awards until September 2022, total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. Beginning in September 2022, the Cooperative began tracking expenditures by member school for the nonpublic services. As such we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE from the beginning of the grant awards through September 2022, as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-043-PN01, 2611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member school starting in September 2022, most of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation Management of the School Corporation should develop written policies and procedures which would require tracking of actual nonpublic proportionate share expenditures by member school by the Cooperative. Documentation should be maintained to show how these expenditures are being tracked to ensure compliance with the Earmarking compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, 22619-043-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Significant Deficiency, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northwest Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2022-2023 the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The nonpublic expenditures spent did not meet the earmarking requirements for grant award numbers 22611-043-PN01, 22611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP. From the beginning of the grant awards until September 2022, total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. Beginning in September 2022, the Cooperative began tracking expenditures by member school for the nonpublic services. As such we were unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE from the beginning of the grant awards through September 2022, as required. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was isolated to the 22611-043-PN01, 2611-043-ARP, and 22619-043-ARP grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 SCHOOL CITY OF HOBART SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Through inquiry of Cooperative management, they were unaware of the requirements to track nonpublic proportionate share expenditures directly for each member school. While the Cooperative did implement new processes and procedures to ensure expenditures were tracked by member school starting in September 2022, most of the grant awards had been allocated to the member schools based on a percentage of the budget. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation was unable to ensure Cooperative compliance with earmarking requirements and the Cooperative was unable to track expenditures for nonpublic services for each member school. Consequently, the amounts requested for reimbursement were not supported by actual expenditures, but rather a percentage based on the budget per member school. Because of this, expenditures were not accurately reported to the oversight agency. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation Management of the School Corporation should develop written policies and procedures which would require tracking of actual nonpublic proportionate share expenditures by member school by the Cooperative. Documentation should be maintained to show how these expenditures are being tracked to ensure compliance with the Earmarking compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Reference Number: 2024-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation State Agency: Agency of Transportation Federal Program: Highway Planning and Construction Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Award Number and Year: FFY2023 – FFY2024 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 200.332, the following requirements are imposed on pass-through entities: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date; (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). (c) Consider imposing specific subaward conditions upon a subrecipient if appropriate as described in § 200.208. (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient's cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up and make management decisions related to cross-cutting findings in accordance with section § 200.513(a)(3)(vii). Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. (e) Depending upon the pass-through entity's assessment of risk posed by the subrecipient (as described in paragraph (b) of this section), the following monitoring tools may be useful for the pass-through entity to ensure proper accountability and compliance with program requirements and achievement of performance goals: (1) Providing subrecipients with training and technical assistance on program-related matters; and (2) Performing on-site reviews of the subrecipient's program operations; (3) Arranging for agreed-upon-procedures engagements as described in § 200.425. Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) omitted required federal award information from subawards it issued in the program and did not adequately monitor subrecipients. Context: Nineteen subawards were selected for testing and the following exceptions were noted: • For 16 of 19 subawards selected for testing, the federal award date was not included on the subaward agreement. • For 1 of 19 subawards selected for testing, the last on-site subrecipient monitoring visit was performed in FY 2019 and the next on-site monitoring did not take place until FY 2024. Per the VTrans subrecipient monitoring plan, on-site monitoring must be performed no less than every three years. Cause: Procedures and internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required federal information. Although VTrans subsequently modified its subaward issuance process, controls in effect during the audit period were not sufficient to ensure that subawards included all required information. Procedures and internal controls were also not sufficient to ensure that timely on-site monitoring visits were performed in accordance with its monitoring plan. Effect: Excluding the required federal grant award information at the time of subaward issuance may cause subrecipients and their auditors to be uninformed about specific program and other regulations that apply to the funds they receive. There is also the potential for subrecipients to have incomplete Schedules of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) in their Single Audit reports. Failure to conduct adequate subrecipient monitoring may result in a failure of VTrans to detect that subawards are used for unauthorized purposes, are managed in violation of the terms and conditions of the subawards, or that subaward performance goals are not achieved. There is an increased risk that subrecipients could be inappropriately spending and/or inaccurately tracking and reporting federal funds over multiple year periods, and these discrepancies may not be properly monitored, detected, and corrected by VTrans personnel on a timely basis. Questioned costs: Undetermined. Recommendation: VTrans should review and enhance internal controls and procedures to ensure that all required federal award information is included in subawards and that on-site subrecipient monitoring is conducted timely per the terms of its subrecipient monitoring plan. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
FINDING 2024-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-026-PN01, 21619-026-PN01, 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, 23619-026-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Harrison County Exceptional Learners Cooperative (Cooperative). During both fiscal years under audit, the Cooperative operated the special education programs and spent federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreements were between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. However, there was inadequate oversight performed by the School Corporation in order to ensure compliance with the Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking compliance requirement. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 21611-026-PN01, 21619-026-PN01, 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, and 23619-026-PN01 grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. These were the amounts reported to the IDOE. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. The 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, and 23619-026-PN01 grant awards ended during the audit period. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative fully spent the required nonpublic proportionate share amounts by the end of the grant award. The following schedule shows the total nonpublic proportionate share approved by the IDOE for all member corporations for each grant award compared with the total expenditures posted to the ledger for nonpublic proportionate share. The remaining difference of $13,595.71 is nonpublic proportionate share money not spent by the Cooperative on behalf of member schools by the end of the grant award for all awards ending during the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 25 SOUTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Grant Award/ IDOE Approved Non- Total Non-Public Proportionate Project No. Public Proportionate Share Share Spent by Cooperative Difference 22611-026-PN01 $ 47,289.04 $ 40,688.11 $ 6,600.93 22611-026-ARP 10,585.73 5,233.83 5,351.90 22619-026-PN01 1,952.05 1,263.05 689.00 23619-026-PN01 3,949.95 2,996.07 953.88 Total $ 63,776.77 $ 50,181.06 $ 13,595.71 The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the 21611-026-PN01, 21619-026- PN01, 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, and 23619-026-PN01 grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 SOUTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause The School Corporation's Director of Business Operations/Treasurer, who was also the fiscal agent for the Cooperative, stated that the amounts attributed to member corporations for nonpublic proportionate share had been calculated for many years using the methodology noted above. She was unaware that such an allocation was not allowed until the issue was identified for the grants ending in fiscal year 2022-2023 and was not able to correct the issue for the grants ending in 2023-2024. The School Corporation had the option to apply for a waiver to allow the unspent portion of nonpublic proportionate share funds to be used for other grants purposes, but she indicated that the School Corporation was told that it would not matter and that the School Corporation would still have been in noncompliance. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the Cooperative properly tracked nonpublic proportionate share expenditures in a manner that would allow us to verify that the Earmarking requirements of the federal award had been met. Due to the lack of proper oversight from the School Corporation, the Cooperative also did not fully spend the required nonpublic proportionate share amounts on behalf of the School Corporation. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are properly accounted for by the Cooperative based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. We also recommend tracking total nonpublic proportionate share by approved grant amounts from the IDOE to ensure proportionate share is being spent by the end of the grant award. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027A, 84.027X, 84.173A Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-026-PN01, 21619-026-PN01, 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, 23619-026-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Harrison County Exceptional Learners Cooperative (Cooperative). During both fiscal years under audit, the Cooperative operated the special education programs and spent federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreements were between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. However, there was inadequate oversight performed by the School Corporation in order to ensure compliance with the Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking compliance requirement. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the earmarking requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met for each member school. The Cooperative did not have effective internal controls to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Non-Public Proportionate Share expenditures for the 21611-026-PN01, 21619-026-PN01, 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, and 23619-026-PN01 grant awards could not be verified for the individual member schools. Total grant expenditures were posted as expended. The nonpublic proportionate share expenditures were determined by applying a percentage to the nonpublic school budgeted expenditures. These were the amounts reported to the IDOE. As such, the Indiana State Board of Accounts was unable to identify if the minimum amount per the grant award was expended and properly reported to the IDOE as required. The 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, and 23619-026-PN01 grant awards ended during the audit period. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative fully spent the required nonpublic proportionate share amounts by the end of the grant award. The following schedule shows the total nonpublic proportionate share approved by the IDOE for all member corporations for each grant award compared with the total expenditures posted to the ledger for nonpublic proportionate share. The remaining difference of $13,595.71 is nonpublic proportionate share money not spent by the Cooperative on behalf of member schools by the end of the grant award for all awards ending during the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 25 SOUTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Grant Award/ IDOE Approved Non- Total Non-Public Proportionate Project No. Public Proportionate Share Share Spent by Cooperative Difference 22611-026-PN01 $ 47,289.04 $ 40,688.11 $ 6,600.93 22611-026-ARP 10,585.73 5,233.83 5,351.90 22619-026-PN01 1,952.05 1,263.05 689.00 23619-026-PN01 3,949.95 2,996.07 953.88 Total $ 63,776.77 $ 50,181.06 $ 13,595.71 The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the 21611-026-PN01, 21619-026- PN01, 22611-026-PN01, 22611-026-ARP, 22619-026-PN01, and 23619-026-PN01 grant awards. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 SOUTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause The School Corporation's Director of Business Operations/Treasurer, who was also the fiscal agent for the Cooperative, stated that the amounts attributed to member corporations for nonpublic proportionate share had been calculated for many years using the methodology noted above. She was unaware that such an allocation was not allowed until the issue was identified for the grants ending in fiscal year 2022-2023 and was not able to correct the issue for the grants ending in 2023-2024. The School Corporation had the option to apply for a waiver to allow the unspent portion of nonpublic proportionate share funds to be used for other grants purposes, but she indicated that the School Corporation was told that it would not matter and that the School Corporation would still have been in noncompliance. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the School Corporation was unable to ensure that the Cooperative properly tracked nonpublic proportionate share expenditures in a manner that would allow us to verify that the Earmarking requirements of the federal award had been met. Due to the lack of proper oversight from the School Corporation, the Cooperative also did not fully spend the required nonpublic proportionate share amounts on behalf of the School Corporation. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are properly accounted for by the Cooperative based on expenditures charged directly on behalf of the member school. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be retained for audit. We also recommend tracking total nonpublic proportionate share by approved grant amounts from the IDOE to ensure proportionate share is being spent by the end of the grant award. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.