Condition: The Board has written fiscal policies but they do not meet the financial management system requirements established in the regulations. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 establishes the requirements of a financial management system adequate to ensure compliance with federal regulations. This system must include written procedures to implement requirements for payment methods and determine the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E. Cause and Effect: The Board has processes and procedures in place to administer grant funds but written policies do not contain compliance requirements. The Board is not in compliance with financial management system requirements. Recommendation: The Board should develop a grants manual or additional written policies to incorporate all the requirements of 2 CFR 200 and ensure compliance. Views of Management and Planned Corrective Action: See Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.
Finding 2025-001: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Improper expenditure recognition Federal Program Name: Title II, Part A, Teacher & Principal Training and Recruiting Assistance Listing Number: 84.367A Federal Agency Name: U.S. Department of Education Passed-Through Agency Name: Texas Department of Education Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement Per 2 CFR 200.302 and 200.303, management is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and completeness of all financial records and related information, as well as for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls over grant reporting and compliance. Condition During the current fiscal year, grant expenditures initially included $291,666 for services scheduled to be provided in the subsequent fiscal year. Cause In preparing its financial records for the year ended June 30, 2025, the District did not identify expenditures recorded in the incorrect fiscal year. The failure to detect these errors in a timely manner indicates that closing procedures— specifically the monitoring and review of financial information—were not performed effectively. Effect or Potential Effect The District’s internal control system did not prevent, or timely detect and correct, misstatements in its financial records. Ineffective monitoring and closing procedures increase the risk that errors or irregularities may occur and remain undetected. Questioned Costs None Context or Perspective Information Improper recognition of expenditures could result in misstatements reported to awarding agencies and inaccuracies in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, potentially affecting the determination of major programs subject to single audit testing. The expenditures identified above were ultimately removed from current year activity and were excluded from the year-end reimbursement request. Recommendation We recommend that the District provide additional training to staff responsible for preparing year-end grant expenditure reports to strengthen accuracy. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions See corrective action plan
Specific Requirements: 2 CFR 200.302(b) requires non-Federal entities to provide the following – 1) identification, in its accounts, of all Federal awards received and expended; 2) accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award program; 3) records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally-funded activities; 4) effective controls over, and accountability for all funds, property, and other assets; 5) comparison of expenditures with budget amounts for each Federal award; 6) written procedures to implement the requirements of the Federal payment section of Uniform Guidance (200.305); 7) written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with the cost principles as listed in Uniform Guidance. Best practices under generally accepted accounting principles require an organization to establish internal controls over financial reporting over federal awards, which includes tracking of federal dollars within the detailed general ledger by federal programs. Condition: We noted that internal controls over tracking federal funds in the general ledger by federal programs was not being executed to clearly identify which expenditures were for the federal program. Program expenses included both federal and non-federal dollars which made it difficult to ensure the expenditures for federal programs were accurately presented on the SEFA and to identify the specific expenditure to test for compliance. Cause: For the second year the accounting department had significant turnover and went through a software conversion in the current year. The software was not set up to track the expenditures by Federal grant. Effect or Potential Effect: Lack of controls over coding federal programs in detailed general ledger may result in either overstating or understating federal expenditures which could cause a material misstatement of the financial statements and SEFA. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the Organization update its coding process in their financial system. Begin including Project codes for expenses for all federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan.
Congressional Directives, U.S Department of Health and Human Services, Federal Assistance Listing #93.493; Contract No. 90XP0658-01-00 Condition: The amount of expenditures covered by the report period were inaccurately reported to the federal granting agency. Criteria: In compliance with Title 24 CFR Subpart D Post Federal Award Requirements §200.302 Financial management (b): The financial management system must provide for (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in SS 200.328 and 200.329.” Cause: The error stems from a clerical oversight related to evaluating the amount of expenditures at the wrong date, as the transactions in the final month of the reporting period had not been closed out by the Organization at the time the report was prepared. Effect: The Organization failed to report the actual amount of expenditures in accordance with the program requirements, resulting in an understatement of $85,195 on the report. Failure to submit accurate funding and financial data could result in loss of future funding. Recommendation: Management should perform an internal review over inputs into federal financial reports before they’re submitted, to verify that inputs are accurate and cover the appropriate reporting period.
2025-001: Significant Deficiency - Reporting U.S. Department of Education Pass-through Oregon Department of Education Child Nutrition Cluster – AL #s 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 and 10.582 Criteria – Management is responsible for ensuring reporting meets the Reporting Principles as required by 2 CFR §200.302, §200.328 and program regulations, where information reported is complete, accurate and timely. Monthly claim reports submitted through the state reporting system must accurately reflect reimbursable meals served Condition – The District submitted monthly child nutrition reimbursement claims that contained inaccurate meal counts for multiple months during the fiscal year. Specifically, the District overstated reimbursable meal counts due to errors in including nonreimbursable meals served. Additionally, the claims were not subject to an independent review prior to submission to ensure accuracy and completeness. Cause – The District did not have a formalized review and reconciliation process for monthly child nutrition claims and responsibilities for claim preparation and review were not adequately segregated. Effect or potential effect – As a result, the District received federal reimbursements in excess of allowable meals served. Based on audit procedures performed, the resulting questioned costs were less than $25,000, which is below the Uniform Guidance reporting threshold and therefore not required to be reported. Recommendations – We recommend the District enhance internal controls by implementing an independent review to the reporting process to ensure meal counts are properly calculated prior to submission. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with this finding. Management will revisit internal controls and independent review processes to ensure meal counts reported are in accordance with requirements as defined in 2 CFR §200.302, §200.328 and program regulations.
Criteria: Under Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.302, §200.303, §200.305, §200.318–§200.326, and §200.430), a non-federal entity must establish, document, and maintain written policies and procedures for the management of federal awards. Effective internal control over federal awards provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the awards. Condition: The Town did not have written policies and procedures required by Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200) for the administration of its federal programs. Specifically, the Town has not formally documented policies and procedures addressing key areas required under the Uniform Guidance, including but not limited to allowable and unallowable costs and cost principles, procurement standards, suspension and debarment, conflicts of interest, cash management, and reporting and record retention requirements. While informal processes exist, they are not sufficiently documented to ensure consistent application or compliance with federal requirements. Cause: The Town has not developed or formally adopted written federal grant management policies and procedures. Effect: Without formal written policies and procedures, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with federal program requirements. This condition exposes the Town to potential noncompliance with federal regulations, increases the risk of unallowable costs being charged to federal awards, and may affect the Town’s ability to properly administer, monitor, and report federal program activity. Additionally, the lack of documentation may impair continuity of compliance in the event of change in key personnel. Recommendation: The Town should develop, formally adopt, and implement written policies and procedures to comply with Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200). The policies should address all major compliance areas, including but not limited to allowable and unallowable costs and cost principles, procurement standards, suspension and debarment, conflicts of interest, cash management, and reporting and record retention requirements. The Town should ensure that staff responsible for federal grant administration are properly trained to ensure adherence to these policies and that the policies are reviewed periodically and updated as needed. Views of responsible officials: See management’s responses to findings on Page 78.
FINDING 2025-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425U, 84.425D Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425U210013, S425D200013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have an effective system of internal controls over federal award requirements that would have ensured that expenses charged to the grant were for activities and costs that were allowable under the federal award. The School Corporation designed a process for vendor claims in which all purchase orders were approved by either the Superintendent of Schools or a member of his staff who was knowledgeable of the requirements of the federal program, with the associated claim vouchers, then reviewed by another employee who was also knowledgeable of the requirements of the federal program prior to submission to the School Board for final approval for payment and inclusion on the reimbursement requests submitted for the program. Out of a sample of 25 claims selected for internal control testing, the School Corporation was unable to provide 5 claim vouchers to show the aforementioned review and approval. We were therefore unable to verify that the stated internal control was properly implemented and operated effectively for those claims to ensure the expenditures were for activities and costs allowed under the federal award. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 SOUTH SPENCER COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation also designed a process for payroll claims where the Superintendent of Schools reviewed and approved the detailed payroll distribution reports which included employees with payroll expenses charged to the federal award. However, the internal control was not adequately designed and did not detect noncompliance with the allowable cost requirements of the award. During compliance testing of vendor and payroll claims, one payroll claim for a Certified Intervention Teacher was selected for testing. The School Corporation was unable to provide documentation to support the determination of the amount of the teacher's total salary that was allocated to the federal award. We then reviewed all payroll expenses associated with the Certified Intervention Teacher position paid out of the federal award during the audit period and determined that a total of $22,416 was charged to the federal award without proper documentation to support the amount of the teacher's salary allocated to the federal award. We consider the $22,416 to be questioned costs. The lack of effective vendor internal controls was systemic to both awards but was isolated to fiscal year 2023-2024 prior to the appointment of the current Treasurer. The lack of effective payroll internal controls was systemic to both awards, while the noncompliance was isolated to award number S425U210013. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (3) Records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally funded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, financial obligations, unobligated balances, asses, expenditures, income and interest and be supported by source documentation. . . ." 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. . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 SOUTH SPENCER COUNTY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." Cause The School Corporation experienced turnover in a key position related to the internal controls over the federal award, resulting in issues with organization and retention of supporting documentation to verify the key internal control over vendor claims. In addition, the School Corporation's policies and procedures were not properly designed to show the determination of how employees' compensation would be allocated to multiple cost centers. As a result, the key internal control over payroll claims was unable to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with the allowable costs requirement of the federal award. Effect Without proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, noncompliance that resulted in questioned costs remained undetected. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs We identified $22,416 in known questioned costs as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure expenditures made from federal awards are for activities and costs allowed per the terms and conditions of the federal award and in compliance with the Activities Allowed or Unallowed and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. We also recommended that the School Corporation strengthen its policies and procedures to ensure that appropriate supporting documentation is retained and available for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
2025-001 – Significant Deficiency– Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Compliance Requirement(s): Period of Performance and Reporting ALN 21.027 U.S. Department of the Treasury Criteria: The District was a subrecipient of Ohio’s K-12 School Safety Grant Program. Under Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR §§200.77 and 200.309 require that all costs be incurred within the grant’s period of performance, and §200.344 mandates liquidation of obligations by the specified deadlines, which were December 31, 2023 for encumbrances and September 30, 2024 for liquidation. For reporting, §§200.302(b) and 200.328 require accurate financial and programmatic reporting to the pass-through entity. Condition: The District liquidated $72,970 in expenditures after September 30, 2024, which was beyond the grant’s period of performance. In addition, quarterly reports did not accurately reflect the timing of expenditures, resulting in discrepancies between reported and actual activity between quarters. Context: Our testing focused on expenditures near the end of the performance period and included a review of all four quarterly reports. Multiple reports contained errors in the timing of reported expenditures compared to actual disbursements. Cause: The District lacked controls to prevent expenditures beyond the grant’s performance period and did not have adequate review procedures for quarterly reporting. Effect: The questioned costs may be subject to disallowance, creating a potential liability for the District. Inaccurate financial reporting also increases the risk of improper drawdowns, misinformed oversight, and potential impact on future funding decisions. Questioned Costs: $72,970 Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the District establish and enforce controls to ensure all expenditures are incurred and liquidated within the grant’s period of performance, implement a documented review process for quarterly grant reporting that includes reconciliation to the general ledger prior to submission, and develop a documented training schedule to ensure staff understand Uniform Guidance requirements for compliance with period of performance and reporting. Views of Responsible Officials: See management’s response in the District’s Corrective Action Plan.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER COMPLIANCE – U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, PASSED THROUGH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SPECIAL EDUCATION CLUSTER – ALN NOS. 84.027 AND 84.173 2025-001 Internal Control Over Compliance With Federal Allowable Costs Requirements Criteria – 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(3) requires Independent School District No. 911 (the District) to maintain records that adequately identify the source and application of funds for federally funded activities in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart E – Cost Principles. Condition – During our audit, we noted that the District did not have sufficient controls to ensure adequate and timely documentation of time and effort was created and retained to support salary costs charged to federal programs and ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance allowable costs standards. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – For three of three employees tested whose time was charged to this program, the supporting time and effort documentation was not completed in a timely manner, and for one of the three, the salary costs charged to this federal program did not agree to the supporting time and effort documentation. This was not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding – This is a current year finding for this program. Cause – This was an oversight by district personnel. Effect – This could be viewed as a violation of the award agreement. Recommendation – We recommend that the District review its internal control procedures relating to time and effort documentation of allowable costs. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – The District agrees with the finding. The District will review and update its policies and procedures relating to allowable costs for its federal programs to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance in the future. The District has separately issued a Corrective Action Plan related to this finding.
ELMWOOD PARK COMMUNITY UNIT SCHOOL DISTRICT 401 06-016-4010-26 SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS Year Ending June 30, 2025 SECTION III - FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS Year originally reported? 3. Federal Program Name and Year: Title I Grants to Local Education Agencies 4. Project No.: 24-4300-00, 25-4300-00, 24-4331-PL & 25-4331-00 5. AL No.: 84.010 6. Passed Through: 7. Federal Agency: Illinois State Board of Education U.S. Department of Education 8. Criteria or specific requirement (including statutory, regulatory, or other citation) Federal regulations (2 CFR §200.302 and Title I program requirements) require recipients to maintain accurate and verifiable records to support data submitted in funding applications. 9. Condition The District receives Title I funding and determines eligibility for schoolwide programs based on attendance numbers derived from free and reduced lunch counts. During the audit, we noted that the district’s process for compiling these attendance numbers involves the grant manager obtaining a report from the Business Office, which is generated from the food service platform as of a specific day. However, the district was unable to reproduce the report used to complete the Title I application and supporting documentation for the reported figures was not available for review. 10. Questioned Costs No reportable questioned costs identified. 11. Context The District receives Title I funding, which is allocated based on student poverty levels. To determine eligibility for schoolwide programs, the District includes attendance numbers in its Title I application, calculated using free and reduced lunch counts. These counts are critical because they establish whether a school meets the threshold for operating a schoolwide program under Title I guidelines. As part of the audit, we selected a non-statistical sample of schools included in the application to review the underlying support for the reported attendance numbers. This approach was intended to verify whether the district maintained documentation to substantiate the data submitted. 12. Effect Without adequate documentation, the District cannot demonstrate the accuracy of the attendance numbers used to determine eligibility for schoolwide programs. This increases the risk of noncompliance with Title I requirements and could impact funding determinations. 13. Cause The District does not have a formal process to retain or archive the specific report used to populate attendance numbers in the Title I application. Additionally, the food service data fluctuates due to student enrollments and withdrawals, and the system does not maintain historical snapshots of these counts. 14. Recommendation The District should implement procedures to retain supporting documentation for all data submitted in Title I applications. This may include saving a copy of the food service report used, maintaining historical records, and establishing a formal review process to ensure data accuracy and reproducibility. 15. Management's response The District will maintain all reports used to compile attendance figures for the Title I grant.
Finding 2025.002: Cash Management - Significant Deficiency Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Block Grants for Community Mental Health Services Federal Assistance Listing Number: 93.958 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 24MHA2102 Criteria In accordance with §200.305, Federal Payment, grantees and subgrantees that receive grant funds are responsible for maintaining controls regarding the management of federal program funds under the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR 200.302 and 200.303. Condition The Organization's drawdowns did not illustrate review and approval by management. Cause The Organization did not have adequate controls to ensure drawdowns were properly approved and such approval is documented. Effect or Potential Effect The condition may lead to inaccurate or improper drawdowns. Questioned Costs None Context We selected three drawdowns for testing of cash management procedures. We noted that for all three drawdowns, there was no formal approval or evidence of review. Identification of Repeat Finding No Recommendation The Organization should develop written procedures to review all drawdowns that occur in order to ensure accuracy. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions Management and the Board of Directors agree with the finding and will implement additional controls to ensure there is formal evidence of review being performed.
Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (Federal Assistance Listing No. 21.027) Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR §200.302(a) of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), non-federal entities must maintain financial management systems that provide for the identification, in their accounts, of all federal awards received and expended, and must ensure accurate, current, and complete disclosure of financial results. Additionally, according to Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, special revenue funds are used to account for specific revenue sources that are restricted or committed to expenditures for specified purposes other than debt service or capital projects. Since funds received under Assistance Listing 21.027 are restricted for specific uses, they should be accounted for in a special revenue fund. Condition: During our audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, we noted that the District did not record $4,860,733 in transactions related to the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (Assistance Listing 21.027) in the appropriate fund. Instead of recording this activity in the Special Revenue Fund, the transactions were recorded in the General Fund. Based on grant receipts received by the District of $4,860,733 in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 it was determined that expenditures relating to the grant were incurred in the General Fund in the fiscal years ended June 30, 2025 and 2024 in the amounts of $1,017,513 and $3,843,220 respectively. The receipts in the amount of $1,017,513 related to expenditures incurred in the year ended June 30, 2025 were reclassified to the Special Revenue Fund. Questioned Costs: None Context: $4,860,733 in transactions related to the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds were recorded in the General Fund instead of the Special Revenue Fund. Effect: Recording of the $4,860,733 in federally restricted grant activity in the General Fund instead of the Special Revenue Fund reduces the transparency of the financial statements and may obscure the tracking of federal expenditures. This misclassification increases the risk of noncompliance with federal grant reporting requirements, and may result in inaccurate reporting on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA), which could impact audit results or federal program oversight. The expenditures incurred in both years were subject to a single audit in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. Cause: Unknown. Recommendation: We recommend that management establish procedures to ensure that all federal grant activity is recorded in the appropriate fund, consistent with GASB and Uniform Guidance requirements. Specifically, all activity related to Assistance Listing 21.027 should be accounted for in the Special Revenue Fund to maintain proper accountability. View of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management has reviewed this finding and has indicated a corrective action plan will be developed to address this finding and recommendation.
Condition: District did not submit the required ARP ESSER FS-10F Final Expenditure Report by the required deadline. The reporting filing deadline was extended to 10/15/2024, the District submitted the report on 11/25/2024. Criteria: Under the OMB Compliance Supplement (Education Stabilization Fund – 84.425), recipients must submit required ARP ESSER financial reports accurately and within deadlines established by the State Education Agency (SEA). Federal regulation (2 CFR §200.302) requires recipients to maintain effective internal controls and ensure that all required federal reports are submitted timely, complete, and accurate. Cause: The late submission resulted from insufficient internal controls to monitor required federal reporting deadlines. In particular, the District did not maintain a centralized compliance calendar to track and manage these obligations. Effect: Failure to submit the ARP ESSER reports timely puts the District at risk of noncompliance with federal requirements, may impair the U.S. Department of Education’s and the SEA’s ability to monitor program performance and expenditures, and may affect future funding decisions. Questioned Costs: None. This finding relates to reporting timeliness only and does not involve unallowable costs. Perspective: This issue is considered a systemic noncompliance for the fiscal year ended 2025, based on testing of the one mandatory FS-10F Final Expenditure Report required for 84.425U. Repeat: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement a formal federal reporting compliance calendar that includes ARP ESSER deadlines as well as develop written procedures requiring periodic review of upcoming deadlines. Auditee’s Response: The District agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Direct Funding FFAL# 97.083 Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) Cash Management, Reporting Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.302, non-Federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal award compliance, including controls over cash management and Federal financial and performance reporting. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.327–200.329 require accurate, complete, and timely submission of performance and financial reports. Condition: The City did not have adequate internal controls to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and proper authorization of submissions to the Federal agency. Specifically: 1. Financial and performance reports submitted to the Federal agency did not undergo a secondary (independent) review prior to submission. 2. Reimbursement requests submitted to the Federal agency did not undergo a secondary (independent) review prior to submission. Cause: The City has not implemented or enforced a formalized review process that requires supervisory-level approval prior to the submission of reports or reimbursement requests. Effect: Without a secondary review, there is an increased risk that inaccurate, incomplete, or unsupported information may be submitted to the Federal agency. This could result in: • Reporting errors or omissions, • Noncompliance with Federal requirements, • Potential questioned costs, and • Increased risk of funding delays or corrective action requirements. Questioned Costs: None to report Context/Sampling: Out of a total population of three reports and reimbursement requests, three were selected for testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City design and implement formal internal controls requiring documented secondary review and approval for all financial and performance reports, and all reimbursement requests submitted to Federal agencies. Views of Responsible Officials: Agree.
21-027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria 2 CFR Part 200.302(b)(7) requires the financial management system to include written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Condition The City has not developed written procedures for determining the allowability of costs for departments outside of transit. Cause Administration did not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Effect Unallowable costs could be charged to the program. Questioned Costs None Perspective Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs is integral to the proper design of internal controls. However, the results of audit procedures did not detect any unallowable costs charged to the program. Recommendations Management should develop written procedures as required by 2 CFR Part 200.302(b)(7) for all departments within the City. Views of Responsible Officials Management will incorporate written procedures for determining the allowability of costs into the City’s Financial Plan document, which already includes a section for City-wide policies related to grant administration.
Item 2025-007 - Cash Management - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Center Program Cluster (Assistance Listing Number 93.224/93.527) Notice of Award Number 6 H80CS00505-23-04, 6 H2ECS45602-02-04, 1 H8LCS50772-01-00 and 6 H8HCS46163-03-01 - (Significant Deficiency) Criteria: Non-federal entities other than states are required to have internal controls in place to ensure compliance with the requirements of cash management that are contained in 2 CFR sections 200.302(b)(6) and 200,305, 31 CFR Part 205, 48 CFR sections 52.216-7(b) and 52.232-12. Statement of Condition: During our audit, we noted that there is no evidence of review and approval of drawdowns from the Health Center Program Cluster and the supporting records. Cause: LBUCC does not have a policy in place requiring the review and approval of drawdowns from the Health Center Program Cluster to be documented. Effect: Failure to document review and approval of drawdowns may result in unauthorized or incorrect drawdowns from the Health Center Program Cluster. Questioned Costs: None. Context: Although there is no evidence of review and approval of the drawdowns, the amounts of all 8 sample drawdowns tested agreed to the underlying records and supporting documents. Identification as a Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that LBUCC implement a policy that requires all drawdowns and supporting documents to be reviewed and that such review and approval be documented. Management Response: Management agrees with the finding and will implement these steps to ensure compliance with the federal cost principles, strengthen internal controls, and reduce the risk of questioned costs.
2025-002 - Lack of Written Federal Program Policies. Type: Material Weakness. Condition: The Village does not have documented policies and procedures specific to the administration of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program. This includes the absence of written guidance on key compliance areas such as payments, procurement, allowability of costs charged to federal programs, compensation, and travel costs under Uniform Guidance. Criteria: Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance, non-federal entities are required to establish and maintain effective internal controls and written policies to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. These policies should be tailored to the specific requirements of each federal program. Cause: The entity has not developed formal written policies and procedures for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program, possibly due to reliance on informal practices or general administrative policies that do not address federal-specific requirements. Effect: Without documented policies, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with federal requirements, inconsistent program administration, and lack of accountability. This may result in questioned costs, audit findings, or potential repayment of federal funds. Recommendation: We recommend that the Village develop and implement written policies and procedures specific to the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program. These should include: - Payments in accordance with §200.302 (6), - Procurement in accordance with §200.318, - Allowability of costs charged to federal programs in accordance with §200.302 (7), - Compensation in accordance with §200.430 and §200.431, - Travel costs in accordance with §200.474. Training should also be provided to staff responsible for administering the program to ensure consistent application of these policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management acknowledges the auditor’s finding regarding the absence of formally documented federal program policies. We recognize the importance of maintaining written procedures to ensure consistent compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements and to strengthen internal controls over federal awards. While informal practices have historically guided our federal program administration, we agree that formalizing these policies will enhance transparency, accountability, and operational efficiency. Management is currently in the process of developing written policies covering key areas such as procurement, allowable costs, subrecipient monitoring, and cash management. We anticipate completing this documentation and implementing the policies by February 28, 2026. We are committed to continuous improvement and appreciate the auditor’s recommendations as part of our efforts to maintain strong compliance and stewardship of federal funds.
Finding: 2025-001 Incomplete Tenant Records – Section 8 HCV Program (ALN 14.871) Condition: During our review of forty (40) tenant files under the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program, we identified multiple instances of missing documentation and compliance lapses: 1. For one (1) tenant, income verification was not performed for the current year, and prior year income was rolled forward. The HUD-50058 (Family Report) form was reviewed in the PIC system but was not present in the tenant file. 2. For one (1) tenant, the Approved Lease, HUD-52517 (Request for Tenancy Approval), and HUD- 52641 (HAP Contract) forms were not present in the tenant file. Criteria: Under 2 CFR § 200.303, non-Federal entities are required to “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.” Additionally, 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(3) mandates that entities “maintain records which adequately identify the source and application of funds provided for federally-assisted activities.” HUD regulations governing the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program (ALN 14.871) further require that tenant files include complete and timely documentation of income verification, lease approvals, and execution of required HUD forms such as HUD-50058 (Family Report), HUD-52517 (Request for Tenancy Approval), and HUD-52641 (Housing Assistance Payments Contract). These documents are essential to support eligibility determinations and ensure accurate Housing Assistance Payments. Cause: The deficiencies appear to result from inconsistent implementation of file maintenance procedures and inadequate internal controls over documentation and compliance tracking. There may also be a lack of staff training or oversight regarding HUD documentation requirements. Effect: Incomplete tenant records compromise the Housing Authority’s ability to demonstrate compliance with HUD regulations and the proper use of Federal funds. Missing documentation such as income verification and executed lease agreements may result in eligibility determinations that cannot be substantiated, increasing the risk of noncompliance. These issues could lead to program findings, reputational harm, or future funding restrictions if not addressed. Questioned Costs: There were no determinable questioned costs identified during the review. While documentation gaps were noted, the absence of supporting records did not allow for a reliable calculation of financial impact. Recommendation: We recommend that the Housing Authority strengthen internal controls over tenant file documentation by implementing a standardized checklist to ensure all required forms and records are consistently retained. Staff should receive periodic training on HUD documentation and compliance requirements to reinforce expectations and reduce errors. Management should also conduct routine internal reviews to verify that income verification and lease documentation are properly completed and maintained. These measures will help ensure that tenant eligibility and payment determinations are adequately supported and compliant with federal regulations. Reply and Corrective Action: To address these findings, the Housing Authority will implement a standardized checklist for all tenant file changes, ensuring that all required forms and records are consistently retained. The Program Administrator and staff will conduct monthly reviews of completed reexaminations to verify that all necessary documentation is present and properly filed. All paperwork related to annual reexaminations, transfers, move-ins, and interims will be scanned into the Lindsey software system within five working days of receipt, prior to physical filing. The Program Administrator will organize monthly training sessions on HCV/S8 program requirements, with participation tracked to ensure all staff attend. Weekly spot checks will be performed to confirm that the checklist is being used appropriately. These actions will be supported by updated training materials, access to the Lindsey software, and dedicated staff time for audits and training. To mitigate risks such as incomplete documentation, missed scanning deadlines, or low training attendance, the Housing Authority will implement pre-audit checklists, set automated reminders for staff, and make training mandatory. Management will monitor the implementation of these corrective actions and conduct follow-up reviews to ensure sustained compliance with HUD regulations.
U.S. Department of Transportation – AL #20.106 Airport Improvement Program – Reporting Grant Award: 3-38-0022-064-2022 Criteria The Authority is required to submit payment requests using the DOT Electronic Grants payment system, Delphi e-Invoicing. These requests must meet the standards described in 2 CFR ss 200.302 and 200.305. Additionally, Authority is required to submit annual SF-425 reports within 90 days of the end of the federal fiscal year. Condition During review of submitted Request for Reimbursements and Outlay reports, it was noted that one request submitted was not accurately prepared as there was one instance in which the amount requested was greater than invoice documentation, additionally the request included a request for reimbursement of AIP ineligible costs. As of December 31, 2024 no funds have been returned to U.S. DOT. It was also noted that multiple annual SF-425 reports were submitted late. Questioned Costs N/A Context We reviewed the project financial summary for two of the 19 requests submitted during 2024 and SF-425 reports for all open grants. Cause Employee oversight. Effect The Authority could have had federal funding delayed or reduced. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority implement internal controls to ensure all reporting is accurately filed. Repeat Finding Yes. Prior audit finding 2023-003. Views of Responsible Officials Management recognizes the deficiency and plans to implement the auditor’s recommendation.
U.S. Department of Transportation – AL #20.106 Airport Improvement Program – Reporting Grant Award: 3-38-0022-064-2022 Criteria The Authority is required to submit payment requests using the DOT Electronic Grants payment system, Delphi e-Invoicing. These requests must meet the standards described in 2 CFR ss 200.302 and 200.305. Additionally, Authority is required to submit annual SF-425 reports within 90 days of the end of the federal fiscal year. Condition During review of submitted Request for Reimbursements and Outlay reports, it was noted that one request submitted was not accurately prepared as there was one instance in which the amount requested was greater than invoice documentation, additionally the request included a request for reimbursement of AIP ineligible costs. As of December 31, 2024 no funds have been returned to U.S. DOT. It was also noted that multiple annual SF-425 reports were submitted late. Questioned Costs N/A Context We reviewed the project financial summary for two of the 19 requests submitted during 2024 and SF-425 reports for all open grants. Cause Employee oversight. Effect The Authority could have had federal funding delayed or reduced. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority implement internal controls to ensure all reporting is accurately filed. Repeat Finding Yes. Prior audit finding 2023-003. Views of Responsible Officials Management recognizes the deficiency and plans to implement the auditor’s recommendation.
Identification of a Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding from the immediate previous audit, 2023-002. Criteria: Uniform Guidance requires written procedures for cash management and determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E – Cost Principals. Condition: Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs did not have written procedures for cash management (2 CFR 200.302(b)(6)) and allowable costs determination (2 CFR 200.302(b)(7)) in accordance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Questioned Costs: $0 Cause: Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs’ written policies and procedures were not updated to include required Uniform Guidance policies. Effect: Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs could enter into a transaction that is not in compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Recommendation: We recommend Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs draft and adopt written procedures in accordance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management agrees with the finding and is in process of developing and implementing the appropriate policies and procedures. The board anticipates approving written policies and procedures for cash management in May 2025.
Finding 2024-004 Internal Controls Over Compliance for Cash Management, Allowable Costs, Procurement, and Conflicts of Interest Federal Program: 66.468 Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Condition: The City does not have formally documented written controls to ensure compliance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), regarding the determination of allowable costs, procurement procedures, conflicts of interest, and cash management. Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.302(b) requires the City to have written procedures related to managing cash from federal award, including determining the allowability of costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart E – Cost Principles. Additionally, 2 CFR § 318(a) and (c), requires the City to formally document procedures used for procurements made within federal programs, to demonstrate compliance with Uniform Guidance, which includes written standards of conduct that cover conflicts of interest and govern the performance of individuals engaged in procurement. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures have not been formally drafted and updated in written form. Effect: The failure to have written policies and procedures resulted in the City’s noncompliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Context: This is a general requirement that pertains to most federal grants. This was not identified via sampling procedures. Questioned Costs: None identified. Recommendation: We recommend the City review the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, particularly the sections referenced above, to obtain a better understanding of the related requirements under Uniform Guidance. Based on this understanding, we recommend the City adopt written policies and procedures pertaining to cash management, determining the allowability of costs, procurement procedures, and conflicts of interest for all federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with our recommendation. See corresponding Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-001 Internal Controls Over Compliance for Cash Management, Allowable Costs, Procurement, and Conflicts of Interest Federal Program: 14.251 Economic Development Initiative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Condition: The City did not have formally documented written controls to ensure compliance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), in regard to determining allowable costs, procurement procedures, conflicts of interest, and cash management. Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.302(b) requires the City to have written procedures related to managing cash from federal awards, including determining the allowability of costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart E – Cost Principles. Additionally, 2 CFR § 318(a) and (c), requires the City to formally document procedures used for procurements made within federal programs, to demonstrate compliance with Uniform Guidance, which includes written standards of conduct that cover conflicts of interest and govern the performance of individuals engaged in procurement. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures were not formally drafted and updated in written form. Effect: The failure to have written policies and procedures during the grant period resulted in the City’s temporary noncompliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Context: This is a general requirement that pertains to most federal grants. This was not identified via sampling procedures. Questioned Costs: None identified. Recommendation: We recommend the City review the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, particularly the sections referenced above, to obtain a better understanding of the related requirements under Uniform Guidance. Based on this understanding, we recommend the City adopt written policies and procedures pertaining to cash management, determining the allowability of costs, procurement procedures, and conflicts of interest for all federal programs. Since the discovery of this issue, the City has adopted written policies and procedures pertaining to cash management, determining the allowability of costs, procurement procedures, and conflicts of interest for all federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with our recommendation, and this matter has already been resolved subsequent to year-end. See corresponding Corrective Action Plan.
FINDING 2024-004 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-003. Condition and Context As part of sound management of the federal award, the Town was responsible for implementing a system of internal controls that would ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. The Town had not properly designed or implemented such a system, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The Town was required to submit the following reporting to the Department of Agriculture annually: • Statement of Budget, Income, and Equity (Form RD 442-2) • Balance Sheet (Form RD 442-3) INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The Form RD 442-2 covers financial operations relating to the Town's wastewater utility and the Form RD 442-3 presents the financial status of the wastewater utility. In both instances, a borrower may submit the financial data on other forms, provided the forms are in a similar format and signed and dated by the organization's official to certify the correctness of the information. Alternatively, an annual audit may be submitted in lieu of the forms. The Town did not submit the Form RD 442-2 during the audit period as required. The Town submitted the Form RD 442-3 reporting 2023 data in 2024 as required. However, this report is intended to be a comparative balance sheet as described in the USDA Rural Utilities Service Borrower's Guide. The Town did not include comparative data for 2022 in the report. There was also no documentation or other evidence of an oversight, review, or approval process for the report that was filed. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . ." 7 CFR 1780.47 states in part: "(a) Borrowers are required to provide RUS an annual audit or financial statements. . . . (e) Borrowers exempt from audits. All borrowers who are exempt from audits, will, within 60 days following the end of each fiscal year, furnish the RUS with annual financial statements, consisting of a verification of the organization's balance sheet and statement of income and expense by an appropriate official of the organization. Forms RD 442-2, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity,' and 442-3 may be used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (f) Management reports. These reports will furnish management with a means of evaluating prior decisions and serve as a basis for planning future operations and financial strategies. In those cases where revenues from multiple sources are pledged as security for an RUS loan, two reports will be required; one for the project being financed by RUS and one combining the entire operation of the borrower. In those cases where RUS loans are secured by general obligation bonds or assessments and the borrower combines revenues from all sources, one management report combining all such revenues is acceptable. The following management data will be submitted by the borrower to the processing office. These reports at a minimum will include a balance sheet and income and expense statement. . . . (2) Annual management reports. Prior to the beginning of each fiscal year the following will be submitted to the processing office. (If Form RD 442-2 is used as the annual management report, enter data in column three only of Schedule 1, and complete all of Schedule 2.) (i) Two copies of the management reports and proposed 'Annual Budget'. (ii) Financial information may be reported on Form RD 442-2 which includes Schedule 1, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity' and Schedule 2, 'Projected Cash Flow' or information in similar format. (iii) A copy of the rate schedule in effect at the time of submission. . . ." Cause The Clerk-Treasurer was only in her first year of her first term in office when these were due. As such, she was unfamiliar with the reporting requirements of the grant. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the Town did not file one of the two required reports, and the report that was filed was incomplete. As a result, material noncompliance occurred and remained undetected. By not reporting the comparative data, all information needed to determine the true financial status of the Town was not readily available. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Town's management establish a proper system of internal controls and develop and implement reporting policies and procedures to ensure that all required reports are filed timely, accurately, and contain all the required information. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.303(a), the non-Federal entity must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the awards. Additionally, per 2 CFR §200.403 and §200.302, costs charged to federal awards must be allowable, allocable, and properly documented, and financial reporting must be accurate, complete, and supported by the accounting system. Condition: Although the Parish has implemented internal controls related to the allowability of costs and the preparation of required reports for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery funds, they were not operating effectively during fiscal year 2024. Tests of controls indicated that transactions were not tracked appropriately to ensure they were charged to the correct funding source. In addition, quarterly project and expenditure reports submitted to the U.S. Treasury included inaccurate or unsupported information due to a lack of tracking and reconciliation procedures. Cause: As discussed in item 2024-001, the Parish encountered several challenges during the transition of administration and key personnel. Parish administration and management were immediately tasked with enhancing operations related to procedural concerns from the prior administration and performing the accounting function without sufficient documentation on several balances and transactions. The documented controls were not in practice because of this. Effect: While no instances of noncompliance were noted, the lack of documented controls in practice increases the risk that future required reports could be incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely, as well as, federal costs being unallowed per the cost principles which could potentially result in program noncompliance. Recommendation: We recommend that the Parish enhance and document internal controls over financial reporting, as described in our recommendations described under item 2024-001, to prevent noncompliance of the Uniform Guidance as required.
Finding 2024-005 Internal Controls Over Compliance for Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: 14.251 Economic Development Initiative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Condition: The City does not have formally documented written controls to ensure compliance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), in regard to determining subrecipient monitoring. Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.302(b) requires the City to have written procedures related to managing subrecipient monitoring in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart D – Subrecipient Monitoring. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures have not been formally drafted and updated in written form. Effect: The failure to have written policies and procedures resulted in the City’s noncompliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Context: This is a general requirement that pertains to many federal grants. This was not identified via sampling procedures. Questioned Costs: None identified. Recommendation: We recommend the City review the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, particularly the sections referenced above, to obtain a better understanding of the related requirements under Uniform Guidance. Based on this understanding, we recommend the City adopt written policies and procedures pertaining to subrecipient monitoring for all applicable federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with our recommendation. See corresponding Corrective Action Plan.
Adjoin Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2024 Section II - Financial Statement Findings Section None noted. Section III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs Section 1. Finding Number: Finding 2024-001 Program Name: Supportive Services for Veterans Families: CFDA 64.033 Pass Through Agency: N/A Type of Finding: Other matters, compliance a. Criteria: Failure to comply with the grant agreement’s terms and applicable regulations: The Organization did not comply with grant compliance requirements such as tracking administrative expenses charged to the program outside of the general ledger and in other matters noted in Supportive Services for Veterans Families (SSVF) reviews. b. Condition: During our audit, JGD reviewed the results of all reviews for the SSVF grant and noted seven compliance deficiencies were indicated in the reporting period. These deficiencies resulted in a failure of controls over compliance. Under the SSVF Program, a minimum of 90% of supportive services grant funds must be used to provide and coordinate the provision of supportive services to very lowincome Veteran families who are occupying permanent housing. A maximum of 10% of supportive services grant funds may be used for administrative costs. Per Section 62.70 of the 38 CFR Part 62, administrative costs are defined as all direct and indirect costs associated with the indirect, of subcontractors. SSVF requires grantees to provide support documentation (payroll records, invoices, receipts etc.) for all costs and expenses associated with the administration of the SSVF grant. Administrative costs should be placed in the Administrative section of an SSVF program budget. An approved Indirect Cost Rate is not considered adequate support or source documentation for costs listed in the Administrative section of the budget. Grantees are required to have a detailed breakout of these administrative costs along with any supporting documents for those expenses for auditing and oversight. Title 2 CFR 200.302 requires the financial management system of each non-Federal entity provide “records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally-funded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income and interest and be supported by source documentation.” These citations are included for informational purposes: Fiscal Administration – Administrative Expenses: Administrative expenses were not recorded in the general ledger, resulting in questioned costs. Fiscal Administration – Unallowed Supplemental Pay: Five employees did not have evidence to support reasonableness and compliance with incentive compensation requirements, resulting in questioned costs. 25 Adjoin Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2024 Fiscal Administration – Inadequate TFA Identification: TFA expenses were not paid through credit card charges in the general ledger. This deficiency was cleared as corrective action was taken during the review. Participant Eligibility – HMIS Release of Information Forms: Four case files were missing HMIS Release of Information Forms for household members over the age of 18. Participant Eligibility – Missing Income Eligibility Documentation: Three case files missing income eligibility documents for Veterans and one case file missing income eligibility documents for Veteran and household members at certification of eligibility events. Participant Eligibility – Missing Exit Checklist: Five case files did not include exit checklist documentation. This deficiency was cleared as corrective action was taken during the review. Program Operations – Inadequate MOU: MOU for a legal subcontractor was missing required elements, including expectations and requirements for quarterly assessments and annual monitoring of performance, listing of only eligible/allowable legal services, highlighting of response time expectations and requirements to support payments, and account for Veterans that have been separated from the program and those in need of long-term legal services. c. Context: Recipients of Federal grants are required to comply with all terms and applicable regulations of grant agreements. d. Questioned Costs: Administrative expenses resulted in $937,794 and supplemental pay resulted in $1,500 in questioned costs. The Organization has disputed both findings noting the expenses are itemized within their internal tracking files and that the costs are allowable, allocable, and reasonable. The Organization has received no response from the agency. e. Cause: Internal accounting procedures, lack of compliance policies, and lack of training over verification and documentation processes, resulting in a failure of controls over compliance. f. Effect: Considered to be an other matter related to internal control over compliance. g. Recommendation: Management should take steps to ensure that all administrative expenses are properly recorded in the general ledger, supplemental pay is approved with proper evidence of approvals, and proper documentation and policies are in place to comply with all grant compliance requirements. We recommend that management closely monitor areas of non-compliance as noted in the licensing reviews. Section IV – Schedule of Prior Year Findings and Questioned Costs None noted.
Finding 2024-003 Insufficient Documentation of Other Direct Expenses Type of Finding: Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Condition: During testing of direct costs charged to the federal program, the Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation to fully support all expenditures claimed. In one instance, a receipt supporting a claimed expense was missing. In three additional cases, although the expenditures were generally supported, the documentation did not clearly reflect how the amounts allocated to the major federal program were determined. While these issues were isolated and the known and likely questioned costs were immaterial, the lack of complete documentation represents noncompliance with federal requirements for allowable costs. Criteria: According to Uniform Guidance 2 CFR §200.302(b)(3), the Organization's financial management system must maintain records that sufficiently identify the amount, source, and expenditure of Federal funds for Federal awards. All records must be supported by source documentation. Additionally, 2 CFR §200.403(g) requires that all costs charged to federal awards must be adequately documented. Cause: These exceptions appear to result from informal documentation practices and a lack of consistent application of procedures. Management is heavily involved in the Organization’s financial processes, including allocation of costs, which can limit opportunities for independent oversight or review. The absence of a standardized and consistently enforced process for documenting cost allocations contributes to inconsistent recordkeeping. Possible of Known Effect: Although the overall financial impact of these exceptions was not material, the missing documentation prevents the Organization from fully demonstrating compliance with 2 CFR 200.403 and 200.302. Overreliance on a single individual for documentation and procedural execution without accompanying review or monitoring controls can increase the risk of errors, omissions, or audit findings, even when expenditures are reasonable and allowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $2,742 were identified. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a standardized procedure for documenting all direct and indirect cost allocations charged to federal programs, ensuring that each claim includes full supporting documentation such as receipts and annotated allocation details with consistent allocation methods. To strengthen internal controls, the Organization should consider establishing a review process for claims preparation that includes someone other than the individual preparing or allocating the expenditures. This will enhance accountability and help ensure compliance with federal documentation requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The Organization will develop written guidelines specifying the required supporting documentation for each type of direct expense. Set up vendors in QuickBooks. We will hire and train Finance Manager to manage and track revenue and expenses, QuickBooks, grant reporting etc. All receipts and expenses will be scanned in and kept electronically. The Organization will provide training on documentation requirements, proper record submission, and compliance expectations.
2024-004: Written Policies and Procedures – Significant Deficiency Criteria and Condition: 2 CFR 200.302 requires that the recipient or subrecipient’s financial management system must provide written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 (Federal payments) and for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.318 requires that the recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. Context: Although the Organization follows procedures that minimize the time between reimbursement of dollars and expenditure (2 CFR 200.305), verify payments made are in accordance with subpart E and terms and conditions of the award, and follow procurement standards for vendors, there are no written procedures as required by the CFR. Cause and Effect: The Organization did not maintain written procedures as required by the CFR. Questioned Costs: This finding does not result in questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization formally document the current policies and procedures in place to meet documentation requirements of the CFR. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We will adopt formal policies and procedures that document our current practices and also meet the requirements of the CFR.
2024-004: Written Policies and Procedures – Significant Deficiency Criteria and Condition: 2 CFR 200.302 requires that the recipient or subrecipient’s financial management system must provide written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 (Federal payments) and for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.318 requires that the recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. Context: Although the Organization follows procedures that minimize the time between reimbursement of dollars and expenditure (2 CFR 200.305), verify payments made are in accordance with subpart E and terms and conditions of the award, and follow procurement standards for vendors, there are no written procedures as required by the CFR. Cause and Effect: The Organization did not maintain written procedures as required by the CFR. Questioned Costs: This finding does not result in questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization formally document the current policies and procedures in place to meet documentation requirements of the CFR. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We will adopt formal policies and procedures that document our current practices and also meet the requirements of the CFR.
Finding 2024-001 Interproject Payable – Amounts Owed to Other HUD Project Type of finding: Significant deficiency in internal control. Condition and context: During our audit we noted that the project has recorded a payable due to another HUD-assisted project in the amount of $3,072, and there is no documented HUD authorization supporting this obligation. Criteria: Per 2 CFR Part 200 (Uniform Guidance), §§200.302 and 200.403, federal program funds must be used only for allowable costs and in direct support of the objectives of the program. HUD requirements also prohibit the commingling of funds between projects unless explicitly authorized. Interproject payables or advances without proper documentation or timely settlement may constitute an unallowable use of program resources. Cause: Management permitted the use of funds from another HUD-assisted project to support operations of this project without obtaining HUD approval or establishing proper repayment terms. This occurred due to inadequate oversight of cash management and interproject transactions. Effect: Maintaining an outstanding payable to another HUD project: • Indicates potential misuse of federal funds. • Increases the risk of noncompliance with HUD requirements and Uniform Guidance. • May impair the project’s ability to demonstrate financial independence and program accountability. • Exposes the project to possible HUD sanctions, questioned costs, or repayment obligations. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs are $3,072. Recommendation: We recommend that project management: • Repay the outstanding payable to the related HUD project as soon as feasible. • Cease the practice of interproject borrowing unless HUD has provided explicit authorization. • Implement stronger internal controls over cash management and interproject transactions. • Document and monitor all project-level obligations to ensure compliance with HUD regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding and the payment will be corrected. Management will review internal controls and implement a review process to only pay expenses already incurred to avoid future payments.
U.S. Department of Transportation – AL #20.106 Airport Improvement Program – Reporting Grant Award: 3-38-0022-064-2022 Criteria The Authority is required to submit payment requests using the DOT Electronic Grants payment system, Delphi e-Invoicing. These requests must meet the standards described in 2 CFR ss 200.302 and 200.305. Additionally, Authority is required to submit annual SF-425 reports within 90 days of the end of the federal fiscal year. Condition During review of submitted Request for Reimbursements and Outlay reports, it was noted that one request submitted was not accurately prepared as there was one instance in which the amount requested was greater than invoice documentation, additionally the request included a request for reimbursement of AIP ineligible costs. As of December 31, 2024 no funds have been returned to U.S. DOT. It was also noted that multiple annual SF-425 reports were submitted late. Questioned Costs N/A Context We reviewed the project financial summary for two of the 19 requests submitted during 2024 and SF-425 reports for all open grants. Cause Employee oversight. Effect The Authority could have had federal funding delayed or reduced. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority implement internal controls to ensure all reporting is accurately filed. Repeat Finding Yes. Prior audit finding 2023-003. Views of Responsible Officials Management recognizes the deficiency and plans to implement the auditor’s recommendation.
U.S. Department of Transportation – AL #20.106 Airport Improvement Program – Reporting Grant Award: 3-38-0022-064-2022 Criteria The Authority is required to submit payment requests using the DOT Electronic Grants payment system, Delphi e-Invoicing. These requests must meet the standards described in 2 CFR ss 200.302 and 200.305. Additionally, Authority is required to submit annual SF-425 reports within 90 days of the end of the federal fiscal year. Condition During review of submitted Request for Reimbursements and Outlay reports, it was noted that one request submitted was not accurately prepared as there was one instance in which the amount requested was greater than invoice documentation, additionally the request included a request for reimbursement of AIP ineligible costs. As of December 31, 2024 no funds have been returned to U.S. DOT. It was also noted that multiple annual SF-425 reports were submitted late. Questioned Costs N/A Context We reviewed the project financial summary for two of the 19 requests submitted during 2024 and SF-425 reports for all open grants. Cause Employee oversight. Effect The Authority could have had federal funding delayed or reduced. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority implement internal controls to ensure all reporting is accurately filed. Repeat Finding Yes. Prior audit finding 2023-003. Views of Responsible Officials Management recognizes the deficiency and plans to implement the auditor’s recommendation.
Identification of a Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding from the immediate previous audit, 2023-002. Criteria: Uniform Guidance requires written procedures for cash management and determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E – Cost Principals. Condition: Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs did not have written procedures for cash management (2 CFR 200.302(b)(6)) and allowable costs determination (2 CFR 200.302(b)(7)) in accordance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Questioned Costs: $0 Cause: Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs’ written policies and procedures were not updated to include required Uniform Guidance policies. Effect: Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs could enter into a transaction that is not in compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Recommendation: We recommend Boone County Senior Citizen Services Corporation DBA The Bluffs draft and adopt written procedures in accordance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management agrees with the finding and is in process of developing and implementing the appropriate policies and procedures. The board anticipates approving written policies and procedures for cash management in May 2025.
Finding 2024-004 Internal Controls Over Compliance for Cash Management, Allowable Costs, Procurement, and Conflicts of Interest Federal Program: 66.468 Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Condition: The City does not have formally documented written controls to ensure compliance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), regarding the determination of allowable costs, procurement procedures, conflicts of interest, and cash management. Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.302(b) requires the City to have written procedures related to managing cash from federal award, including determining the allowability of costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart E – Cost Principles. Additionally, 2 CFR § 318(a) and (c), requires the City to formally document procedures used for procurements made within federal programs, to demonstrate compliance with Uniform Guidance, which includes written standards of conduct that cover conflicts of interest and govern the performance of individuals engaged in procurement. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures have not been formally drafted and updated in written form. Effect: The failure to have written policies and procedures resulted in the City’s noncompliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Context: This is a general requirement that pertains to most federal grants. This was not identified via sampling procedures. Questioned Costs: None identified. Recommendation: We recommend the City review the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, particularly the sections referenced above, to obtain a better understanding of the related requirements under Uniform Guidance. Based on this understanding, we recommend the City adopt written policies and procedures pertaining to cash management, determining the allowability of costs, procurement procedures, and conflicts of interest for all federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with our recommendation. See corresponding Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-001 Internal Controls Over Compliance for Cash Management, Allowable Costs, Procurement, and Conflicts of Interest Federal Program: 14.251 Economic Development Initiative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Condition: The City did not have formally documented written controls to ensure compliance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), in regard to determining allowable costs, procurement procedures, conflicts of interest, and cash management. Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.302(b) requires the City to have written procedures related to managing cash from federal awards, including determining the allowability of costs in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart E – Cost Principles. Additionally, 2 CFR § 318(a) and (c), requires the City to formally document procedures used for procurements made within federal programs, to demonstrate compliance with Uniform Guidance, which includes written standards of conduct that cover conflicts of interest and govern the performance of individuals engaged in procurement. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures were not formally drafted and updated in written form. Effect: The failure to have written policies and procedures during the grant period resulted in the City’s temporary noncompliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Context: This is a general requirement that pertains to most federal grants. This was not identified via sampling procedures. Questioned Costs: None identified. Recommendation: We recommend the City review the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, particularly the sections referenced above, to obtain a better understanding of the related requirements under Uniform Guidance. Based on this understanding, we recommend the City adopt written policies and procedures pertaining to cash management, determining the allowability of costs, procurement procedures, and conflicts of interest for all federal programs. Since the discovery of this issue, the City has adopted written policies and procedures pertaining to cash management, determining the allowability of costs, procurement procedures, and conflicts of interest for all federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with our recommendation, and this matter has already been resolved subsequent to year-end. See corresponding Corrective Action Plan.
FINDING 2024-004 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-003. Condition and Context As part of sound management of the federal award, the Town was responsible for implementing a system of internal controls that would ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. The Town had not properly designed or implemented such a system, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The Town was required to submit the following reporting to the Department of Agriculture annually: • Statement of Budget, Income, and Equity (Form RD 442-2) • Balance Sheet (Form RD 442-3) INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The Form RD 442-2 covers financial operations relating to the Town's wastewater utility and the Form RD 442-3 presents the financial status of the wastewater utility. In both instances, a borrower may submit the financial data on other forms, provided the forms are in a similar format and signed and dated by the organization's official to certify the correctness of the information. Alternatively, an annual audit may be submitted in lieu of the forms. The Town did not submit the Form RD 442-2 during the audit period as required. The Town submitted the Form RD 442-3 reporting 2023 data in 2024 as required. However, this report is intended to be a comparative balance sheet as described in the USDA Rural Utilities Service Borrower's Guide. The Town did not include comparative data for 2022 in the report. There was also no documentation or other evidence of an oversight, review, or approval process for the report that was filed. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . ." 7 CFR 1780.47 states in part: "(a) Borrowers are required to provide RUS an annual audit or financial statements. . . . (e) Borrowers exempt from audits. All borrowers who are exempt from audits, will, within 60 days following the end of each fiscal year, furnish the RUS with annual financial statements, consisting of a verification of the organization's balance sheet and statement of income and expense by an appropriate official of the organization. Forms RD 442-2, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity,' and 442-3 may be used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (f) Management reports. These reports will furnish management with a means of evaluating prior decisions and serve as a basis for planning future operations and financial strategies. In those cases where revenues from multiple sources are pledged as security for an RUS loan, two reports will be required; one for the project being financed by RUS and one combining the entire operation of the borrower. In those cases where RUS loans are secured by general obligation bonds or assessments and the borrower combines revenues from all sources, one management report combining all such revenues is acceptable. The following management data will be submitted by the borrower to the processing office. These reports at a minimum will include a balance sheet and income and expense statement. . . . (2) Annual management reports. Prior to the beginning of each fiscal year the following will be submitted to the processing office. (If Form RD 442-2 is used as the annual management report, enter data in column three only of Schedule 1, and complete all of Schedule 2.) (i) Two copies of the management reports and proposed 'Annual Budget'. (ii) Financial information may be reported on Form RD 442-2 which includes Schedule 1, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity' and Schedule 2, 'Projected Cash Flow' or information in similar format. (iii) A copy of the rate schedule in effect at the time of submission. . . ." Cause The Clerk-Treasurer was only in her first year of her first term in office when these were due. As such, she was unfamiliar with the reporting requirements of the grant. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the Town did not file one of the two required reports, and the report that was filed was incomplete. As a result, material noncompliance occurred and remained undetected. By not reporting the comparative data, all information needed to determine the true financial status of the Town was not readily available. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Town's management establish a proper system of internal controls and develop and implement reporting policies and procedures to ensure that all required reports are filed timely, accurately, and contain all the required information. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.303(a), the non-Federal entity must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the awards. Additionally, per 2 CFR §200.403 and §200.302, costs charged to federal awards must be allowable, allocable, and properly documented, and financial reporting must be accurate, complete, and supported by the accounting system. Condition: Although the Parish has implemented internal controls related to the allowability of costs and the preparation of required reports for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery funds, they were not operating effectively during fiscal year 2024. Tests of controls indicated that transactions were not tracked appropriately to ensure they were charged to the correct funding source. In addition, quarterly project and expenditure reports submitted to the U.S. Treasury included inaccurate or unsupported information due to a lack of tracking and reconciliation procedures. Cause: As discussed in item 2024-001, the Parish encountered several challenges during the transition of administration and key personnel. Parish administration and management were immediately tasked with enhancing operations related to procedural concerns from the prior administration and performing the accounting function without sufficient documentation on several balances and transactions. The documented controls were not in practice because of this. Effect: While no instances of noncompliance were noted, the lack of documented controls in practice increases the risk that future required reports could be incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely, as well as, federal costs being unallowed per the cost principles which could potentially result in program noncompliance. Recommendation: We recommend that the Parish enhance and document internal controls over financial reporting, as described in our recommendations described under item 2024-001, to prevent noncompliance of the Uniform Guidance as required.
Finding 2024-005 Internal Controls Over Compliance for Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: 14.251 Economic Development Initiative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Condition: The City does not have formally documented written controls to ensure compliance with the U.S. Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), in regard to determining subrecipient monitoring. Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.302(b) requires the City to have written procedures related to managing subrecipient monitoring in accordance with 2 CFR 200 Subpart D – Subrecipient Monitoring. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures have not been formally drafted and updated in written form. Effect: The failure to have written policies and procedures resulted in the City’s noncompliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Context: This is a general requirement that pertains to many federal grants. This was not identified via sampling procedures. Questioned Costs: None identified. Recommendation: We recommend the City review the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, particularly the sections referenced above, to obtain a better understanding of the related requirements under Uniform Guidance. Based on this understanding, we recommend the City adopt written policies and procedures pertaining to subrecipient monitoring for all applicable federal programs. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with our recommendation. See corresponding Corrective Action Plan.
Adjoin Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2024 Section II - Financial Statement Findings Section None noted. Section III - Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs Section 1. Finding Number: Finding 2024-001 Program Name: Supportive Services for Veterans Families: CFDA 64.033 Pass Through Agency: N/A Type of Finding: Other matters, compliance a. Criteria: Failure to comply with the grant agreement’s terms and applicable regulations: The Organization did not comply with grant compliance requirements such as tracking administrative expenses charged to the program outside of the general ledger and in other matters noted in Supportive Services for Veterans Families (SSVF) reviews. b. Condition: During our audit, JGD reviewed the results of all reviews for the SSVF grant and noted seven compliance deficiencies were indicated in the reporting period. These deficiencies resulted in a failure of controls over compliance. Under the SSVF Program, a minimum of 90% of supportive services grant funds must be used to provide and coordinate the provision of supportive services to very lowincome Veteran families who are occupying permanent housing. A maximum of 10% of supportive services grant funds may be used for administrative costs. Per Section 62.70 of the 38 CFR Part 62, administrative costs are defined as all direct and indirect costs associated with the indirect, of subcontractors. SSVF requires grantees to provide support documentation (payroll records, invoices, receipts etc.) for all costs and expenses associated with the administration of the SSVF grant. Administrative costs should be placed in the Administrative section of an SSVF program budget. An approved Indirect Cost Rate is not considered adequate support or source documentation for costs listed in the Administrative section of the budget. Grantees are required to have a detailed breakout of these administrative costs along with any supporting documents for those expenses for auditing and oversight. Title 2 CFR 200.302 requires the financial management system of each non-Federal entity provide “records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federally-funded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income and interest and be supported by source documentation.” These citations are included for informational purposes: Fiscal Administration – Administrative Expenses: Administrative expenses were not recorded in the general ledger, resulting in questioned costs. Fiscal Administration – Unallowed Supplemental Pay: Five employees did not have evidence to support reasonableness and compliance with incentive compensation requirements, resulting in questioned costs. 25 Adjoin Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2024 Fiscal Administration – Inadequate TFA Identification: TFA expenses were not paid through credit card charges in the general ledger. This deficiency was cleared as corrective action was taken during the review. Participant Eligibility – HMIS Release of Information Forms: Four case files were missing HMIS Release of Information Forms for household members over the age of 18. Participant Eligibility – Missing Income Eligibility Documentation: Three case files missing income eligibility documents for Veterans and one case file missing income eligibility documents for Veteran and household members at certification of eligibility events. Participant Eligibility – Missing Exit Checklist: Five case files did not include exit checklist documentation. This deficiency was cleared as corrective action was taken during the review. Program Operations – Inadequate MOU: MOU for a legal subcontractor was missing required elements, including expectations and requirements for quarterly assessments and annual monitoring of performance, listing of only eligible/allowable legal services, highlighting of response time expectations and requirements to support payments, and account for Veterans that have been separated from the program and those in need of long-term legal services. c. Context: Recipients of Federal grants are required to comply with all terms and applicable regulations of grant agreements. d. Questioned Costs: Administrative expenses resulted in $937,794 and supplemental pay resulted in $1,500 in questioned costs. The Organization has disputed both findings noting the expenses are itemized within their internal tracking files and that the costs are allowable, allocable, and reasonable. The Organization has received no response from the agency. e. Cause: Internal accounting procedures, lack of compliance policies, and lack of training over verification and documentation processes, resulting in a failure of controls over compliance. f. Effect: Considered to be an other matter related to internal control over compliance. g. Recommendation: Management should take steps to ensure that all administrative expenses are properly recorded in the general ledger, supplemental pay is approved with proper evidence of approvals, and proper documentation and policies are in place to comply with all grant compliance requirements. We recommend that management closely monitor areas of non-compliance as noted in the licensing reviews. Section IV – Schedule of Prior Year Findings and Questioned Costs None noted.
Finding 2024-003 Insufficient Documentation of Other Direct Expenses Type of Finding: Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Condition: During testing of direct costs charged to the federal program, the Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation to fully support all expenditures claimed. In one instance, a receipt supporting a claimed expense was missing. In three additional cases, although the expenditures were generally supported, the documentation did not clearly reflect how the amounts allocated to the major federal program were determined. While these issues were isolated and the known and likely questioned costs were immaterial, the lack of complete documentation represents noncompliance with federal requirements for allowable costs. Criteria: According to Uniform Guidance 2 CFR §200.302(b)(3), the Organization's financial management system must maintain records that sufficiently identify the amount, source, and expenditure of Federal funds for Federal awards. All records must be supported by source documentation. Additionally, 2 CFR §200.403(g) requires that all costs charged to federal awards must be adequately documented. Cause: These exceptions appear to result from informal documentation practices and a lack of consistent application of procedures. Management is heavily involved in the Organization’s financial processes, including allocation of costs, which can limit opportunities for independent oversight or review. The absence of a standardized and consistently enforced process for documenting cost allocations contributes to inconsistent recordkeeping. Possible of Known Effect: Although the overall financial impact of these exceptions was not material, the missing documentation prevents the Organization from fully demonstrating compliance with 2 CFR 200.403 and 200.302. Overreliance on a single individual for documentation and procedural execution without accompanying review or monitoring controls can increase the risk of errors, omissions, or audit findings, even when expenditures are reasonable and allowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $2,742 were identified. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a standardized procedure for documenting all direct and indirect cost allocations charged to federal programs, ensuring that each claim includes full supporting documentation such as receipts and annotated allocation details with consistent allocation methods. To strengthen internal controls, the Organization should consider establishing a review process for claims preparation that includes someone other than the individual preparing or allocating the expenditures. This will enhance accountability and help ensure compliance with federal documentation requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The Organization will develop written guidelines specifying the required supporting documentation for each type of direct expense. Set up vendors in QuickBooks. We will hire and train Finance Manager to manage and track revenue and expenses, QuickBooks, grant reporting etc. All receipts and expenses will be scanned in and kept electronically. The Organization will provide training on documentation requirements, proper record submission, and compliance expectations.
2024-004: Written Policies and Procedures – Significant Deficiency Criteria and Condition: 2 CFR 200.302 requires that the recipient or subrecipient’s financial management system must provide written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 (Federal payments) and for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.318 requires that the recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. Context: Although the Organization follows procedures that minimize the time between reimbursement of dollars and expenditure (2 CFR 200.305), verify payments made are in accordance with subpart E and terms and conditions of the award, and follow procurement standards for vendors, there are no written procedures as required by the CFR. Cause and Effect: The Organization did not maintain written procedures as required by the CFR. Questioned Costs: This finding does not result in questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization formally document the current policies and procedures in place to meet documentation requirements of the CFR. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We will adopt formal policies and procedures that document our current practices and also meet the requirements of the CFR.
2024-004: Written Policies and Procedures – Significant Deficiency Criteria and Condition: 2 CFR 200.302 requires that the recipient or subrecipient’s financial management system must provide written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 (Federal payments) and for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.318 requires that the recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. Context: Although the Organization follows procedures that minimize the time between reimbursement of dollars and expenditure (2 CFR 200.305), verify payments made are in accordance with subpart E and terms and conditions of the award, and follow procurement standards for vendors, there are no written procedures as required by the CFR. Cause and Effect: The Organization did not maintain written procedures as required by the CFR. Questioned Costs: This finding does not result in questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization formally document the current policies and procedures in place to meet documentation requirements of the CFR. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We will adopt formal policies and procedures that document our current practices and also meet the requirements of the CFR.
Finding 2024-001 Interproject Payable – Amounts Owed to Other HUD Project Type of finding: Significant deficiency in internal control. Condition and context: During our audit we noted that the project has recorded a payable due to another HUD-assisted project in the amount of $3,072, and there is no documented HUD authorization supporting this obligation. Criteria: Per 2 CFR Part 200 (Uniform Guidance), §§200.302 and 200.403, federal program funds must be used only for allowable costs and in direct support of the objectives of the program. HUD requirements also prohibit the commingling of funds between projects unless explicitly authorized. Interproject payables or advances without proper documentation or timely settlement may constitute an unallowable use of program resources. Cause: Management permitted the use of funds from another HUD-assisted project to support operations of this project without obtaining HUD approval or establishing proper repayment terms. This occurred due to inadequate oversight of cash management and interproject transactions. Effect: Maintaining an outstanding payable to another HUD project: • Indicates potential misuse of federal funds. • Increases the risk of noncompliance with HUD requirements and Uniform Guidance. • May impair the project’s ability to demonstrate financial independence and program accountability. • Exposes the project to possible HUD sanctions, questioned costs, or repayment obligations. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs are $3,072. Recommendation: We recommend that project management: • Repay the outstanding payable to the related HUD project as soon as feasible. • Cease the practice of interproject borrowing unless HUD has provided explicit authorization. • Implement stronger internal controls over cash management and interproject transactions. • Document and monitor all project-level obligations to ensure compliance with HUD regulations. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding and the payment will be corrected. Management will review internal controls and implement a review process to only pay expenses already incurred to avoid future payments.
2 CFR § 300 codified in 45 CFR part 75 and gives regulatory effect to the Department of Health and Human Services 2 CFR § 200; while 2 CFR § 400 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Agriculture for 2 CFR § 200. 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(6) states the financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.305 for Payment. 2 CFR 200.302(b)(7) requires written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E-Cost Principles of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.430 states that costs of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of this part, and that the total compensation for individual employees: (1) Is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity's laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) Is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. 2 CFR 200.431 requires established written leave policies if the entity intends to pay fringe benefits. 2 CFR 200.464(a)(2) requires reimbursement of relocation costs to employees be in accordance with an established written policy must be consistently followed by the employer. 2 CFR 200.475 requires reimbursement and/or charges to be consistent with those normally allowed in like circumstances in the non-Federal entity's non-federally-funded activities and in accordance with non-Federal entity's written travel reimbursement policies. Additionally, for Federal awards, the Uniform Guidance requires a written policy for the procurement requirements outlined in 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(1), 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(2), and 2 CFR § 200.320(B). The Board of Health did not have written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance as they were not aware of the requirements. The failure to implement written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance with the District’s federal programs. The Board of Health should adopt written policies in accordance with the Uniform Guidance to help improve internal controls over federal compliance.
2 CFR § 300 codified in 45 CFR part 75 and gives regulatory effect to the Department of Health and Human Services 2 CFR § 200; while 2 CFR § 400 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Agriculture for 2 CFR § 200. 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(6) states the financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.305 for Payment. 2 CFR 200.302(b)(7) requires written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E-Cost Principles of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.430 states that costs of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of this part, and that the total compensation for individual employees: (1) Is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity's laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) Is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. 2 CFR 200.431 requires established written leave policies if the entity intends to pay fringe benefits. 2 CFR 200.464(a)(2) requires reimbursement of relocation costs to employees be in accordance with an established written policy must be consistently followed by the employer. 2 CFR 200.475 requires reimbursement and/or charges to be consistent with those normally allowed in like circumstances in the non-Federal entity's non-federally-funded activities and in accordance with non-Federal entity's written travel reimbursement policies. Additionally, for Federal awards, the Uniform Guidance requires a written policy for the procurement requirements outlined in 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(1), 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(2), and 2 CFR § 200.320(B). The Board of Health did not have written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance as they were not aware of the requirements. The failure to implement written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance with the District’s federal programs. The Board of Health should adopt written policies in accordance with the Uniform Guidance to help improve internal controls over federal compliance.
2 CFR § 300 codified in 45 CFR part 75 and gives regulatory effect to the Department of Health and Human Services 2 CFR § 200; while 2 CFR § 400 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Agriculture for 2 CFR § 200. 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(6) states the financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.305 for Payment. 2 CFR 200.302(b)(7) requires written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E-Cost Principles of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.430 states that costs of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of this part, and that the total compensation for individual employees: (1) Is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity's laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) Is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. 2 CFR 200.431 requires established written leave policies if the entity intends to pay fringe benefits. 2 CFR 200.464(a)(2) requires reimbursement of relocation costs to employees be in accordance with an established written policy must be consistently followed by the employer. 2 CFR 200.475 requires reimbursement and/or charges to be consistent with those normally allowed in like circumstances in the non-Federal entity's non-federally-funded activities and in accordance with non-Federal entity's written travel reimbursement policies. Additionally, for Federal awards, the Uniform Guidance requires a written policy for the procurement requirements outlined in 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(1), 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(2), and 2 CFR § 200.320(B). The Board of Health did not have written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance as they were not aware of the requirements. The failure to implement written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance with the District’s federal programs. The Board of Health should adopt written policies in accordance with the Uniform Guidance to help improve internal controls over federal compliance.
2 CFR § 300 codified in 45 CFR part 75 and gives regulatory effect to the Department of Health and Human Services 2 CFR § 200; while 2 CFR § 400 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Agriculture for 2 CFR § 200. 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(6) states the financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.305 for Payment. 2 CFR 200.302(b)(7) requires written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E-Cost Principles of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.430 states that costs of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of this part, and that the total compensation for individual employees: (1) Is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity's laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) Is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. 2 CFR 200.431 requires established written leave policies if the entity intends to pay fringe benefits. 2 CFR 200.464(a)(2) requires reimbursement of relocation costs to employees be in accordance with an established written policy must be consistently followed by the employer. 2 CFR 200.475 requires reimbursement and/or charges to be consistent with those normally allowed in like circumstances in the non-Federal entity's non-federally-funded activities and in accordance with non-Federal entity's written travel reimbursement policies. Additionally, for Federal awards, the Uniform Guidance requires a written policy for the procurement requirements outlined in 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(1), 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(2), and 2 CFR § 200.320(B). The Board of Health did not have written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance as they were not aware of the requirements. The failure to implement written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance with the District’s federal programs. The Board of Health should adopt written policies in accordance with the Uniform Guidance to help improve internal controls over federal compliance.
2 CFR § 300 codified in 45 CFR part 75 and gives regulatory effect to the Department of Health and Human Services 2 CFR § 200; while 2 CFR § 400 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Agriculture for 2 CFR § 200. 2 CFR § 200.302(b)(6) states the financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for written procedures to implement the requirements of 2 CFR § 200.305 for Payment. 2 CFR 200.302(b)(7) requires written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with Subpart E-Cost Principles of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.430 states that costs of compensation are allowable to the extent that they satisfy the specific requirements of this part, and that the total compensation for individual employees: (1) Is reasonable for the services rendered and conforms to the established written policy of the non-Federal entity consistently applied to both Federal and non-Federal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a non-Federal entity's laws and/or rules or written policies and meets the requirements of Federal statute, where applicable; and (3) Is determined and supported as provided in paragraph (i) of this section, Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses, when applicable. 2 CFR 200.431 requires established written leave policies if the entity intends to pay fringe benefits. 2 CFR 200.464(a)(2) requires reimbursement of relocation costs to employees be in accordance with an established written policy must be consistently followed by the employer. 2 CFR 200.475 requires reimbursement and/or charges to be consistent with those normally allowed in like circumstances in the non-Federal entity's non-federally-funded activities and in accordance with non-Federal entity's written travel reimbursement policies. Additionally, for Federal awards, the Uniform Guidance requires a written policy for the procurement requirements outlined in 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(1), 2 CFR § 200.318(c)(2), and 2 CFR § 200.320(B). The Board of Health did not have written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance as they were not aware of the requirements. The failure to implement written policies as required by the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance with the District’s federal programs. The Board of Health should adopt written policies in accordance with the Uniform Guidance to help improve internal controls over federal compliance.
Finding 2024-01: Considered a significant deficiency. Criteria: Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §§200.302–303 and 200.318–320) requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls and written policies and procedures to ensure compliance with federal award requirements. These policies must be sufficiently detailed to provide consistent and proper administration of federal programs Condition: As part of our audit of compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance for the year ended December 31, 2024, we noted that West Michigan Food Processing Association does not have formal, written policies and procedures in place related to the administration of its federal awards. Specifically, we noted the absence of written procedures addressing: ➢ Financial management systems (including allowable costs and cash management) ➢ Procurement standards ➢ Subrecipient monitoring ➢ Internal controls over compliance ➢ Conflicts of interest Effect: Without formal written policies and procedures, there is an increased risk that federal program requirements may not be followed consistently. This could result in noncompliance with federal regulations, mismanagement of federal funds, or potential questioned costs. Additionally, the absence of documentation limits the ability to demonstrate compliance during audit or grantor review processes. Cause: The absence of written policies appears to result from the entity historically depending on established practices and staff knowledge, rather than formally documenting procedures as required under Uniform Guidance. Recommendation: We recommend that West Michigan Food Processing Association develop and implement comprehensive written policies and procedures to address the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. These should be tailored to the Association’s structure and operations and cover all applicable federal compliance areas. Management should also establish a process to periodically review and update these documents to ensure continued compliance. Response: West Michigan Food Processing Association concurs with the facts of the finding and is implementing procedures to prevent this in the future.