FINDING 2023-003 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 2022, FY 2023 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 For the Child Nutrition Cluster, the reimbursement for meals served is not based on costs; it is determined solely by applying the applicable meals rates formula. However, the School Corporation can use its entire reimbursement payment for any combination of allowable operating and administrative costs. All expenditures from the reimbursement payment must also be reasonable and allocable. The purchase of capital expenditures, those expenditures which are over $5,000 or more for an item that is to be used for general purposes for multiple years, must have approval by the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) prior to purchase. In fiscal year 2022-2023, the School Corporation purchased two pieces of equipment, each over $5,000, without approval from the IDOE. The first piece of equipment was a liftgate in the amount of $6,906, and the second piece of equipment was a vehicle in the amount of $7,500. The total amount of $14,406 was considered questioned costs. In addition, the School Corporation did not have an allowable costs policy outlining the School Corporation's processes and policies with regards to costs charged to federal grants. The lack of effective 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 WABASH CITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.439(b) states in part: "The following rule of allowability must apply to equipment and other capital expenditures: . . . (2) Capital expenditures for special purpose equipment are allowable as direct costs, provided that items with a unit cost of $5,000 or more have the prior written approval of the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (7) Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, equipment was purchased without prior approval from the IDOE. 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 Questioned costs in the amount of $14,406 were identified as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure that equipment purchased over $5,000 is approved by the IDOE prior to purchase. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-003 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 2022, FY 2023 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 For the Child Nutrition Cluster, the reimbursement for meals served is not based on costs; it is determined solely by applying the applicable meals rates formula. However, the School Corporation can use its entire reimbursement payment for any combination of allowable operating and administrative costs. All expenditures from the reimbursement payment must also be reasonable and allocable. The purchase of capital expenditures, those expenditures which are over $5,000 or more for an item that is to be used for general purposes for multiple years, must have approval by the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) prior to purchase. In fiscal year 2022-2023, the School Corporation purchased two pieces of equipment, each over $5,000, without approval from the IDOE. The first piece of equipment was a liftgate in the amount of $6,906, and the second piece of equipment was a vehicle in the amount of $7,500. The total amount of $14,406 was considered questioned costs. In addition, the School Corporation did not have an allowable costs policy outlining the School Corporation's processes and policies with regards to costs charged to federal grants. The lack of effective 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 WABASH CITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.439(b) states in part: "The following rule of allowability must apply to equipment and other capital expenditures: . . . (2) Capital expenditures for special purpose equipment are allowable as direct costs, provided that items with a unit cost of $5,000 or more have the prior written approval of the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity. . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (7) Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, equipment was purchased without prior approval from the IDOE. 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 Questioned costs in the amount of $14,406 were identified as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure that equipment purchased over $5,000 is approved by the IDOE prior to purchase. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The School Corporation was required to submit annual data reports to the Indiana Department of Education via JotForm, a form/report builder. Data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period expenditures, prior period expenditures, and key line items such as "Number of Specific Positions Supported with Esser Funds," "Allocation of ESSER funds," "Expenditures per Activity," and "Full-Time Equivalency Positions." During the audit period the School Corporation submitted two ESSER I reports, two ESSER II reports, and two ESSER III reports, for a total of six reports. There was no evidence of an oversight or review process in place to prevent, or detect and correct, errors. All six reports were selected for testing. For four of the six annual data reports the report could not be traced to the records, nor could the accuracy and completeness of the reports be verified. The errors identified were as follows: The ESSER I, Year 2 report, which covered the period of October 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $260,064. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $264,832. Of the reported expenditures, $219,703 could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The ESSER I, Year 3 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $86,521. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $78,230. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER II, Year 1 and Year 2 reports, which covered the periods of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, and July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, respectively, Key Line Items were not able to be traced to supporting documentation. The Expenditures by Subgrant Fund, expenditure category, and object code were supported by the School Corporation's records; however, the School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation for the nonfinancial data required to be submitted with the reports. The ESSER III, Year 1 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $41,340. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $20,670. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER III, Year 2 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $1,407,299, which agreed to the School Corporation's ledger. However, $644,730 of the reported expenditures could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. 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. . . ." 34 CFR 76.722 states: "A State may require a subgrantee to submit reports in a manner and format that assists the State in complying with the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720 and in carrying out other responsibilities under the program." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the reports were not supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. 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 There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure all reports submitted on behalf of the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund program funds are supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The School Corporation was required to submit annual data reports to the Indiana Department of Education via JotForm, a form/report builder. Data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period expenditures, prior period expenditures, and key line items such as "Number of Specific Positions Supported with Esser Funds," "Allocation of ESSER funds," "Expenditures per Activity," and "Full-Time Equivalency Positions." During the audit period the School Corporation submitted two ESSER I reports, two ESSER II reports, and two ESSER III reports, for a total of six reports. There was no evidence of an oversight or review process in place to prevent, or detect and correct, errors. All six reports were selected for testing. For four of the six annual data reports the report could not be traced to the records, nor could the accuracy and completeness of the reports be verified. The errors identified were as follows: The ESSER I, Year 2 report, which covered the period of October 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $260,064. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $264,832. Of the reported expenditures, $219,703 could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The ESSER I, Year 3 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $86,521. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $78,230. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER II, Year 1 and Year 2 reports, which covered the periods of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, and July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, respectively, Key Line Items were not able to be traced to supporting documentation. The Expenditures by Subgrant Fund, expenditure category, and object code were supported by the School Corporation's records; however, the School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation for the nonfinancial data required to be submitted with the reports. The ESSER III, Year 1 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $41,340. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $20,670. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER III, Year 2 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $1,407,299, which agreed to the School Corporation's ledger. However, $644,730 of the reported expenditures could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. 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. . . ." 34 CFR 76.722 states: "A State may require a subgrantee to submit reports in a manner and format that assists the State in complying with the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720 and in carrying out other responsibilities under the program." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the reports were not supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. 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 There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure all reports submitted on behalf of the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund program funds are supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The School Corporation was required to submit annual data reports to the Indiana Department of Education via JotForm, a form/report builder. Data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period expenditures, prior period expenditures, and key line items such as "Number of Specific Positions Supported with Esser Funds," "Allocation of ESSER funds," "Expenditures per Activity," and "Full-Time Equivalency Positions." During the audit period the School Corporation submitted two ESSER I reports, two ESSER II reports, and two ESSER III reports, for a total of six reports. There was no evidence of an oversight or review process in place to prevent, or detect and correct, errors. All six reports were selected for testing. For four of the six annual data reports the report could not be traced to the records, nor could the accuracy and completeness of the reports be verified. The errors identified were as follows: The ESSER I, Year 2 report, which covered the period of October 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $260,064. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $264,832. Of the reported expenditures, $219,703 could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The ESSER I, Year 3 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $86,521. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $78,230. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER II, Year 1 and Year 2 reports, which covered the periods of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, and July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, respectively, Key Line Items were not able to be traced to supporting documentation. The Expenditures by Subgrant Fund, expenditure category, and object code were supported by the School Corporation's records; however, the School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation for the nonfinancial data required to be submitted with the reports. The ESSER III, Year 1 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $41,340. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $20,670. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER III, Year 2 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $1,407,299, which agreed to the School Corporation's ledger. However, $644,730 of the reported expenditures could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. 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. . . ." 34 CFR 76.722 states: "A State may require a subgrantee to submit reports in a manner and format that assists the State in complying with the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720 and in carrying out other responsibilities under the program." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the reports were not supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. 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 There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure all reports submitted on behalf of the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund program funds are supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The School Corporation was required to submit annual data reports to the Indiana Department of Education via JotForm, a form/report builder. Data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period expenditures, prior period expenditures, and key line items such as "Number of Specific Positions Supported with Esser Funds," "Allocation of ESSER funds," "Expenditures per Activity," and "Full-Time Equivalency Positions." During the audit period the School Corporation submitted two ESSER I reports, two ESSER II reports, and two ESSER III reports, for a total of six reports. There was no evidence of an oversight or review process in place to prevent, or detect and correct, errors. All six reports were selected for testing. For four of the six annual data reports the report could not be traced to the records, nor could the accuracy and completeness of the reports be verified. The errors identified were as follows: The ESSER I, Year 2 report, which covered the period of October 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $260,064. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $264,832. Of the reported expenditures, $219,703 could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The ESSER I, Year 3 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $86,521. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $78,230. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER II, Year 1 and Year 2 reports, which covered the periods of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, and July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, respectively, Key Line Items were not able to be traced to supporting documentation. The Expenditures by Subgrant Fund, expenditure category, and object code were supported by the School Corporation's records; however, the School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation for the nonfinancial data required to be submitted with the reports. The ESSER III, Year 1 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $41,340. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $20,670. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER III, Year 2 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $1,407,299, which agreed to the School Corporation's ledger. However, $644,730 of the reported expenditures could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. 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. . . ." 34 CFR 76.722 states: "A State may require a subgrantee to submit reports in a manner and format that assists the State in complying with the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720 and in carrying out other responsibilities under the program." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the reports were not supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. 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 There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure all reports submitted on behalf of the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund program funds are supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The School Corporation was required to submit annual data reports to the Indiana Department of Education via JotForm, a form/report builder. Data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period expenditures, prior period expenditures, and key line items such as "Number of Specific Positions Supported with Esser Funds," "Allocation of ESSER funds," "Expenditures per Activity," and "Full-Time Equivalency Positions." During the audit period the School Corporation submitted two ESSER I reports, two ESSER II reports, and two ESSER III reports, for a total of six reports. There was no evidence of an oversight or review process in place to prevent, or detect and correct, errors. All six reports were selected for testing. For four of the six annual data reports the report could not be traced to the records, nor could the accuracy and completeness of the reports be verified. The errors identified were as follows: The ESSER I, Year 2 report, which covered the period of October 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $260,064. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $264,832. Of the reported expenditures, $219,703 could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The ESSER I, Year 3 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $86,521. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $78,230. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER II, Year 1 and Year 2 reports, which covered the periods of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, and July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, respectively, Key Line Items were not able to be traced to supporting documentation. The Expenditures by Subgrant Fund, expenditure category, and object code were supported by the School Corporation's records; however, the School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation for the nonfinancial data required to be submitted with the reports. The ESSER III, Year 1 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $41,340. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $20,670. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER III, Year 2 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $1,407,299, which agreed to the School Corporation's ledger. However, $644,730 of the reported expenditures could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. 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. . . ." 34 CFR 76.722 states: "A State may require a subgrantee to submit reports in a manner and format that assists the State in complying with the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720 and in carrying out other responsibilities under the program." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the reports were not supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. 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 There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure all reports submitted on behalf of the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund program funds are supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2023-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The School Corporation was required to submit annual data reports to the Indiana Department of Education via JotForm, a form/report builder. Data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period expenditures, prior period expenditures, and key line items such as "Number of Specific Positions Supported with Esser Funds," "Allocation of ESSER funds," "Expenditures per Activity," and "Full-Time Equivalency Positions." During the audit period the School Corporation submitted two ESSER I reports, two ESSER II reports, and two ESSER III reports, for a total of six reports. There was no evidence of an oversight or review process in place to prevent, or detect and correct, errors. All six reports were selected for testing. For four of the six annual data reports the report could not be traced to the records, nor could the accuracy and completeness of the reports be verified. The errors identified were as follows: The ESSER I, Year 2 report, which covered the period of October 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $260,064. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $264,832. Of the reported expenditures, $219,703 could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The ESSER I, Year 3 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $86,521. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $78,230. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER II, Year 1 and Year 2 reports, which covered the periods of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, and July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, respectively, Key Line Items were not able to be traced to supporting documentation. The Expenditures by Subgrant Fund, expenditure category, and object code were supported by the School Corporation's records; however, the School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation for the nonfinancial data required to be submitted with the reports. The ESSER III, Year 1 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, reported total expenses of $41,340. However, the School Corporation's ledger for the same period had total expenses of $20,670. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. The ESSER III, Year 2 report, which covered the period of July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, reported total expenses of $1,407,299, which agreed to the School Corporation's ledger. However, $644,730 of the reported expenditures could not be determined to be properly categorized. In addition, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for the identified Key Line Items. 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. . . ." 34 CFR 76.722 states: "A State may require a subgrantee to submit reports in a manner and format that assists the State in complying with the requirements under 34 CFR 76.720 and in carrying out other responsibilities under the program." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, the reports were not supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. 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 There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure all reports submitted on behalf of the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund program funds are supported by the School Corporation's underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
2023-022 - Inadequate Controls over Reporting and Other Federal Compliance Requirements for the Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs Award Years: 2022, 2023 Award Numbers: 2205LA5021, 2205LA5MAP, 2305LA5021, 2305LA5MAP Compliance Requirements: Matching, Earmarking, Period of Performance, Reporting Repeat Finding: No See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: LDH erroneously double-reported expenditures for the Medicaid program, resulting in questioned costs, and did not complete certain quarterly checklist reviews intended to ensure compliance with the reporting and matching federal compliance requirements for the Medicaid program and the reporting, period of performance, matching, and earmarking federal compliance requirements for the CHIP program. LDH improperly included the same $16.6 million Medicaid expenditure on both the September 30, 2022, and March 31, 2023, quarterly federal expenditure reports. In addition, LDH did not complete two of the four (50%) quarterly checklist reviews for fiscal year 2023. Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.302(b)(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 2 CFR 200.328 and 200.329 is required. The Medicaid and CHIP programs require quarterly reporting to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) detailing expenditures by category of service for which states are entitled to federal reimbursement. The federal expenditures reported in the quarterly reports are used to reconcile the draws of federal funds. In addition, good internal controls require that policies and procedures are established and followed to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Cause: LDH did not ensure their controls over federal requirements were completed for every quarter during fiscal year 2023. In addition, LDH did not accurately complete the quarterly reconciliation, which is intended to ensure all items are accurately reported on the quarterly federal expenditure report. Effect: Double-reporting expenditures resulted in $14.9 million in federal questioned costs for the year ending June 30, 2023. As a result of not completing quarterly checklist reviews, LDH failed to detect the misreporting of a $1.7 million recoupment of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments on the wrong federal year schedule for the June 30, 2023, quarterly federal expenditure report. Recommendation: LDH management should strengthen controls over preparation and review of the quarterly federal expenditure reports to ensure federal expenditures are accurately reported and should ensure all quarterly checklist reviews are completed. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management partially concurred with the finding and provided a corrective action plan (B-23). Auditor’s Additional Comments: Management's response stated, "LDH disagrees that the quarterly checklist is intended to demonstrate compliance with the federal reporting requirements." LDH management previously represented that the quarterly checklist was part of LDH's internal control process to document the preparation and review of the quarterly federal expenditure reports. As stated in the finding, the noncompliance associated with federal reporting requirements occurred because LDH did not ensure their internal controls over federal requirements were completed for every quarter during fiscal year 2023.
2023-022 - Inadequate Controls over Reporting and Other Federal Compliance Requirements for the Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs Award Years: 2022, 2023 Award Numbers: 2205LA5021, 2205LA5MAP, 2305LA5021, 2305LA5MAP Compliance Requirements: Matching, Earmarking, Period of Performance, Reporting Repeat Finding: No See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: LDH erroneously double-reported expenditures for the Medicaid program, resulting in questioned costs, and did not complete certain quarterly checklist reviews intended to ensure compliance with the reporting and matching federal compliance requirements for the Medicaid program and the reporting, period of performance, matching, and earmarking federal compliance requirements for the CHIP program. LDH improperly included the same $16.6 million Medicaid expenditure on both the September 30, 2022, and March 31, 2023, quarterly federal expenditure reports. In addition, LDH did not complete two of the four (50%) quarterly checklist reviews for fiscal year 2023. Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.302(b)(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 2 CFR 200.328 and 200.329 is required. The Medicaid and CHIP programs require quarterly reporting to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) detailing expenditures by category of service for which states are entitled to federal reimbursement. The federal expenditures reported in the quarterly reports are used to reconcile the draws of federal funds. In addition, good internal controls require that policies and procedures are established and followed to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Cause: LDH did not ensure their controls over federal requirements were completed for every quarter during fiscal year 2023. In addition, LDH did not accurately complete the quarterly reconciliation, which is intended to ensure all items are accurately reported on the quarterly federal expenditure report. Effect: Double-reporting expenditures resulted in $14.9 million in federal questioned costs for the year ending June 30, 2023. As a result of not completing quarterly checklist reviews, LDH failed to detect the misreporting of a $1.7 million recoupment of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments on the wrong federal year schedule for the June 30, 2023, quarterly federal expenditure report. Recommendation: LDH management should strengthen controls over preparation and review of the quarterly federal expenditure reports to ensure federal expenditures are accurately reported and should ensure all quarterly checklist reviews are completed. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management partially concurred with the finding and provided a corrective action plan (B-23). Auditor’s Additional Comments: Management's response stated, "LDH disagrees that the quarterly checklist is intended to demonstrate compliance with the federal reporting requirements." LDH management previously represented that the quarterly checklist was part of LDH's internal control process to document the preparation and review of the quarterly federal expenditure reports. As stated in the finding, the noncompliance associated with federal reporting requirements occurred because LDH did not ensure their internal controls over federal requirements were completed for every quarter during fiscal year 2023.
2023-022 - Inadequate Controls over Reporting and Other Federal Compliance Requirements for the Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs Award Years: 2022, 2023 Award Numbers: 2205LA5021, 2205LA5MAP, 2305LA5021, 2305LA5MAP Compliance Requirements: Matching, Earmarking, Period of Performance, Reporting Repeat Finding: No See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: LDH erroneously double-reported expenditures for the Medicaid program, resulting in questioned costs, and did not complete certain quarterly checklist reviews intended to ensure compliance with the reporting and matching federal compliance requirements for the Medicaid program and the reporting, period of performance, matching, and earmarking federal compliance requirements for the CHIP program. LDH improperly included the same $16.6 million Medicaid expenditure on both the September 30, 2022, and March 31, 2023, quarterly federal expenditure reports. In addition, LDH did not complete two of the four (50%) quarterly checklist reviews for fiscal year 2023. Criteria: According to 2 CFR 200.302(b)(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 2 CFR 200.328 and 200.329 is required. The Medicaid and CHIP programs require quarterly reporting to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) detailing expenditures by category of service for which states are entitled to federal reimbursement. The federal expenditures reported in the quarterly reports are used to reconcile the draws of federal funds. In addition, good internal controls require that policies and procedures are established and followed to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Cause: LDH did not ensure their controls over federal requirements were completed for every quarter during fiscal year 2023. In addition, LDH did not accurately complete the quarterly reconciliation, which is intended to ensure all items are accurately reported on the quarterly federal expenditure report. Effect: Double-reporting expenditures resulted in $14.9 million in federal questioned costs for the year ending June 30, 2023. As a result of not completing quarterly checklist reviews, LDH failed to detect the misreporting of a $1.7 million recoupment of Disproportionate Share Hospital payments on the wrong federal year schedule for the June 30, 2023, quarterly federal expenditure report. Recommendation: LDH management should strengthen controls over preparation and review of the quarterly federal expenditure reports to ensure federal expenditures are accurately reported and should ensure all quarterly checklist reviews are completed. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management partially concurred with the finding and provided a corrective action plan (B-23). Auditor’s Additional Comments: Management's response stated, "LDH disagrees that the quarterly checklist is intended to demonstrate compliance with the federal reporting requirements." LDH management previously represented that the quarterly checklist was part of LDH's internal control process to document the preparation and review of the quarterly federal expenditure reports. As stated in the finding, the noncompliance associated with federal reporting requirements occurred because LDH did not ensure their internal controls over federal requirements were completed for every quarter during fiscal year 2023.
Criteria In accordance with the Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.302(a), “Each state must expend and account for the Federal award in accordance with state laws and procedures for expending and accounting for the state's own funds. In addition, the state's and the other non-Federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. See also § 200.450.” Condition Some supporting schedules for expenses claimed for ESF and 21st Century Grant for the year ended June 30, 2023, were not readily available. Context Supporting schedule cannot be located. Cause Procedures to monitor proper filing of supporting documents were not adhered to consistently. Effect Complete records of claims were not maintained. Questioned Cost None identified. Recommendation The Charter School needs to ensure that supporting schedules and documents for claims are readily available and ensure proper safekeeping of pertinent documents. In addition, the Charter School is responsible for maintaining supporting documentation for seven (7) years and for making it available to the NJDOE, the U.S. Department of Education, and/or their authorized representatives upon request.
Criteria In accordance with the Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.302(a), “Each state must expend and account for the Federal award in accordance with state laws and procedures for expending and accounting for the state's own funds. In addition, the state's and the other non-Federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. See also § 200.450.” Condition Some supporting schedules for expenses claimed for ESF and 21st Century Grant for the year ended June 30, 2023, were not readily available. Context Supporting schedule cannot be located. Cause Procedures to monitor proper filing of supporting documents were not adhered to consistently. Effect Complete records of claims were not maintained. Questioned Cost None identified. Recommendation The Charter School needs to ensure that supporting schedules and documents for claims are readily available and ensure proper safekeeping of pertinent documents. In addition, the Charter School is responsible for maintaining supporting documentation for seven (7) years and for making it available to the NJDOE, the U.S. Department of Education, and/or their authorized representatives upon request.
Criteria In accordance with the Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.302(a), “Each state must expend and account for the Federal award in accordance with state laws and procedures for expending and accounting for the state's own funds. In addition, the state's and the other non-Federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. See also § 200.450.” Condition Some supporting schedules for expenses claimed for ESF and 21st Century Grant for the year ended June 30, 2023, were not readily available. Context Supporting schedule cannot be located. Cause Procedures to monitor proper filing of supporting documents were not adhered to consistently. Effect Complete records of claims were not maintained. Questioned Cost None identified. Recommendation The Charter School needs to ensure that supporting schedules and documents for claims are readily available and ensure proper safekeeping of pertinent documents. In addition, the Charter School is responsible for maintaining supporting documentation for seven (7) years and for making it available to the NJDOE, the U.S. Department of Education, and/or their authorized representatives upon request.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Further, the financial management system of each non-federal entity must provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The County did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure that the required reports were submitted. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted that the quarterly reported SF-425 reports were not submitted. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted that the required forms were not submitted. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-005. Recommendation: We recommend the County design controls to ensure compliance with federal reporting requirements to ensure that the submitted reports are complete and accurate. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Further, the financial management system of each non-federal entity must provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The County did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure that the required reports were submitted. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted that the quarterly reported SF-425 reports were not submitted. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted that the required forms were not submitted. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-005. Recommendation: We recommend the County design controls to ensure compliance with federal reporting requirements to ensure that the submitted reports are complete and accurate. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Further, the financial management system of each non-federal entity must provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The County did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure that the required reports were submitted. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted that the quarterly reported SF-425 reports were not submitted. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted that the required forms were not submitted. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-005. Recommendation: We recommend the County design controls to ensure compliance with federal reporting requirements to ensure that the submitted reports are complete and accurate. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Further, the financial management system of each non-federal entity must provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The County did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure that the required reports were submitted. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted that the quarterly reported SF-425 reports were not submitted. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted that the required forms were not submitted. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-005. Recommendation: We recommend the County design controls to ensure compliance with federal reporting requirements to ensure that the submitted reports are complete and accurate. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to § 200.302 Financial management of 2 CFR Part 200, the financial management system of each nonfederal entity must provide for written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to § 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs of 2 CFR Part 200, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the nonfederal entity in order to be allowable under federal awards. According to § 200.430 Compensation—personal services of 2 CFR Part 200, 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 nonfederal entity consistently applied to both federal and nonfederal activities; (2) Follows an appointment made in accordance with a nonfederal 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, when applicable. According to § 200.431 Compensation-fringe benefits of 2 CFR Part 200, except as provided elsewhere in these principles, the costs of fringe benefits are allowable provided that the benefits are reasonable and are required by law, nonfederal entity-employee agreement, or an established policy of the nonfederal entity. Condition: The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs nor an established written policy for compensation-personal services and fringe benefits. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the County charged various types of salaries and benefits to the grants. The County does not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs. Specific to compensation-personal services and fringe benefits, there is not an established written policy for us to test that personnel costs charged to grants conform to, follows an appointment in accordance with, and are required by an established policy of the County. Cause: Management oversight. Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Noncompliance results in potential unallowable costs charged to grants. Repeat Finding: This audit finding was reported in the prior year in finding 2022-002. Recommendation: We recommend the County establish written procedures for determining the allowability of costs to include a written policy regarding the charging of personnel costs to grants. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement from responsible officials.
Federal Program: Highway Safety Improvement Program, Assistance Listing Number 20.205 Criteria: Per CFR 200.302, the financial management system of each non-Federal entity must 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, financial obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income and interest and be supported by source documentation. Condition: During our procedures over the matching compliance requirement, we reviewed reimbursement requests and noted that the amount requested for reimbursement did not agree to the expenditures listed in the City’s expenditure detail. This is because the City implemented a cost sharing/split approach for total project costs where total costs were to be split by various funding sources. The City would account for this by recording each funding source’s portion of the costs in their system as projects were split up by expense and funding source strings. Reimbursement requests were supposed to be submitted based on each funding source’s portion of the costs. The amounts actually requested for reimbursement on the request included total project costs instead of the programs’ specified portion of the project cost resulting in an overpayment. As a result, the City’s records would not identify the proper application of program funds as there is no expenditure to agree to the funds that were overpaid. Cause: Due to the decentralized nature of the reimbursement request process, the reimbursement requests are not reviewed prior to submission to the granting agency. Effect: The City could potentially fund the same expenditures under multiple grants and jeopardize future grant funding due to program noncompliance. Questioned Costs: $31,869. This amount was determined by totaling the overpayments identified. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of two reimbursement requests were selected for testing which account for $39,389 of federal program expenditures. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement a review process to ensure that reimbursement requests are submitted for the appropriate amounts. Management’s Response: See Corrective Action Plan.
Information on Federal Programs: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Block Grant for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse (Assistance Listing #93.959); Block Grant for Community Mental Health Services (Assistance Listing #93.958); Crisis Counseling (Assistance Listing #97.032) State of Florida Department of Children and Families, Forensic Services and Competency Restoration Training (Catalog of State Financial Assistance #60.114) Finding Type: Significant Deficiency Criteria: The 2 CFR section 200.302 requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards present accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program. The entity is required to maintain records, supported by source documentation, that identify adequately the source of funds for federally funded programs. Condition and Context: The Organization’s draft Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and Schedule of Expenditures of State Financial Assistance (the “Schedules”) did not accurately reconcile to the Post Award Notice issued by the State of Florida, impacting certain programs and resulting in reclassifications to the Schedules. Cause: The Organization’s existing internal controls in place over the year-end reconciliation process did not identify reclassifications necessary in the Schedules. Effect: The final Post Award Notice resulted in reclassifications to the Schedules, however this did not create any differences in total awards. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: The Organization should implement a process and related internal controls surrounding the year-end reconciliation of the Schedules to ensure the Schedules reconcile to the final reports. Views of Responsible Officials: Due to extenuating circumstances, including the late issuance of the Post Award Notice from the managing entity, the Schedule was not fully reconciled which resulted in reclassifications to the final Schedules. The total amount of funding received was correct, however, there were reclassifications necessary between certain programs within the Schedules. Planned Implementation Corrective Action: Additional preventive internal control procedures will be implemented, including an additional level of review of the Schedules and reconciliation. These procedures and internal controls have been implemented as of the date of this report. Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Chief Financial Officer
Information on Federal Programs: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Block Grant for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse (Assistance Listing #93.959); Block Grant for Community Mental Health Services (Assistance Listing #93.958); Crisis Counseling (Assistance Listing #97.032) State of Florida Department of Children and Families, Forensic Services and Competency Restoration Training (Catalog of State Financial Assistance #60.114) Finding Type: Significant Deficiency Criteria: The 2 CFR section 200.302 requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards present accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program. The entity is required to maintain records, supported by source documentation, that identify adequately the source of funds for federally funded programs. Condition and Context: The Organization’s draft Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and Schedule of Expenditures of State Financial Assistance (the “Schedules”) did not accurately reconcile to the Post Award Notice issued by the State of Florida, impacting certain programs and resulting in reclassifications to the Schedules. Cause: The Organization’s existing internal controls in place over the year-end reconciliation process did not identify reclassifications necessary in the Schedules. Effect: The final Post Award Notice resulted in reclassifications to the Schedules, however this did not create any differences in total awards. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: The Organization should implement a process and related internal controls surrounding the year-end reconciliation of the Schedules to ensure the Schedules reconcile to the final reports. Views of Responsible Officials: Due to extenuating circumstances, including the late issuance of the Post Award Notice from the managing entity, the Schedule was not fully reconciled which resulted in reclassifications to the final Schedules. The total amount of funding received was correct, however, there were reclassifications necessary between certain programs within the Schedules. Planned Implementation Corrective Action: Additional preventive internal control procedures will be implemented, including an additional level of review of the Schedules and reconciliation. These procedures and internal controls have been implemented as of the date of this report. Person Responsible for Corrective Action: Chief Financial Officer