2024-001 – Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) (Significant Deficiency) Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.210(b), a recipient of Federal awards is required to prepare a SEFA for the period covered by the entity’s financial statement which must include the total Federal awards expended. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-Federal entities to, among other things, establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure expenditures are properly reported on the SEFA. In addition to providing an accurate SEFA, an organization must also be able to demonstrate that it has a system of internal control that supports the preparation of the SEFA. Condition: The University did not have an adequate process in place to prepare and review its SEFA. Cause: The University’s internal control process for preparing the SEFA did not include review and approval of the SEFA prior to providing it to the auditor. Effect: Failure to accurately report federal expenditures on the SEFA could result in noncompliance with federal regulations. Recommendation: We recommend the University establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls over the preparation of the SEFA. At a minimum, an organization should be able to show documentation that the SEFA was reviewed and approved by an individual who was not directly involved with the initial preparation of the SEFA. The review process should include checking both the reported expenditures of federal awards and the assistance listing numbers reported for each grant program. Action Taken: Management has put in place the following procedures: We will establish, document and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards by performing reconciliation of federal funds at the end of each trimester. The account reconciled will be listed on the SEFA. The Director of Financial Aid will be responsible for preparing the SEFA. It will be reviewed and re-reconciled by the Business Systems Analyst and the FA Asst. Director. Reports used to reconcile come from our Sonis system and are the Award Summary Detail and the Charges and Credits reports. Responsible Party and contact information: Valerie Souza, FA Business Systems Analyst and Lynda Swanson, Asst. Director of Financial Aid. Expected Date of Correction: At the end of each trimester. Full completion of processes will be at the end of our fiscal year/calendar year when audit preparation begins.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
2024-001 – Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) (Significant Deficiency) Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.210(b), a recipient of Federal awards is required to prepare a SEFA for the period covered by the entity’s financial statement which must include the total Federal awards expended. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-Federal entities to, among other things, establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure expenditures are properly reported on the SEFA. In addition to providing an accurate SEFA, an organization must also be able to demonstrate that it has a system of internal control that supports the preparation of the SEFA. Condition: The University did not have an adequate process in place to prepare and review its SEFA. Cause: The University’s internal control process for preparing the SEFA did not include review and approval of the SEFA prior to providing it to the auditor. Effect: Failure to accurately report federal expenditures on the SEFA could result in noncompliance with federal regulations. Recommendation: We recommend the University establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls over the preparation of the SEFA. At a minimum, an organization should be able to show documentation that the SEFA was reviewed and approved by an individual who was not directly involved with the initial preparation of the SEFA. The review process should include checking both the reported expenditures of federal awards and the assistance listing numbers reported for each grant program. Action Taken: Management has put in place the following procedures: We will establish, document and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards by performing reconciliation of federal funds at the end of each trimester. The account reconciled will be listed on the SEFA. The Director of Financial Aid will be responsible for preparing the SEFA. It will be reviewed and re-reconciled by the Business Systems Analyst and the FA Asst. Director. Reports used to reconcile come from our Sonis system and are the Award Summary Detail and the Charges and Credits reports. Responsible Party and contact information: Valerie Souza, FA Business Systems Analyst and Lynda Swanson, Asst. Director of Financial Aid. Expected Date of Correction: At the end of each trimester. Full completion of processes will be at the end of our fiscal year/calendar year when audit preparation begins.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
2024-007 – Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) (Significant Deficiency) Department of Education, SFA Cluster, Special Tests and Provisions Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.210(b), a recipient of Federal awards is required to prepare a SEFA for the period covered by the entity’s financial statement which must include the total Federal awards expended. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-Federal entities to, among other things, establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure expenditures are properly reported on the SEFA. In addition to providing an accurate SEFA, an organization must also be able to demonstrate that it has a system of internal control that supports the preparation of the SEFA. Condition: The University did not have an adequate process in place to prepare and review its SEFA. Cause: The University’s internal control process for preparing the SEFA did not include review and approval of the SEFA prior to providing it to the auditor. Effect: Failure to accurately report federal expenditures on the SEFA could result in noncompliance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding from a Prior Year: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the University establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls over the preparation of the SEFA. At a minimum, an organization should be able to show documentation that the SEFA was reviewed and approved by an individual who was not directly involved with the initial preparation of the SEFA. The review process should include checking both the reported expenditures of federal awards and the assistance listing numbers reported for each grant program. Management Response: The University acknowledges the identified deficiency in the internal control process related to the preparation and review of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA). In response, the University has implemented a formalized and documented process to ensure the SEFA is accurately prepared, thoroughly reviewed, and approved in compliance with 2 CFR 200.210(b) and 2 CFR 200.303. The corrective actions taken include: 1) Independent Review and Approval: The SEFA is now subject to a formal review and approval process by an individual who is independent of the initial preparation. This review involves verifying the accuracy of reported expenditures, confirming the proper listing of assistance numbers (CFDA numbers), and ensuring that all program titles match the federal award documentation. 2) Internal Control Documentation: The University has documented its SEFA preparation and review procedures as part of its internal control framework. This documentation includes roles, responsibilities, timelines, and sign-off requirements to provide an audit trail for compliance verification. 3) Staff Training and Cross-Departmental Coordination: Staff involved in grants accounting and financial reporting will receive targeted training on SEFA requirements. Additionally, coordination among the Financial Aid Office and Finance Office has been strengthened to ensure the complete and accurate sharing of data related to federal award expenditures.
2024-007 – Preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) (Significant Deficiency) Department of Education, SFA Cluster, Special Tests and Provisions Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.210(b), a recipient of Federal awards is required to prepare a SEFA for the period covered by the entity’s financial statement which must include the total Federal awards expended. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-Federal entities to, among other things, establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure expenditures are properly reported on the SEFA. In addition to providing an accurate SEFA, an organization must also be able to demonstrate that it has a system of internal control that supports the preparation of the SEFA. Condition: The University did not have an adequate process in place to prepare and review its SEFA. Cause: The University’s internal control process for preparing the SEFA did not include review and approval of the SEFA prior to providing it to the auditor. Effect: Failure to accurately report federal expenditures on the SEFA could result in noncompliance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding from a Prior Year: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the University establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls over the preparation of the SEFA. At a minimum, an organization should be able to show documentation that the SEFA was reviewed and approved by an individual who was not directly involved with the initial preparation of the SEFA. The review process should include checking both the reported expenditures of federal awards and the assistance listing numbers reported for each grant program. Management Response: The University acknowledges the identified deficiency in the internal control process related to the preparation and review of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA). In response, the University has implemented a formalized and documented process to ensure the SEFA is accurately prepared, thoroughly reviewed, and approved in compliance with 2 CFR 200.210(b) and 2 CFR 200.303. The corrective actions taken include: 1) Independent Review and Approval: The SEFA is now subject to a formal review and approval process by an individual who is independent of the initial preparation. This review involves verifying the accuracy of reported expenditures, confirming the proper listing of assistance numbers (CFDA numbers), and ensuring that all program titles match the federal award documentation. 2) Internal Control Documentation: The University has documented its SEFA preparation and review procedures as part of its internal control framework. This documentation includes roles, responsibilities, timelines, and sign-off requirements to provide an audit trail for compliance verification. 3) Staff Training and Cross-Departmental Coordination: Staff involved in grants accounting and financial reporting will receive targeted training on SEFA requirements. Additionally, coordination among the Financial Aid Office and Finance Office has been strengthened to ensure the complete and accurate sharing of data related to federal award expenditures.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Program Name: Assessment and Evaluation Language Resource Center Assistance Listing Number: 84.229A Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 7773322/GR205913 Award Period: 08/15/2018- 08/14/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award requires compliance with the provisions of period of performance. Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see §§200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv)). CAL should have internal controls designed to ensure compliance with these provisions. Condition: We noted CAL recorded expenses to an award after the contract’s period of performance ended in August 2023. The expenses were for an event that occurred in November of 2023. CAL did not identify and properly record the timing difference. Questioned costs: None Context: One of the three invoices we examined were not properly reflected within the financial statements and improperly allocated to an award outside of the period of performance. Management did provide an adjustment to the financial statements and Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding review of invoices and the dates costs were incurred were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: CLA noted no instances of noncompliance with the provisions of period of performance; however, the lack of effective internal controls over compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend CAL ensure consistent application review of the dates invoice were incurred and the proper reflection within the financial statements and allocation to awards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. As of January 2, 2024 CAL, hired a staff account (Melanie Richards) to ensure all expenses are recorded in compliance with performance periods. The Associate Director of Finance will review all postings monthly and consult with the Vice President of Finance on any corrections or recommendations.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Program Name: Assessment and Evaluation Language Resource Center Assistance Listing Number: 84.229A Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 7773322/GR205913 Award Period: 08/15/2018- 08/14/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award requires compliance with the provisions of period of performance. Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see §§200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv)). CAL should have internal controls designed to ensure compliance with these provisions. Condition: We noted CAL recorded expenses to an award after the contract’s period of performance ended in August 2023. The expenses were for an event that occurred in November of 2023. CAL did not identify and properly record the timing difference. Questioned costs: None Context: One of the three invoices we examined were not properly reflected within the financial statements and improperly allocated to an award outside of the period of performance. Management did provide an adjustment to the financial statements and Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding review of invoices and the dates costs were incurred were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: CLA noted no instances of noncompliance with the provisions of period of performance; however, the lack of effective internal controls over compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend CAL ensure consistent application review of the dates invoice were incurred and the proper reflection within the financial statements and allocation to awards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. As of January 2, 2024 CAL, hired a staff account (Melanie Richards) to ensure all expenses are recorded in compliance with performance periods. The Associate Director of Finance will review all postings monthly and consult with the Vice President of Finance on any corrections or recommendations.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Program Name: Assessment and Evaluation Language Resource Center Assistance Listing Number: 84.229A Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 7773322/GR205913 Award Period: 08/15/2018- 08/14/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award requires compliance with the provisions of period of performance. Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see §§200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv)). CAL should have internal controls designed to ensure compliance with these provisions. Condition: We noted CAL recorded expenses to an award after the contract’s period of performance ended in August 2023. The expenses were for an event that occurred in November of 2023. CAL did not identify and properly record the timing difference. Questioned costs: None Context: One of the three invoices we examined were not properly reflected within the financial statements and improperly allocated to an award outside of the period of performance. Management did provide an adjustment to the financial statements and Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding review of invoices and the dates costs were incurred were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: CLA noted no instances of noncompliance with the provisions of period of performance; however, the lack of effective internal controls over compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend CAL ensure consistent application review of the dates invoice were incurred and the proper reflection within the financial statements and allocation to awards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. As of January 2, 2024 CAL, hired a staff account (Melanie Richards) to ensure all expenses are recorded in compliance with performance periods. The Associate Director of Finance will review all postings monthly and consult with the Vice President of Finance on any corrections or recommendations.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Program Name: Assessment and Evaluation Language Resource Center Assistance Listing Number: 84.229A Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 7773322/GR205913 Award Period: 08/15/2018- 08/14/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award requires compliance with the provisions of period of performance. Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see §§200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv)). CAL should have internal controls designed to ensure compliance with these provisions. Condition: We noted CAL recorded expenses to an award after the contract’s period of performance ended in August 2023. The expenses were for an event that occurred in November of 2023. CAL did not identify and properly record the timing difference. Questioned costs: None Context: One of the three invoices we examined were not properly reflected within the financial statements and improperly allocated to an award outside of the period of performance. Management did provide an adjustment to the financial statements and Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Cause: The policies and procedures surrounding review of invoices and the dates costs were incurred were not consistently followed as designed. Effect: CLA noted no instances of noncompliance with the provisions of period of performance; however, the lack of effective internal controls over compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend CAL ensure consistent application review of the dates invoice were incurred and the proper reflection within the financial statements and allocation to awards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: There is no disagreement with the audit finding. As of January 2, 2024 CAL, hired a staff account (Melanie Richards) to ensure all expenses are recorded in compliance with performance periods. The Associate Director of Finance will review all postings monthly and consult with the Vice President of Finance on any corrections or recommendations.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
SOME FEDERAL AWARDS MAY CONTAIN COST LIMITATIONS ON RECOVERY OF INDIRECT COSTS THAT DIFFER FROM THE FEDERALLY NEGOTIATED INDIRECT COST RATES. IN THESE CASES, THE INDIRECT COST RATE WILL BE SPECIFIED IN THE AWARD, AD DESCRIBED IN 2 CFR SECTIONS 200.210(A)(15) AND 200.331(A)(1)(XIII). NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS MUST CONFORM TO COST PRINCIPLES IN 2 CFR PART 200, SUBPART E, APPENDIX IV, AND CAS (IF APPLICABLE), AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANY NEGOTIATED RATE AGREEMENTS AND SPECIFIC AWARD CONDITIONS/LIMITATIONS. ADDITIONALLY, RATES USED MUST BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE AWARD AND THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED MUST BE APPLIED TO THE APPROPRIATE BASE. IDAHO IMMUNIZATION COALITION, INC. WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTATION OF AN APPROPRIATE BASE OF EXPENDITURES FOR THE AWARD APPROVED RATE WAS APPLIED TO.
FINDING 2022-010 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-138-PN01, 21619-138-PN01, 22611-138-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed nor implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. The School Corporation had not established an effective system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for one of the two journal entries tested. For the one journal entry, we were unable to determine if the Special Education fund transfers in, totaling $619,180, and transfers out, totaling $554,684, were for allowable activities and costs for the program. In addition, we were unable to determine if the transfers were for transactions that occurred within the period of performance. The lack of internal controls and the failure to retain supporting documentation was isolated to the transfers noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal controls 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 40 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.333 (Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 34 CFR 300.202(a) states: "General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act - (1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part; (2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and (3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds." 34 CFR 300.208 states: "(a) Uses. Notwithstanding ?? 300.202, 300.203(b), and 300.162(b), funds provided to an LEA under Part B of the Act may be used for the following activities: (1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the costs of special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the IEP of the child, even if one or more nondisabled children benefit from these services. (2) Early intervening services. To develop and implement coordinated, early intervening educational services in accordance with ? 300.226. (3) High cost special education and related services. To establish and implement cost or risk sharing funds, consortia, or cooperatives for the LEA itself, or for LEAs working in a consortium of which the LEA is a part, to pay for high cost special education and related services. (b) Administrative case management. An LEA may use funds received under Part B of the Act to purchase appropriate technology for recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and related services personnel providing services described in the IEP of children with disabilities, that is needed for the implementation of those case management activities." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 300.800 states: "The Secretary provides grants under section 619 of the Act to assist States to provide special education and related services in accordance with Part B of the Act ? (a) To children with disabilities aged three through five years; and (b) At a State's discretion, to two-year-old children with disabilities who will turn three during the school year." 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: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.77 (Uniform Guidance) states: "Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see ?? 200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv))." 2 CFR 200.1 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: ". . . Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per ? 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 (Uniform Guidance) states: "A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance (except as described in ? 200.461 Publication and printing costs) and any costs incurred before the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the Federal award that were authorized by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." 2CFR 200.309 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under ? 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If a termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management had not developed nor implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls and to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $1,173,864 were identified, as detailed in Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance 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 2022-010 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-138-PN01, 21619-138-PN01, 22611-138-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed nor implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. The School Corporation had not established an effective system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for one of the two journal entries tested. For the one journal entry, we were unable to determine if the Special Education fund transfers in, totaling $619,180, and transfers out, totaling $554,684, were for allowable activities and costs for the program. In addition, we were unable to determine if the transfers were for transactions that occurred within the period of performance. The lack of internal controls and the failure to retain supporting documentation was isolated to the transfers noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal controls 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 40 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.333 (Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 34 CFR 300.202(a) states: "General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act - (1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part; (2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and (3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds." 34 CFR 300.208 states: "(a) Uses. Notwithstanding ?? 300.202, 300.203(b), and 300.162(b), funds provided to an LEA under Part B of the Act may be used for the following activities: (1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the costs of special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the IEP of the child, even if one or more nondisabled children benefit from these services. (2) Early intervening services. To develop and implement coordinated, early intervening educational services in accordance with ? 300.226. (3) High cost special education and related services. To establish and implement cost or risk sharing funds, consortia, or cooperatives for the LEA itself, or for LEAs working in a consortium of which the LEA is a part, to pay for high cost special education and related services. (b) Administrative case management. An LEA may use funds received under Part B of the Act to purchase appropriate technology for recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and related services personnel providing services described in the IEP of children with disabilities, that is needed for the implementation of those case management activities." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 300.800 states: "The Secretary provides grants under section 619 of the Act to assist States to provide special education and related services in accordance with Part B of the Act ? (a) To children with disabilities aged three through five years; and (b) At a State's discretion, to two-year-old children with disabilities who will turn three during the school year." 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: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.77 (Uniform Guidance) states: "Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see ?? 200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv))." 2 CFR 200.1 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: ". . . Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per ? 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 (Uniform Guidance) states: "A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance (except as described in ? 200.461 Publication and printing costs) and any costs incurred before the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the Federal award that were authorized by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." 2CFR 200.309 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under ? 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If a termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management had not developed nor implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls and to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $1,173,864 were identified, as detailed in Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance 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 2022-010 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-138-PN01, 21619-138-PN01, 22611-138-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed nor implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. The School Corporation had not established an effective system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for one of the two journal entries tested. For the one journal entry, we were unable to determine if the Special Education fund transfers in, totaling $619,180, and transfers out, totaling $554,684, were for allowable activities and costs for the program. In addition, we were unable to determine if the transfers were for transactions that occurred within the period of performance. The lack of internal controls and the failure to retain supporting documentation was isolated to the transfers noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal controls 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 40 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.333 (Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 34 CFR 300.202(a) states: "General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act - (1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part; (2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and (3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds." 34 CFR 300.208 states: "(a) Uses. Notwithstanding ?? 300.202, 300.203(b), and 300.162(b), funds provided to an LEA under Part B of the Act may be used for the following activities: (1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the costs of special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the IEP of the child, even if one or more nondisabled children benefit from these services. (2) Early intervening services. To develop and implement coordinated, early intervening educational services in accordance with ? 300.226. (3) High cost special education and related services. To establish and implement cost or risk sharing funds, consortia, or cooperatives for the LEA itself, or for LEAs working in a consortium of which the LEA is a part, to pay for high cost special education and related services. (b) Administrative case management. An LEA may use funds received under Part B of the Act to purchase appropriate technology for recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and related services personnel providing services described in the IEP of children with disabilities, that is needed for the implementation of those case management activities." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 300.800 states: "The Secretary provides grants under section 619 of the Act to assist States to provide special education and related services in accordance with Part B of the Act ? (a) To children with disabilities aged three through five years; and (b) At a State's discretion, to two-year-old children with disabilities who will turn three during the school year." 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: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.77 (Uniform Guidance) states: "Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see ?? 200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv))." 2 CFR 200.1 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: ". . . Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per ? 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 (Uniform Guidance) states: "A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance (except as described in ? 200.461 Publication and printing costs) and any costs incurred before the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the Federal award that were authorized by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." 2CFR 200.309 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under ? 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If a termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management had not developed nor implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls and to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $1,173,864 were identified, as detailed in Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance 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 2022-010 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-138-PN01, 21619-138-PN01, 22611-138-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed nor implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. The School Corporation had not established an effective system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for one of the two journal entries tested. For the one journal entry, we were unable to determine if the Special Education fund transfers in, totaling $619,180, and transfers out, totaling $554,684, were for allowable activities and costs for the program. In addition, we were unable to determine if the transfers were for transactions that occurred within the period of performance. The lack of internal controls and the failure to retain supporting documentation was isolated to the transfers noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal controls 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 40 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.333 (Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 34 CFR 300.202(a) states: "General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act - (1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part; (2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and (3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds." 34 CFR 300.208 states: "(a) Uses. Notwithstanding ?? 300.202, 300.203(b), and 300.162(b), funds provided to an LEA under Part B of the Act may be used for the following activities: (1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the costs of special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the IEP of the child, even if one or more nondisabled children benefit from these services. (2) Early intervening services. To develop and implement coordinated, early intervening educational services in accordance with ? 300.226. (3) High cost special education and related services. To establish and implement cost or risk sharing funds, consortia, or cooperatives for the LEA itself, or for LEAs working in a consortium of which the LEA is a part, to pay for high cost special education and related services. (b) Administrative case management. An LEA may use funds received under Part B of the Act to purchase appropriate technology for recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and related services personnel providing services described in the IEP of children with disabilities, that is needed for the implementation of those case management activities." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 300.800 states: "The Secretary provides grants under section 619 of the Act to assist States to provide special education and related services in accordance with Part B of the Act ? (a) To children with disabilities aged three through five years; and (b) At a State's discretion, to two-year-old children with disabilities who will turn three during the school year." 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: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.77 (Uniform Guidance) states: "Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see ?? 200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv))." 2 CFR 200.1 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: ". . . Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per ? 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 (Uniform Guidance) states: "A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance (except as described in ? 200.461 Publication and printing costs) and any costs incurred before the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the Federal award that were authorized by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." 2CFR 200.309 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under ? 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If a termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management had not developed nor implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls and to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $1,173,864 were identified, as detailed in Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance 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 2022-010 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-138-PN01, 21619-138-PN01, 22611-138-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed nor implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. The School Corporation had not established an effective system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for one of the two journal entries tested. For the one journal entry, we were unable to determine if the Special Education fund transfers in, totaling $619,180, and transfers out, totaling $554,684, were for allowable activities and costs for the program. In addition, we were unable to determine if the transfers were for transactions that occurred within the period of performance. The lack of internal controls and the failure to retain supporting documentation was isolated to the transfers noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal controls 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 40 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.333 (Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 34 CFR 300.202(a) states: "General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act - (1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part; (2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and (3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds." 34 CFR 300.208 states: "(a) Uses. Notwithstanding ?? 300.202, 300.203(b), and 300.162(b), funds provided to an LEA under Part B of the Act may be used for the following activities: (1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the costs of special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the IEP of the child, even if one or more nondisabled children benefit from these services. (2) Early intervening services. To develop and implement coordinated, early intervening educational services in accordance with ? 300.226. (3) High cost special education and related services. To establish and implement cost or risk sharing funds, consortia, or cooperatives for the LEA itself, or for LEAs working in a consortium of which the LEA is a part, to pay for high cost special education and related services. (b) Administrative case management. An LEA may use funds received under Part B of the Act to purchase appropriate technology for recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and related services personnel providing services described in the IEP of children with disabilities, that is needed for the implementation of those case management activities." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 300.800 states: "The Secretary provides grants under section 619 of the Act to assist States to provide special education and related services in accordance with Part B of the Act ? (a) To children with disabilities aged three through five years; and (b) At a State's discretion, to two-year-old children with disabilities who will turn three during the school year." 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: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.77 (Uniform Guidance) states: "Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see ?? 200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv))." 2 CFR 200.1 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: ". . . Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per ? 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 (Uniform Guidance) states: "A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance (except as described in ? 200.461 Publication and printing costs) and any costs incurred before the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the Federal award that were authorized by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." 2CFR 200.309 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under ? 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If a termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management had not developed nor implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls and to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $1,173,864 were identified, as detailed in Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance 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 2022-010 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21611-138-PN01, 21619-138-PN01, 22611-138-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed nor implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. The School Corporation had not established an effective system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for one of the two journal entries tested. For the one journal entry, we were unable to determine if the Special Education fund transfers in, totaling $619,180, and transfers out, totaling $554,684, were for allowable activities and costs for the program. In addition, we were unable to determine if the transfers were for transactions that occurred within the period of performance. The lack of internal controls and the failure to retain supporting documentation was isolated to the transfers noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal controls 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 40 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.333 (Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, from the date of the submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 34 CFR 300.202(a) states: "General. Amounts provided to the LEA under Part B of the Act - (1) Must be expended in accordance with the applicable provisions of this part; (2) Must be used only to pay the excess costs of providing special education and related services to children with disabilities, consistent with paragraph (b) of this section; and (3) Must be used to supplement State, local, and other Federal funds and not to supplant those funds." 34 CFR 300.208 states: "(a) Uses. Notwithstanding ?? 300.202, 300.203(b), and 300.162(b), funds provided to an LEA under Part B of the Act may be used for the following activities: (1) Services and aids that also benefit nondisabled children. For the costs of special education and related services, and supplementary aids and services, provided in a regular class or other education-related setting to a child with a disability in accordance with the IEP of the child, even if one or more nondisabled children benefit from these services. (2) Early intervening services. To develop and implement coordinated, early intervening educational services in accordance with ? 300.226. (3) High cost special education and related services. To establish and implement cost or risk sharing funds, consortia, or cooperatives for the LEA itself, or for LEAs working in a consortium of which the LEA is a part, to pay for high cost special education and related services. (b) Administrative case management. An LEA may use funds received under Part B of the Act to purchase appropriate technology for recordkeeping, data collection, and related case management activities of teachers and related services personnel providing services described in the IEP of children with disabilities, that is needed for the implementation of those case management activities." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 300.800 states: "The Secretary provides grants under section 619 of the Act to assist States to provide special education and related services in accordance with Part B of the Act ? (a) To children with disabilities aged three through five years; and (b) At a State's discretion, to two-year-old children with disabilities who will turn three during the school year." 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: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.77 (Uniform Guidance) states: "Period of performance means the time during which the non-Federal entity may incur new obligations to carry out the work authorized under the Federal award. The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must include start and end dates of the period of performance in the Federal award (see ?? 200.210 Information contained in a Federal award paragraph (a)(5) and 200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities, paragraph (a)(1)(iv))." 2 CFR 200.1 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states in part: ". . . Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per ? 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 (Uniform Guidance) states: "A non-Federal entity may charge to the Federal award only allowable costs incurred during the period of performance (except as described in ? 200.461 Publication and printing costs) and any costs incurred before the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the Federal award that were authorized by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." 2CFR 200.309 (Revised Uniform Guidance) states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under ? 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If a termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 SCOTT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management had not developed nor implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls and to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $1,173,864 were identified, as detailed in Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance 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 2021-010 – Lack of Internal Controls Over Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards PASS-THROUGH GRANTOR: Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management: Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services FEDERAL AGENCY: U.S. Department of Treasury ASSISTANCE LISTING: 21.019 FEDERAL PROGRAM NAME: Coronavirus Relief Fund FEDERAL AWARD NUMBER: Oklahoma Cares PPE – Reimbursement 2020; 4530-DR-OK SA-2242 FEDERAL AWARD YEAR: 2020 CONTROL CATEGORY: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Costs Principles; and Period of Performance QUESTIONED COSTS: $-0- Condition: During our audit, we identified federal programs that were not listed accurately on the County’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA). Federal expenditures were understated by $532,307. The following misstatements were noted: Expenditures: • The actual expenditures for Coronavirus Relief Fund, ALN 21.019, were $774,579, the County reported $241,966, which understated expenditures by $532,613. • The actual expenditures for Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, ALN 21.027, were $2,437, the County reported $2,807, which overstated expenditures by $370. • The actual expenditures for FEMA – Public Assistance DR-4438, Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters), ALN 97.036, were $$60,394, the County reported $46,703, which understated expenditures by $13,691. • The actual expenditures of FEMA – Category B DR-4438 ALN 97.067 were $0, the County reported $8,342, which overstated expenditures by $8,342. • The actual expenditures for FEMA – Public Assistance OEM DR – 4453 ALN 97.036 were $0, the County reported $870, which overstated expenditures by $870. • The actual expenditures for COVID-19 FEMA-Public Assistance DR-4530, Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters), ALN 97.036, were $28,063, the County reported $21,047, which understated expenditures by $7,016. • The actual expenditures for Emergency Management Performance Grant, ALN 97.042, were $45,000, the County reported $56,250, which overstated expenditures by $11,250. • The actual expenditures for Fire Management Assistance Grand, ALN 97.046, were $0, the County reported $181, which overstated expenditures by $181. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure an accurate reporting of expenditures for federal awards. Effect of Condition: These conditions resulted in the misstatement of the expenditures reported on the County’s SEFA and could increase the potential for material noncompliance. Recommendation: OSAI recommends county officials and department heads gain an understanding of federal programs awarded to Washington County. Internal control procedures should be designed and implemented to ensure accurate reporting of expenditures on the SEFA and to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Management Response: District 1 County Commissioner: Not by way of excuse, but truly in response, the Federal programs associated with the COVID response were unnecessarily arduous and created confusion at all levels of government. While the monetary response was accepted, the premise of these programs was nothing more than an administrative shell game. From the outset of the response, guidance was termed as “interim”, then “final interim” and finally, “final” (redundancy intentional). The intent of our national level leadership became more apparent as these programs progressed with each iteration of programming being reliant on returned funds from the previous. Without grandstanding, I will simply say that no entity, regardless of their planning with these programs, will be found as fully compliant. As these programs have a sunset in the near term, I suspect these findings will disappear. District 2 County Commissioner: I was not in office at this time; however, I will work with other elected officials, county officials and department heads to ensure there is an understanding of federal programs awarded to Washington County, and the use of internal control procedures designed and implemented to ensure accurate reporting of expenditures and revenues on the SEFA and to ensure compliance with federal requirements. District 3 County Commissioner: These programs are temporary and difficult to navigate through. I will continue to press staff to report effectively as possible and to be responsive to specific requests that are made. County Clerk: I will work with the other Elected Officials to gain a better understanding of federal programs that are awarded to our County. I will work with the other offices to implement internal controls to ensure accurate reporting on the SEFA. County Sheriff: I have and will continue to work toward compliance in these areas of SEFA. I will continue to work with the other elected officials to gain proper understanding of Federal Programs and Requirements. Criteria: Title 2 CFR 200 § 200.210(a)(b) Financial Statements reads as follows: (a) Financial statements. The auditee must prepare financial statements that reflect its financial position, results of operations or changes in net assets, and where appropriate, cash flows for the fiscal year audited. The financial statements must be for the same organizational unit and fiscal year that is chosen to meet the requirements of this part. However, non-Federal entity-wide financial statements may also include departments, agencies, and other organizational units that have separate audits in accordance with §200.514 Scope of audit, paragraph (a) and prepare separate financial statements. (b) Schedule of expenditures of federal awards. The auditee must also prepare a schedule of expenditures of Federal awards for the period covered by the auditee’s financial statement, which must include the total Federal awards expended as determined in accordance with §200.502 Basis for determining Federal awards expended. 2 CFR § 200.303(a) Internal Controls reads as follows: The 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). 2 CFR § 200.508(b) Auditee responsibilities reads as follows: The auditee must: Prepare appropriate financial statements, including the schedule of expenditures of Federal awards in accordance with §200.510 Financial statements. 2 CFR § 200.510 (b) Financial statements reads as follows: Schedule of expenditures of Federal awards. The auditee must also prepare a schedule of expenditures of Federal awards for the period covered by the auditee's financial statements which must include the total Federal awards expended as determined in accordance with §200.502 Basis for determining Federal awards expended. [….] Additionally, GAO Standards – Section 2 – Establishing an Effective Internal Control System – OV2.23 states in part: Objectives of an Entity – Compliance Objectives Management conducts activities in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. As part of specifying compliance objectives, the entity determines which laws and regulations apply to the entity. Management is expected to set objectives that incorporate these requirements. Furthermore, GAO Standards – Principle 6 – Define Objectives and Risk Tolerances – 6.05 states: Definitions of Objectives Management considers external requirements and internal expectations when defining objectives to enable the design of internal control. Legislators, regulators, and standardsetting bodies set external requirements by establishing the laws, regulations, and standards with which the entity is required to comply. Management identifies, understands, and incorporates these requirements into the entity’s objectives. Management sets internal expectations and requirements through the established standards of conduct, oversight structure, organizational structure, and expectations of competence as part of the control environment.
Finding 2021-010 – Lack of Internal Controls Over Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards PASS-THROUGH GRANTOR: Oklahoma Department of Emergency Management: Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services FEDERAL AGENCY: U.S. Department of Treasury ASSISTANCE LISTING: 21.019 FEDERAL PROGRAM NAME: Coronavirus Relief Fund FEDERAL AWARD NUMBER: Oklahoma Cares PPE – Reimbursement 2020; 4530-DR-OK SA-2242 FEDERAL AWARD YEAR: 2020 CONTROL CATEGORY: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Costs Principles; and Period of Performance QUESTIONED COSTS: $-0- Condition: During our audit, we identified federal programs that were not listed accurately on the County’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA). Federal expenditures were understated by $532,307. The following misstatements were noted: Expenditures: • The actual expenditures for Coronavirus Relief Fund, ALN 21.019, were $774,579, the County reported $241,966, which understated expenditures by $532,613. • The actual expenditures for Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, ALN 21.027, were $2,437, the County reported $2,807, which overstated expenditures by $370. • The actual expenditures for FEMA – Public Assistance DR-4438, Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters), ALN 97.036, were $$60,394, the County reported $46,703, which understated expenditures by $13,691. • The actual expenditures of FEMA – Category B DR-4438 ALN 97.067 were $0, the County reported $8,342, which overstated expenditures by $8,342. • The actual expenditures for FEMA – Public Assistance OEM DR – 4453 ALN 97.036 were $0, the County reported $870, which overstated expenditures by $870. • The actual expenditures for COVID-19 FEMA-Public Assistance DR-4530, Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters), ALN 97.036, were $28,063, the County reported $21,047, which understated expenditures by $7,016. • The actual expenditures for Emergency Management Performance Grant, ALN 97.042, were $45,000, the County reported $56,250, which overstated expenditures by $11,250. • The actual expenditures for Fire Management Assistance Grand, ALN 97.046, were $0, the County reported $181, which overstated expenditures by $181. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure an accurate reporting of expenditures for federal awards. Effect of Condition: These conditions resulted in the misstatement of the expenditures reported on the County’s SEFA and could increase the potential for material noncompliance. Recommendation: OSAI recommends county officials and department heads gain an understanding of federal programs awarded to Washington County. Internal control procedures should be designed and implemented to ensure accurate reporting of expenditures on the SEFA and to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Management Response: District 1 County Commissioner: Not by way of excuse, but truly in response, the Federal programs associated with the COVID response were unnecessarily arduous and created confusion at all levels of government. While the monetary response was accepted, the premise of these programs was nothing more than an administrative shell game. From the outset of the response, guidance was termed as “interim”, then “final interim” and finally, “final” (redundancy intentional). The intent of our national level leadership became more apparent as these programs progressed with each iteration of programming being reliant on returned funds from the previous. Without grandstanding, I will simply say that no entity, regardless of their planning with these programs, will be found as fully compliant. As these programs have a sunset in the near term, I suspect these findings will disappear. District 2 County Commissioner: I was not in office at this time; however, I will work with other elected officials, county officials and department heads to ensure there is an understanding of federal programs awarded to Washington County, and the use of internal control procedures designed and implemented to ensure accurate reporting of expenditures and revenues on the SEFA and to ensure compliance with federal requirements. District 3 County Commissioner: These programs are temporary and difficult to navigate through. I will continue to press staff to report effectively as possible and to be responsive to specific requests that are made. County Clerk: I will work with the other Elected Officials to gain a better understanding of federal programs that are awarded to our County. I will work with the other offices to implement internal controls to ensure accurate reporting on the SEFA. County Sheriff: I have and will continue to work toward compliance in these areas of SEFA. I will continue to work with the other elected officials to gain proper understanding of Federal Programs and Requirements. Criteria: Title 2 CFR 200 § 200.210(a)(b) Financial Statements reads as follows: (a) Financial statements. The auditee must prepare financial statements that reflect its financial position, results of operations or changes in net assets, and where appropriate, cash flows for the fiscal year audited. The financial statements must be for the same organizational unit and fiscal year that is chosen to meet the requirements of this part. However, non-Federal entity-wide financial statements may also include departments, agencies, and other organizational units that have separate audits in accordance with §200.514 Scope of audit, paragraph (a) and prepare separate financial statements. (b) Schedule of expenditures of federal awards. The auditee must also prepare a schedule of expenditures of Federal awards for the period covered by the auditee’s financial statement, which must include the total Federal awards expended as determined in accordance with §200.502 Basis for determining Federal awards expended. 2 CFR § 200.303(a) Internal Controls reads as follows: The 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). 2 CFR § 200.508(b) Auditee responsibilities reads as follows: The auditee must: Prepare appropriate financial statements, including the schedule of expenditures of Federal awards in accordance with §200.510 Financial statements. 2 CFR § 200.510 (b) Financial statements reads as follows: Schedule of expenditures of Federal awards. The auditee must also prepare a schedule of expenditures of Federal awards for the period covered by the auditee's financial statements which must include the total Federal awards expended as determined in accordance with §200.502 Basis for determining Federal awards expended. [….] Additionally, GAO Standards – Section 2 – Establishing an Effective Internal Control System – OV2.23 states in part: Objectives of an Entity – Compliance Objectives Management conducts activities in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. As part of specifying compliance objectives, the entity determines which laws and regulations apply to the entity. Management is expected to set objectives that incorporate these requirements. Furthermore, GAO Standards – Principle 6 – Define Objectives and Risk Tolerances – 6.05 states: Definitions of Objectives Management considers external requirements and internal expectations when defining objectives to enable the design of internal control. Legislators, regulators, and standardsetting bodies set external requirements by establishing the laws, regulations, and standards with which the entity is required to comply. Management identifies, understands, and incorporates these requirements into the entity’s objectives. Management sets internal expectations and requirements through the established standards of conduct, oversight structure, organizational structure, and expectations of competence as part of the control environment.