Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Program Name: Federal Transit Cluster CFDA No.: 20.500/20.507/20.525 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Program Name: Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program CFDA No.: 20.325 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation Award No. and Year: Various Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Criteria: 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that SCRRA must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The 2022 Compliance Supplement states: Non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. ?Covered transactions? include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a passthrough entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the FTA program, we noted six (6) of the fourteen (14) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. During our testing of SCRRA?s provisions for procurement requirements for the CRISI program, we noted four (4) of the four (4) contracts selected for testing where there was no evidence that SCRRA verified the entity was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction, prior to entering the contract, in accordance with SCRRA?s policy. Cause: SCRRA did not adhere to established policies and procedures to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. Effect: SCRRA?s control was not consistently applied, which required verification of suspension or debarment prior to entering the contract. However, the verification of suspension and debarment was subsequently performed and documented by SCRRA. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of fourteen (14) out of seventy-two (72) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the FTA program. A nonstatistical sample of four (4) out of (4) procurement contracts were selected for procurement and suspension and debarment testing for the CRISI program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes Southern California Regional Rail Authority Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended June 30, 2022 Recommendation: We recommend SCRRA adhere to their procurement procedures requiring the suspension or debarment verification is performed prior to entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management Agrees. See separate corrective action plan.
Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing #93.697 COVID-19 Testing and Mitigation for Rural Health Clinics Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Medical Center is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The Medical Center?s listing of expenses claimed under the Testing and Mitigation for Rural Health Clinics program as an allowable cost had more expenses than funds received. Some of these excess funds related to a different period and would have been reported on the Schedule in a different year. This should have been caught with an effective secondary review of expenses. Cause: The Medical Center did not have an internal control process in place to ensure the review and approval of the expenses claimed under the federal program that was detailed enough to catch certain errors. Effect: Without an effective secondary review and approval, the allowable expenses might not be accurately calculated. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: A nonstatistical sample of 65 ($152,804) from a population of 482 items ($602,846) were tested for activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No Recommendation: We recommend the Medical Center implement a control process which includes a secondary review and approval of the detail final expenditure listing used to claim the allowable costs under the federal program. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: The amount of a student's Pell Grant for an academic year is based upon the payment and disbursement schedules published by the Secretary for each award year (34 CFR 690.62). The Code of Federal Regulations (34 CFR 690.80(b)(1)) states if the student?s enrollment status changes from one academic term to another within the same award year, the institution shall recalculate the Federal Pell Grant award for the new payment period taking into account any changes in the cost of attendance. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires nonfederal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure students are awarded and disbursed the proper federal fund amounts. Condition: The College under-awarded funds for the Pell Grant. Questioned costs: None. Context: During our testing we noted three out of forty-one students, from a statistically valid sample, were awarded less Pell than they were eligible for based on the 2021-22 Pell payment schedule. The Pell payment schedule takes into account the cost of attendance, the student's Expected Family Contribution and the enrollment status of the student. Cause: The College did not award the correct amount of the Pell grant due to human error when entering student's Cost of Attendance. Effect: Students did not receive the full amount of Pell they were eligible for. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the College review its current procedures for awarding Title IV funds and implement changes necessary to ensure federal funds are awarded and disbursed in accordance with federal regulations. We also recommend the College disburse the proper Pell award to these students. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action: Management agrees with the finding and has developed a plan to correct it.
2022-059 Department of Human Services Ensure issued benefits are accurate Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number and Name: 10.542 Pandemic EBT Food Benefits (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: Not available (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: $3,692,215 (known); $13,554,666 (likely) (COVID-19) Criteria: Public Law 116-127; 2 CFR 200.303 The federal requirements for the Pandemic EBT (P-EBT) program require state agencies follow their approved state plan. Part of Oregon?s simplifying assumptions in their state plan was that the benefit amount was determined at the school level, not the individual level, based on the school?s operating status, for October 2020 ? May 2021. As part of Oregon?s Ready Schools, Safe Learners program, schools were required to weekly report their operating status/instructional model to the Oregon Department of Education (ODE). In fiscal year 2022, the Department of Human Services (department) paid retroactive P-EBT benefits for children related to the 2020-2021 school year. This sample population consisted of institutions (schools and other educational facilities) and months in which children at the institutions received benefits, totaling $391 million. We selected a random sample of 40 institutions and a random month to determine if the benefits provided to the children, based on the status reported by the institution, were accurate. We identified 4 institutions, for April/May, where the benefit paid status of the institution was not the same as reported by the institution to ODE. In all 4 cases, the benefits paid were at a higher level resulting in questioned costs of $38,931 and likely questioned costs of $9.2 million. One of the simplifying assumptions for the P-EBT program, approved in Oregon?s state plan, was ?Oregon will have a limited reconsideration process to revisit benefit allotments at a school level.? However, the department allowed institutions to update their status without additional review, explanation, or documentation. The department could not provide the auditors any support for the changes made by the institutions. Furthermore, the Oregon Governor issued a directive to schools, on March 5, 2021, to begin a phased approach to require all public schools to provide in-person instruction through either a fully on-site or hybrid model on or before the week of April 19, 2021, for all schools. Although benefits issued continued to decrease as the school year end approached, in May 2021, 26% of the institution?s benefits paid were for fully virtual totaling $17 million. We judgmentally selected 36 institutions classified as fully virtual in May with benefits totaling $7.9 million. For 25 institutions, the benefit paid status did not agree to the status reported by the institution to ODE resulting in questioned costs of $3,653,284 and likely questioned costs of $4.4 million. We recommend DHS perform review to identify any additional discrepancies between benefits paid and the institutions reported status, to determine if payments were appropriate, and communicate with the federal awarding agency to determine if repayment is necessary.
2022-061 Higher Education Coordinating Commission FFATA reports were not prepared or submitted Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0; 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 170; 2 CFR 200.303 The WIOA Cluster is subject to subaward reporting under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA). FFATA requires the department to submit information for any subaward action that equals or exceeds $30,000 in the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Reports should be submitted no later than the end of the month following the month in which the subawards were made. Federal regulations also require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Upon inquiry of the department, we determined it had not submitted any subaward information to the FSRS during fiscal year 2022. Department management stated FFATA reporting was not completed due to staff turnover. We also reviewed information the department had submitted at USAspending.gov and determined the department had not submitted any subaward information to FSRS since 2017. The agency is not in compliance with FFATA reporting requirements. Additionally, the department is not transparent in the spending decisions of these federal awards. We recommend department management implement controls to timely prepare and submit the monthly FFATA reports as required by federal regulations. The department should also work with the federal awarding agency to determine what actions it should take for older reports not submitted.
2022-062 Higher Education Coordinating Commission Improve controls over payroll Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Workers Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0, 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 Federal regulations require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. The department has implemented the following procedures to ensure payroll costs are correctly charged to the program. Managers approve monthly timesheets submitted by the employees in the state?s payroll system. When managers do not approve by a specified date, the payroll system will automatically approve the timesheet, shown with the words ?system approved.? Additionally, each employee should have a signed position description, which details the duties of the position and the amount of time to be charged for the duties. We selected a nonstatistical random sample of 20 employee timesheets related to 12 employees to ensure payroll was appropriately charged to the program. Additionally, we selected one employee who was on job rotation with the agency from January 2022 through June 2022. We verified payroll timesheets were reviewed by a manager and signed position descriptions were retained per state guidelines, and identified the following exceptions: ? Two timesheets for one employee did not have evidence of manager approval and 2 timesheets for two employees were reviewed over three months later. ? For all 12 employees, the position descriptions provided were unsigned or signed upon our request. We did not question these costs as department management verified job duties were appropriate to the program. ? For the employee on job rotation, 4 of the 6 timesheets were not reviewed and a signed position description was not signed by the employee. According to department management, timesheets were not always approved by the manager as the system will automatically lock and approve the timesheet. For position descriptions, supervisor did not always follow through on obtaining signed position descriptions and for longer term employees a number of boxes could not be located when the agency moved. There is a risk that employees could be improperly charging to the federal program. We recommend department management ensure timesheets are timely reviewed and positions descriptions are completed and retained.
2022-061 Higher Education Coordinating Commission FFATA reports were not prepared or submitted Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0; 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 170; 2 CFR 200.303 The WIOA Cluster is subject to subaward reporting under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA). FFATA requires the department to submit information for any subaward action that equals or exceeds $30,000 in the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Reports should be submitted no later than the end of the month following the month in which the subawards were made. Federal regulations also require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Upon inquiry of the department, we determined it had not submitted any subaward information to the FSRS during fiscal year 2022. Department management stated FFATA reporting was not completed due to staff turnover. We also reviewed information the department had submitted at USAspending.gov and determined the department had not submitted any subaward information to FSRS since 2017. The agency is not in compliance with FFATA reporting requirements. Additionally, the department is not transparent in the spending decisions of these federal awards. We recommend department management implement controls to timely prepare and submit the monthly FFATA reports as required by federal regulations. The department should also work with the federal awarding agency to determine what actions it should take for older reports not submitted.
2022-062 Higher Education Coordinating Commission Improve controls over payroll Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Workers Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0, 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 Federal regulations require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. The department has implemented the following procedures to ensure payroll costs are correctly charged to the program. Managers approve monthly timesheets submitted by the employees in the state?s payroll system. When managers do not approve by a specified date, the payroll system will automatically approve the timesheet, shown with the words ?system approved.? Additionally, each employee should have a signed position description, which details the duties of the position and the amount of time to be charged for the duties. We selected a nonstatistical random sample of 20 employee timesheets related to 12 employees to ensure payroll was appropriately charged to the program. Additionally, we selected one employee who was on job rotation with the agency from January 2022 through June 2022. We verified payroll timesheets were reviewed by a manager and signed position descriptions were retained per state guidelines, and identified the following exceptions: ? Two timesheets for one employee did not have evidence of manager approval and 2 timesheets for two employees were reviewed over three months later. ? For all 12 employees, the position descriptions provided were unsigned or signed upon our request. We did not question these costs as department management verified job duties were appropriate to the program. ? For the employee on job rotation, 4 of the 6 timesheets were not reviewed and a signed position description was not signed by the employee. According to department management, timesheets were not always approved by the manager as the system will automatically lock and approve the timesheet. For position descriptions, supervisor did not always follow through on obtaining signed position descriptions and for longer term employees a number of boxes could not be located when the agency moved. There is a risk that employees could be improperly charging to the federal program. We recommend department management ensure timesheets are timely reviewed and positions descriptions are completed and retained.
2022-061 Higher Education Coordinating Commission FFATA reports were not prepared or submitted Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0; 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 170; 2 CFR 200.303 The WIOA Cluster is subject to subaward reporting under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA). FFATA requires the department to submit information for any subaward action that equals or exceeds $30,000 in the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Reports should be submitted no later than the end of the month following the month in which the subawards were made. Federal regulations also require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Upon inquiry of the department, we determined it had not submitted any subaward information to the FSRS during fiscal year 2022. Department management stated FFATA reporting was not completed due to staff turnover. We also reviewed information the department had submitted at USAspending.gov and determined the department had not submitted any subaward information to FSRS since 2017. The agency is not in compliance with FFATA reporting requirements. Additionally, the department is not transparent in the spending decisions of these federal awards. We recommend department management implement controls to timely prepare and submit the monthly FFATA reports as required by federal regulations. The department should also work with the federal awarding agency to determine what actions it should take for older reports not submitted.
2022-062 Higher Education Coordinating Commission Improve controls over payroll Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Workers Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0, 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 Federal regulations require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. The department has implemented the following procedures to ensure payroll costs are correctly charged to the program. Managers approve monthly timesheets submitted by the employees in the state?s payroll system. When managers do not approve by a specified date, the payroll system will automatically approve the timesheet, shown with the words ?system approved.? Additionally, each employee should have a signed position description, which details the duties of the position and the amount of time to be charged for the duties. We selected a nonstatistical random sample of 20 employee timesheets related to 12 employees to ensure payroll was appropriately charged to the program. Additionally, we selected one employee who was on job rotation with the agency from January 2022 through June 2022. We verified payroll timesheets were reviewed by a manager and signed position descriptions were retained per state guidelines, and identified the following exceptions: ? Two timesheets for one employee did not have evidence of manager approval and 2 timesheets for two employees were reviewed over three months later. ? For all 12 employees, the position descriptions provided were unsigned or signed upon our request. We did not question these costs as department management verified job duties were appropriate to the program. ? For the employee on job rotation, 4 of the 6 timesheets were not reviewed and a signed position description was not signed by the employee. According to department management, timesheets were not always approved by the manager as the system will automatically lock and approve the timesheet. For position descriptions, supervisor did not always follow through on obtaining signed position descriptions and for longer term employees a number of boxes could not be located when the agency moved. There is a risk that employees could be improperly charging to the federal program. We recommend department management ensure timesheets are timely reviewed and positions descriptions are completed and retained.
2022-061 Higher Education Coordinating Commission FFATA reports were not prepared or submitted Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0; 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 170; 2 CFR 200.303 The WIOA Cluster is subject to subaward reporting under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA). FFATA requires the department to submit information for any subaward action that equals or exceeds $30,000 in the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Reports should be submitted no later than the end of the month following the month in which the subawards were made. Federal regulations also require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Upon inquiry of the department, we determined it had not submitted any subaward information to the FSRS during fiscal year 2022. Department management stated FFATA reporting was not completed due to staff turnover. We also reviewed information the department had submitted at USAspending.gov and determined the department had not submitted any subaward information to FSRS since 2017. The agency is not in compliance with FFATA reporting requirements. Additionally, the department is not transparent in the spending decisions of these federal awards. We recommend department management implement controls to timely prepare and submit the monthly FFATA reports as required by federal regulations. The department should also work with the federal awarding agency to determine what actions it should take for older reports not submitted.
2022-062 Higher Education Coordinating Commission Improve controls over payroll Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Workers Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0, 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 Federal regulations require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. The department has implemented the following procedures to ensure payroll costs are correctly charged to the program. Managers approve monthly timesheets submitted by the employees in the state?s payroll system. When managers do not approve by a specified date, the payroll system will automatically approve the timesheet, shown with the words ?system approved.? Additionally, each employee should have a signed position description, which details the duties of the position and the amount of time to be charged for the duties. We selected a nonstatistical random sample of 20 employee timesheets related to 12 employees to ensure payroll was appropriately charged to the program. Additionally, we selected one employee who was on job rotation with the agency from January 2022 through June 2022. We verified payroll timesheets were reviewed by a manager and signed position descriptions were retained per state guidelines, and identified the following exceptions: ? Two timesheets for one employee did not have evidence of manager approval and 2 timesheets for two employees were reviewed over three months later. ? For all 12 employees, the position descriptions provided were unsigned or signed upon our request. We did not question these costs as department management verified job duties were appropriate to the program. ? For the employee on job rotation, 4 of the 6 timesheets were not reviewed and a signed position description was not signed by the employee. According to department management, timesheets were not always approved by the manager as the system will automatically lock and approve the timesheet. For position descriptions, supervisor did not always follow through on obtaining signed position descriptions and for longer term employees a number of boxes could not be located when the agency moved. There is a risk that employees could be improperly charging to the federal program. We recommend department management ensure timesheets are timely reviewed and positions descriptions are completed and retained.
2022-061 Higher Education Coordinating Commission FFATA reports were not prepared or submitted Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0; 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 170; 2 CFR 200.303 The WIOA Cluster is subject to subaward reporting under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA). FFATA requires the department to submit information for any subaward action that equals or exceeds $30,000 in the FFATA Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Reports should be submitted no later than the end of the month following the month in which the subawards were made. Federal regulations also require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Upon inquiry of the department, we determined it had not submitted any subaward information to the FSRS during fiscal year 2022. Department management stated FFATA reporting was not completed due to staff turnover. We also reviewed information the department had submitted at USAspending.gov and determined the department had not submitted any subaward information to FSRS since 2017. The agency is not in compliance with FFATA reporting requirements. Additionally, the department is not transparent in the spending decisions of these federal awards. We recommend department management implement controls to timely prepare and submit the monthly FFATA reports as required by federal regulations. The department should also work with the federal awarding agency to determine what actions it should take for older reports not submitted.
2022-062 Higher Education Coordinating Commission Improve controls over payroll Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Assistance Listing Number and Name: 17.258 WIOA Adult Program; 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities; 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Workers Formula Grant Federal Award Numbers and Years: AA33251LN0, 2019; AA33251L70, 2019; AA33251L90, 2019; AA33251R70, 2019; AA33251R90, 2019; AA34789VS0, 2020; AA34789V90, 2020; AA34789VQ0, 2020; AA347893L0, 2020; AA347895P0, 2020; AA36341E10, 2021; AA36341D90, 2021; AA36341DQ0, 2021; AA36341KY0, 2021; AA36341LA0, 2021 Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 Federal regulations require recipients of federal awards to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. The department has implemented the following procedures to ensure payroll costs are correctly charged to the program. Managers approve monthly timesheets submitted by the employees in the state?s payroll system. When managers do not approve by a specified date, the payroll system will automatically approve the timesheet, shown with the words ?system approved.? Additionally, each employee should have a signed position description, which details the duties of the position and the amount of time to be charged for the duties. We selected a nonstatistical random sample of 20 employee timesheets related to 12 employees to ensure payroll was appropriately charged to the program. Additionally, we selected one employee who was on job rotation with the agency from January 2022 through June 2022. We verified payroll timesheets were reviewed by a manager and signed position descriptions were retained per state guidelines, and identified the following exceptions: ? Two timesheets for one employee did not have evidence of manager approval and 2 timesheets for two employees were reviewed over three months later. ? For all 12 employees, the position descriptions provided were unsigned or signed upon our request. We did not question these costs as department management verified job duties were appropriate to the program. ? For the employee on job rotation, 4 of the 6 timesheets were not reviewed and a signed position description was not signed by the employee. According to department management, timesheets were not always approved by the manager as the system will automatically lock and approve the timesheet. For position descriptions, supervisor did not always follow through on obtaining signed position descriptions and for longer term employees a number of boxes could not be located when the agency moved. There is a risk that employees could be improperly charging to the federal program. We recommend department management ensure timesheets are timely reviewed and positions descriptions are completed and retained.
2022-064 Oregon Department of Transportation Management should ensure timely review of transfers is documented Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Assistance Listing Number and Name: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Federal Award Numbers and Years: Various Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; GAO-17-704G ?10.03, 12.05; ODOT FASM 3.7 The department is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to ensure entries posted in the accounting records are for costs and activities allowable under the federal program. Journal entry review and approval should be clearly documented and readily available for examination. The department has established Financial Administration Standard 3.7, Expenditure Journal Entries, which requires management to transmit signed hard copy supporting documentation of journal entries to financial services after they?ve been reviewed and approved. We tested 40 transfer journal entries moving costs between federal project sub jobs and found that 19 did not have documentation of timely approval. In two cases, approval was documented more than a year after costs were transferred. The 19 entries were all lump sum transfers processed by Program and Funding Services (P&FS). P&FS is authorized to process transfers, moving costs between sub jobs of the same project. These transfers are necessary to align project costs with the appropriate funding source. Per P&FS management, transfers are generally reviewed within a few days. However, documentation of the review has not been occurring until much later due to challenges associated with remote work and policies requiring hard copy documentation. Over $90 million in program costs were transferred between sub jobs in this manner during fiscal year 2022. Without timely review and documentation available to support transfers, unallowable costs or activities could be transferred and billed erroneously to the Federal government. We recommend management ensure procedures for review of transfer journal entries result in timely documented approvals.
2022-064 Oregon Department of Transportation Management should ensure timely review of transfers is documented Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Assistance Listing Number and Name: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Federal Award Numbers and Years: Various Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; GAO-17-704G ?10.03, 12.05; ODOT FASM 3.7 The department is responsible for establishing and maintaining internal controls to ensure entries posted in the accounting records are for costs and activities allowable under the federal program. Journal entry review and approval should be clearly documented and readily available for examination. The department has established Financial Administration Standard 3.7, Expenditure Journal Entries, which requires management to transmit signed hard copy supporting documentation of journal entries to financial services after they?ve been reviewed and approved. We tested 40 transfer journal entries moving costs between federal project sub jobs and found that 19 did not have documentation of timely approval. In two cases, approval was documented more than a year after costs were transferred. The 19 entries were all lump sum transfers processed by Program and Funding Services (P&FS). P&FS is authorized to process transfers, moving costs between sub jobs of the same project. These transfers are necessary to align project costs with the appropriate funding source. Per P&FS management, transfers are generally reviewed within a few days. However, documentation of the review has not been occurring until much later due to challenges associated with remote work and policies requiring hard copy documentation. Over $90 million in program costs were transferred between sub jobs in this manner during fiscal year 2022. Without timely review and documentation available to support transfers, unallowable costs or activities could be transferred and billed erroneously to the Federal government. We recommend management ensure procedures for review of transfer journal entries result in timely documented approvals.
2022-027 Oregon Housing and Community Services Ensure Monthly and Quarterly reports are accurate and adequately supported Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number and Name: 21.023 Emergency Rental Assistance Program (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: ERA 1, 2021 (COVID-19); ERA 2, 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness; Material Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302(a) and (b)(3); 2 CFR 200.303(a), (c)-(d) Department management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance the department is managing, evaluating, and monitoring the federal award in compliance with the terms and conditions of the award and taking prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified. Additionally, the department is responsible for maintaining records to allow for submission of reports that are accurate and adequately supported. We tested four randomly selected monthly reports and found one report did not accurately report the number of unique households assisted and the amount of the assistance based on the supporting documentation. The department stated the differences were likely due to a transition in subsystem reporting formats and delays in report processing. We tested four quarterly reports, two of which were randomly selected and two of which were judgmentally selected. We found one report where the cumulative obligation amount did not agree to supporting documentation and were not accurate, and one report where the cumulative obligation and cumulative expenditures amounts did not agree to supporting documentation and were not accurate. The department stated these errors were due to erroneously entered information in the federal awarding agency?s reporting portal. Information included in these reports is used by the federal awarding agency to determine whether the department qualifies for receiving reallocation payments, as well as how much of a reallocation would be awarded to the department. Errors in these reports could result in errors in the federal awarding agency?s determination of eligibility for funding, and/or the reallocation formula. We recommend department management update and correct erroneous reports and establish controls to ensure reported amounts are accurate and adequately supported.
2022-028 Oregon Housing and Community Services Ensure Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act reporting is completed Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number and Name: 21.023 Emergency Rental Assistance Program (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: ERA 1, 2021 (COVID-19); ERA 2, 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a), (c)-(d); 2 CFR 170, Appendix A I(a) Department management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance the department is managing, evaluating, and monitoring the federal award in compliance with the terms and conditions of the award and taking prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified. The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) requires the department to submit information for any subaward action that equals or exceeds $30,000. Program guidance required the department to report detailed subaward information directly to the federal awarding agency. This detailed subaward information encompassed all requirements related to FFATA, and the federal awarding agency gave the department the option of filing required FFATA reports on their behalf. The department stated they did not provide the detailed subaward information to the federal awarding agency to complete FFATA reporting on their behalf, and they did not complete any alternate FFATA submissions during the fiscal year due to grant award information not being available on the federal website to file their reports. As a result, the department is not in compliance with FFATA reporting requirements. We recommend department management ensure FFATA reporting is completed.
2022-030 Oregon Housing and Community Services Ensure controls over administrative expenditure limits are properly designed and sufficiently detailed to ensure compliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number and Name: 21.023 Emergency Rental Assistance Program (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: ERA 1, 2021 (COVID-19); ERA 2, 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Type of Finding: Material Weakness Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a), (c)-(d); 15 U.S.C. 9058a(c)(5)(A); 15 U.S.C. 9058c(d)(1)(C) Department management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance the department is managing, evaluating, and monitoring the federal award in compliance with the terms and conditions of the award and taking prompt action when instances of noncompliance are identified. Federal regulations limit the amount of federal funds that can be used for administrative expenditures. The department periodically prepared tracking spreadsheets during the fiscal year to monitor spending and ensure administrative expenditure limitations were not exceeded. We reviewed four randomly selected tracking spreadsheets and noted two tracking spreadsheets where there was insufficient detail to determine what category expenditures were associated with (administrative versus programmatic); and three tracking spreadsheets where there was no indication that the expenditures were within administrative expenditures limitations due to the periodic nature of the tracking. Without sufficiently designed and implemented controls, the department is at risk for exceeding their allowable administrative cost limits. We recommend department management ensure tracking spreadsheets are properly designed and sufficiently detailed to ensure compliance with administrative expenditures limitations.
2022-065 Oregon Department of Education State did not meet maintenance of effort requirement Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Assistance Listing Number and Name: 84.425C, 84.425D, 84.425R, 84.425U & 84.425W, Education Stabilization Fund (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: S425C210048; 2021 (COVID-19), S425D210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425R210047; 2021 (COVID-19), S425U210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425W210038; 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Type of Finding: Material Weakness; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: Section 18008 of Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act; Section 2004(a) of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act; 2 CFR 200.303 The CRRSA and the ARP acts require the State to maintain support for both elementary and secondary education and for higher education in fiscal year 2022 at least at the proportional level of the state?s support for elementary and secondary education and for higher education relative to the state?s overall spending, averaged over fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019. The Department of Education did not meet the maintenance of effort provisions for fiscal year 2022 for elementary and secondary education. Although the state?s overall funding increased for education its proportional level relative to Oregon?s overall spending declined. The department is reliant on the legislative budget process. The department was in contact with the federal awarding agency about the maintenance of effort issue. The department submitted a waiver request to the U.S. Department of Education dated March 29, 2023. According to department management, budget changes and obtaining a clearer understanding of the other fund amount delayed the calculation for maintenance of effort. If the waiver is not approved, the department may be asked to return some of the funds. The total federal expenditures for the Education Stabilization Fund program for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 were $426 million. We recommend department management continue to actively track whether it will meet the maintenance of effort requirement and work with the federal awarding agency.
2022-067 Oregon Department of Education Ensure accuracy of federal reporting Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Assistance Listing Number and Name: 84.425C Education Stabilization Fund (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: S425C200048; 2020 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302(b); 2 CFR 200.303(a) Federal regulations require that federal reports include all activity of the reporting period and be supported by applicable accounting records. Federal regulations also require that the department file a separate report for the Governor?s Emergency Education Relief (GEER) expenditures for the period ending June 30, 2021. The department reported GEER information for the local education areas (LEAs) related to the comprehensive distance learning grant program. LEAs submit reimbursement to the department and this information is tracked in an excel database. The database includes various information, including funding types, dates, and amounts. During FY 2022, the department completed the reports using the database, but incorrectly filtered the data so some expenditures were not captured. This resulted in an underreporting of GEER expenditures by $13.9 million. We recommend department management ensure that accurate expenditure data is submitted to the federal government for federal reporting.
2022-065 Oregon Department of Education State did not meet maintenance of effort requirement Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Assistance Listing Number and Name: 84.425C, 84.425D, 84.425R, 84.425U & 84.425W, Education Stabilization Fund (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: S425C210048; 2021 (COVID-19), S425D210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425R210047; 2021 (COVID-19), S425U210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425W210038; 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Type of Finding: Material Weakness; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: Section 18008 of Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act; Section 2004(a) of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act; 2 CFR 200.303 The CRRSA and the ARP acts require the State to maintain support for both elementary and secondary education and for higher education in fiscal year 2022 at least at the proportional level of the state?s support for elementary and secondary education and for higher education relative to the state?s overall spending, averaged over fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019. The Department of Education did not meet the maintenance of effort provisions for fiscal year 2022 for elementary and secondary education. Although the state?s overall funding increased for education its proportional level relative to Oregon?s overall spending declined. The department is reliant on the legislative budget process. The department was in contact with the federal awarding agency about the maintenance of effort issue. The department submitted a waiver request to the U.S. Department of Education dated March 29, 2023. According to department management, budget changes and obtaining a clearer understanding of the other fund amount delayed the calculation for maintenance of effort. If the waiver is not approved, the department may be asked to return some of the funds. The total federal expenditures for the Education Stabilization Fund program for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 were $426 million. We recommend department management continue to actively track whether it will meet the maintenance of effort requirement and work with the federal awarding agency.
2022-065 Oregon Department of Education State did not meet maintenance of effort requirement Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Assistance Listing Number and Name: 84.425C, 84.425D, 84.425R, 84.425U & 84.425W, Education Stabilization Fund (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: S425C210048; 2021 (COVID-19), S425D210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425R210047; 2021 (COVID-19), S425U210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425W210038; 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Type of Finding: Material Weakness; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: Section 18008 of Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act; Section 2004(a) of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act; 2 CFR 200.303 The CRRSA and the ARP acts require the State to maintain support for both elementary and secondary education and for higher education in fiscal year 2022 at least at the proportional level of the state?s support for elementary and secondary education and for higher education relative to the state?s overall spending, averaged over fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019. The Department of Education did not meet the maintenance of effort provisions for fiscal year 2022 for elementary and secondary education. Although the state?s overall funding increased for education its proportional level relative to Oregon?s overall spending declined. The department is reliant on the legislative budget process. The department was in contact with the federal awarding agency about the maintenance of effort issue. The department submitted a waiver request to the U.S. Department of Education dated March 29, 2023. According to department management, budget changes and obtaining a clearer understanding of the other fund amount delayed the calculation for maintenance of effort. If the waiver is not approved, the department may be asked to return some of the funds. The total federal expenditures for the Education Stabilization Fund program for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 were $426 million. We recommend department management continue to actively track whether it will meet the maintenance of effort requirement and work with the federal awarding agency.
2022-065 Oregon Department of Education State did not meet maintenance of effort requirement Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Assistance Listing Number and Name: 84.425C, 84.425D, 84.425R, 84.425U & 84.425W, Education Stabilization Fund (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: S425C210048; 2021 (COVID-19), S425D210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425R210047; 2021 (COVID-19), S425U210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425W210038; 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Type of Finding: Material Weakness; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: Section 18008 of Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act; Section 2004(a) of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act; 2 CFR 200.303 The CRRSA and the ARP acts require the State to maintain support for both elementary and secondary education and for higher education in fiscal year 2022 at least at the proportional level of the state?s support for elementary and secondary education and for higher education relative to the state?s overall spending, averaged over fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019. The Department of Education did not meet the maintenance of effort provisions for fiscal year 2022 for elementary and secondary education. Although the state?s overall funding increased for education its proportional level relative to Oregon?s overall spending declined. The department is reliant on the legislative budget process. The department was in contact with the federal awarding agency about the maintenance of effort issue. The department submitted a waiver request to the U.S. Department of Education dated March 29, 2023. According to department management, budget changes and obtaining a clearer understanding of the other fund amount delayed the calculation for maintenance of effort. If the waiver is not approved, the department may be asked to return some of the funds. The total federal expenditures for the Education Stabilization Fund program for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 were $426 million. We recommend department management continue to actively track whether it will meet the maintenance of effort requirement and work with the federal awarding agency.
2022-065 Oregon Department of Education State did not meet maintenance of effort requirement Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Assistance Listing Number and Name: 84.425C, 84.425D, 84.425R, 84.425U & 84.425W, Education Stabilization Fund (COVID-19) Federal Award Numbers and Years: S425C210048; 2021 (COVID-19), S425D210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425R210047; 2021 (COVID-19), S425U210049; 2021 (COVID-19), S425W210038; 2021 (COVID-19) Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Type of Finding: Material Weakness; Noncompliance Prior Year Finding: N/A Questioned Costs: N/A Criteria: Section 18008 of Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act; Section 2004(a) of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act; 2 CFR 200.303 The CRRSA and the ARP acts require the State to maintain support for both elementary and secondary education and for higher education in fiscal year 2022 at least at the proportional level of the state?s support for elementary and secondary education and for higher education relative to the state?s overall spending, averaged over fiscal years 2017, 2018 and 2019. The Department of Education did not meet the maintenance of effort provisions for fiscal year 2022 for elementary and secondary education. Although the state?s overall funding increased for education its proportional level relative to Oregon?s overall spending declined. The department is reliant on the legislative budget process. The department was in contact with the federal awarding agency about the maintenance of effort issue. The department submitted a waiver request to the U.S. Department of Education dated March 29, 2023. According to department management, budget changes and obtaining a clearer understanding of the other fund amount delayed the calculation for maintenance of effort. If the waiver is not approved, the department may be asked to return some of the funds. The total federal expenditures for the Education Stabilization Fund program for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2022 were $426 million. We recommend department management continue to actively track whether it will meet the maintenance of effort requirement and work with the federal awarding agency.
Finding Number: 2022-001- Review and Approval of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) (Material Weakness) Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e. auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. The Organization should have a process in place to perform a review of the SEFA, to include evidence of the resolution of variances, as well as a process to document the overall review and approval to ensure proper presentation, completeness, and accuracy of the SEFA. Condition: During the course of the audit, the engagement team identified multiple instances where the SEFA was not accurately prepared and presented. Questioned Costs: None noted. Cause: The Organization does not have an appropriate process in place to review the SEFA, to include retaining evidence of the resolution of variances, as well as documentation of the overall review and approval. Effect or Potential Effect: Potential misstatement could occur if expenditure amounts are not accurately presented on the SEFA. Recommendation: The Organization should develop a consistent process to review the SEFA. Issues identified during the course of the review should be investigated and resolved in a timely manner. The Organization should design a process to retain documentation of the review process and the resolution of any issues identified. Views of Responsible Officials: The Organization agrees with the federal award finding identified in the audit. The Organization's response to this finding is described in the accompanying management's planned corrective action plan. Prior Year Findings: 2021-002
FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. FA 2022-001 Improve Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: COVID-19 ? 84.425D ? Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425U ? American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund COVID-19 ? 84.425W - American Rescue Plan School Emergency Relief Fund ? Homeless Children and Youth Federal Award Number: S425D200012 (Year: 2020), S425U210012 (Year: 2021), S425W210011 (Year: 2021) Questioned Costs: $30,180.00 Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to provide adequate internal controls over expenditures as it relates to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program. Background: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the Education Stabilization Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $3,234,746.01 were expended and reported on the Early County Board of Education?s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2022. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the Institution is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 ? Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 ? Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that ?costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity? (g) Be adequately documented?? In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 202.403 ? Reasonable Costs state that ?a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm?s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award? (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award?s cost.? Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 ? General Procurement Standards state that ?the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations? for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward?? Condition: Auditors performed a review of expenditure activity associated with the ESSER program to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that ?retention? bonuses were paid to individuals who were not employees of the School District. These individuals were hired to perform specific functions as detailed within the associated contracts and were paid amounts in excess of the stated rate noted within these contracts. Furthermore, the School District does not have the authority or ability to retain these individuals as they were not employees of the School District and contract provisions requiring the individuals to remain in the service of the School District for a stated period of time were not reflected within the associated contract. Therefore, expenditures totaling $30,180.00 were not considered to be reasonable and necessary for the performance of the ESSER program and deemed unallowable. Questioned Costs: Known questioned costs of $30,180.00 were identified for expenditures that were not incurred for a necessary and reasonable purpose and did not follow the School District?s policies and procedures. These known questioned costs related to expenditures that were not tested as part of a sample, and therefore, should not be projected to a population to determine likely questioned costs. Cause: Per discussion with management, the School District believed that the expenditures were allowable as the expenditures were approved by GaDOE through the Consolidated Application process and approved by the local Board of Education; however, they were not aware that contract amendments should be initiated prior to the expenditure of funds in this manner. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance, ED, or GaDOE guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when expending federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to ESSER program expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures are in line with provisions reflected within the associated contract and/or contract amendments. In addition, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all expenditures are compliant with the School District?s purchasing policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY20/21, FY21/22 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective system of internal controls was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. The School Corporation entered into a cost reimbursement contract with a food service management company (FSMC). The School Corporation did not maintain supporting documentation for any payments made to the FSMC during the audit period. Forty individual line items from the FSMC monthly invoices were selected for testing. The School Corporation had to reach out to the vendors to obtain the required documentation for the items selected for testing. Supporting documentation could not be provided for three of the line items. Due to the lack of supporting documentation, we were unable to determine if the remaining costs paid were allowable expenditures. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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). . . ." 7 CFR 210.21(f)(1) states in part: ". . . (ii) (A) The contractor must separately identify for each cost submitted for payment to the school food authority the amount of that cost that is allowable (can be paid from the nonprofit school food service account) and the amount that is unallowable (cannot be paid from the nonprofit school food service account); or (B) The contractor must exclude all unallowable costs from its billing documents and certify that only allowable costs are submitted for payment and records have been established that maintain the visibility of unallowable costs, including directly associated costs in a manner suitable for contract cost determination and verification; (iii) The contractor's determination of its allowable costs must be made in compliance with the applicable Departmental and Program regulations and Office of Management and Budget cost circulars; . . . (vi) The contractor must maintain documentation of costs and discounts, rebates and other applicable credits, and must furnish such documentation upon request to the school food authority, the State agency, or the Department." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY20/21, FY21/22 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective system of internal controls was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. The School Corporation entered into a cost reimbursement contract with a food service management company (FSMC). The School Corporation did not maintain supporting documentation for any payments made to the FSMC during the audit period. Forty individual line items from the FSMC monthly invoices were selected for testing. The School Corporation had to reach out to the vendors to obtain the required documentation for the items selected for testing. Supporting documentation could not be provided for three of the line items. Due to the lack of supporting documentation, we were unable to determine if the remaining costs paid were allowable expenditures. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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). . . ." 7 CFR 210.21(f)(1) states in part: ". . . (ii) (A) The contractor must separately identify for each cost submitted for payment to the school food authority the amount of that cost that is allowable (can be paid from the nonprofit school food service account) and the amount that is unallowable (cannot be paid from the nonprofit school food service account); or (B) The contractor must exclude all unallowable costs from its billing documents and certify that only allowable costs are submitted for payment and records have been established that maintain the visibility of unallowable costs, including directly associated costs in a manner suitable for contract cost determination and verification; (iii) The contractor's determination of its allowable costs must be made in compliance with the applicable Departmental and Program regulations and Office of Management and Budget cost circulars; . . . (vi) The contractor must maintain documentation of costs and discounts, rebates and other applicable credits, and must furnish such documentation upon request to the school food authority, the State agency, or the Department." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY20/21, FY21/22 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective system of internal controls was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. The School Corporation entered into a cost reimbursement contract with a food service management company (FSMC). The School Corporation did not maintain supporting documentation for any payments made to the FSMC during the audit period. Forty individual line items from the FSMC monthly invoices were selected for testing. The School Corporation had to reach out to the vendors to obtain the required documentation for the items selected for testing. Supporting documentation could not be provided for three of the line items. Due to the lack of supporting documentation, we were unable to determine if the remaining costs paid were allowable expenditures. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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). . . ." 7 CFR 210.21(f)(1) states in part: ". . . (ii) (A) The contractor must separately identify for each cost submitted for payment to the school food authority the amount of that cost that is allowable (can be paid from the nonprofit school food service account) and the amount that is unallowable (cannot be paid from the nonprofit school food service account); or (B) The contractor must exclude all unallowable costs from its billing documents and certify that only allowable costs are submitted for payment and records have been established that maintain the visibility of unallowable costs, including directly associated costs in a manner suitable for contract cost determination and verification; (iii) The contractor's determination of its allowable costs must be made in compliance with the applicable Departmental and Program regulations and Office of Management and Budget cost circulars; . . . (vi) The contractor must maintain documentation of costs and discounts, rebates and other applicable credits, and must furnish such documentation upon request to the school food authority, the State agency, or the Department." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY20/21, FY21/22 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective system of internal controls was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. The School Corporation entered into a cost reimbursement contract with a food service management company (FSMC). The School Corporation did not maintain supporting documentation for any payments made to the FSMC during the audit period. Forty individual line items from the FSMC monthly invoices were selected for testing. The School Corporation had to reach out to the vendors to obtain the required documentation for the items selected for testing. Supporting documentation could not be provided for three of the line items. Due to the lack of supporting documentation, we were unable to determine if the remaining costs paid were allowable expenditures. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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). . . ." 7 CFR 210.21(f)(1) states in part: ". . . (ii) (A) The contractor must separately identify for each cost submitted for payment to the school food authority the amount of that cost that is allowable (can be paid from the nonprofit school food service account) and the amount that is unallowable (cannot be paid from the nonprofit school food service account); or (B) The contractor must exclude all unallowable costs from its billing documents and certify that only allowable costs are submitted for payment and records have been established that maintain the visibility of unallowable costs, including directly associated costs in a manner suitable for contract cost determination and verification; (iii) The contractor's determination of its allowable costs must be made in compliance with the applicable Departmental and Program regulations and Office of Management and Budget cost circulars; . . . (vi) The contractor must maintain documentation of costs and discounts, rebates and other applicable credits, and must furnish such documentation upon request to the school food authority, the State agency, or the Department." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY20/21, FY21/22 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective system of internal controls was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. The School Corporation entered into a cost reimbursement contract with a food service management company (FSMC). The School Corporation did not maintain supporting documentation for any payments made to the FSMC during the audit period. Forty individual line items from the FSMC monthly invoices were selected for testing. The School Corporation had to reach out to the vendors to obtain the required documentation for the items selected for testing. Supporting documentation could not be provided for three of the line items. Due to the lack of supporting documentation, we were unable to determine if the remaining costs paid were allowable expenditures. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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). . . ." 7 CFR 210.21(f)(1) states in part: ". . . (ii) (A) The contractor must separately identify for each cost submitted for payment to the school food authority the amount of that cost that is allowable (can be paid from the nonprofit school food service account) and the amount that is unallowable (cannot be paid from the nonprofit school food service account); or (B) The contractor must exclude all unallowable costs from its billing documents and certify that only allowable costs are submitted for payment and records have been established that maintain the visibility of unallowable costs, including directly associated costs in a manner suitable for contract cost determination and verification; (iii) The contractor's determination of its allowable costs must be made in compliance with the applicable Departmental and Program regulations and Office of Management and Budget cost circulars; . . . (vi) The contractor must maintain documentation of costs and discounts, rebates and other applicable credits, and must furnish such documentation upon request to the school food authority, the State agency, or the Department." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY20/21, FY21/22 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context An effective system of internal controls was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. The School Corporation entered into a cost reimbursement contract with a food service management company (FSMC). The School Corporation did not maintain supporting documentation for any payments made to the FSMC during the audit period. Forty individual line items from the FSMC monthly invoices were selected for testing. The School Corporation had to reach out to the vendors to obtain the required documentation for the items selected for testing. Supporting documentation could not be provided for three of the line items. Due to the lack of supporting documentation, we were unable to determine if the remaining costs paid were allowable expenditures. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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). . . ." 7 CFR 210.21(f)(1) states in part: ". . . (ii) (A) The contractor must separately identify for each cost submitted for payment to the school food authority the amount of that cost that is allowable (can be paid from the nonprofit school food service account) and the amount that is unallowable (cannot be paid from the nonprofit school food service account); or (B) The contractor must exclude all unallowable costs from its billing documents and certify that only allowable costs are submitted for payment and records have been established that maintain the visibility of unallowable costs, including directly associated costs in a manner suitable for contract cost determination and verification; (iii) The contractor's determination of its allowable costs must be made in compliance with the applicable Departmental and Program regulations and Office of Management and Budget cost circulars; . . . (vi) The contractor must maintain documentation of costs and discounts, rebates and other applicable credits, and must furnish such documentation upon request to the school food authority, the State agency, or the Department." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-001 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Equipment and Real Property Management Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Number: 84.425D Federal Award Number: S425D210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Equipment and Real Property Management Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 15 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Equipment and Real Property Management compliance requirement. A property record or capital asset listing which would include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the federal award identification number (FAIN)), who holds title, the acquisition date, cost of the property, percentage of federal participation in the project costs for the federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, and use and condition of the property is to be maintained for assets purchased that exceed the School Corporation's capitalization threshold. The School Corporation's capitalization threshold was set at $500. The assets purchased during the audit period from the ESSER II grant award were not included in the School Corporation's capital asset listing. Expenditures included 90 Virtual Reality headsets, 9 vacuum cleaners, and 1 self-contained cleaning unit. Total acquisition cost of these assets was $54,731. Additionally, a physical inventory of equipment had not been performed in the last two years. 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 200.313(d) states in part: ". . . (1) Property records must be maintained that include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the FAIN), who holds title, the acquisition date, and cost of the property, percentage of Federal participation in the project costs for the Federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, use and condition of the property, and any ultimate disposition data including the date of disposal and sale price of the property. (2) A physical inventory of the property must be taken and the results reconciled with the property records at least once every two years. . . ." Cause Management had not established a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that adequate documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit related to the grant agreement and the Equipment and Real Property Management compliance requirement. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF NORTH POSEY COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect The failure to retain and provide appropriate documentation prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirement listed above. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure that documentation will be maintained and made available for audit and comply with the grant agreement and the Equipment and Real Property Management compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Funding Agency: United States Department of Agriculture Federal Award Agreement Number: 20-DG-11030000-004 & 21-DG-11030000-020 Award Year: All Title: Southwest Forest Health and Wildfire Prevention Assistance Listing Number: 10.694 Pass-through Agency: Not Applicable Pass-through Identification Number: Not Applicable Questioned Costs: $43,747 Condition - The University did not apply the correct small purchase threshold for identifying purchases that need to obtain quotes in their policy. The population between $10,000 and $20,000 not included in policy included 3 transactions totaling $43,747. Criteria ? 2 CFR 200.303(a) requires non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of grant agreements. 2 CFR 200.320(a) sets the micro-purchase threshold at $10,000 and requires purchases over the micro-purchase threshold to use small purchase procedures, whereby price or rate quotations must be obtained. Cause ? The University was unaware that the policy amount had changed to a threshold of $10,000. Effect ? The University may unintentionally use a higher-cost vendor when failing to obtain price or rate quotations for items over the micro-purchase threshold. Auditors? Recommendation ? The procurement policy should be updated to comply with all relevant state and local procurement requirements and reviewed for necessary revisions regularly.
Funding Agency: United States Department of Agriculture Federal Award Agreement Number: 20-DG-11030000-004 & 21-DG-11030000-020 Award Year: All Title: Southwest Forest Health and Wildfire Prevention Assistance Listing Number: 10.694 Pass-through Agency: Not Applicable Pass-through Identification Number: Not Applicable Questioned Costs: $43,747 Condition - The University did not apply the correct small purchase threshold for identifying purchases that need to obtain quotes in their policy. The population between $10,000 and $20,000 not included in policy included 3 transactions totaling $43,747. Criteria ? 2 CFR 200.303(a) requires non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of grant agreements. 2 CFR 200.320(a) sets the micro-purchase threshold at $10,000 and requires purchases over the micro-purchase threshold to use small purchase procedures, whereby price or rate quotations must be obtained. Cause ? The University was unaware that the policy amount had changed to a threshold of $10,000. Effect ? The University may unintentionally use a higher-cost vendor when failing to obtain price or rate quotations for items over the micro-purchase threshold. Auditors? Recommendation ? The procurement policy should be updated to comply with all relevant state and local procurement requirements and reviewed for necessary revisions regularly.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21-1600, 22-1600 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2020-001. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. The Food Service Director, Food Service Manager, and Food Service Assistant had other job responsibilities, and, therefore, were paid from multiple cost objectives. The amount of their compensation paid from the Child Nutrition Cluster (program) was based on a pre-determined percentage. No personnel activity reports or other time and effort documentation was presented to support the amounts charged to the program. The total amount paid from the School Lunch fund, for these positions, during the audit period was $48,502, which was considered questioned costs. 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 SOUTH DEARBORN COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.430(i) states in part: "Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities . . . (vii) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. . . ." Cause Management had not developed an effective system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that adequate supporting documentation be retained related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls, and to provide adequate supporting documentation, enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $48,502 were identified, as detailed in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish an effective system of internal controls and retain adequate supporting documentation related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21-1600, 22-1600 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2020-001. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. The Food Service Director, Food Service Manager, and Food Service Assistant had other job responsibilities, and, therefore, were paid from multiple cost objectives. The amount of their compensation paid from the Child Nutrition Cluster (program) was based on a pre-determined percentage. No personnel activity reports or other time and effort documentation was presented to support the amounts charged to the program. The total amount paid from the School Lunch fund, for these positions, during the audit period was $48,502, which was considered questioned costs. 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 SOUTH DEARBORN COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.430(i) states in part: "Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities . . . (vii) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. . . ." Cause Management had not developed an effective system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that adequate supporting documentation be retained related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls, and to provide adequate supporting documentation, enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $48,502 were identified, as detailed in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish an effective system of internal controls and retain adequate supporting documentation related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21-1600, 22-1600 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2020-001. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. The Food Service Director, Food Service Manager, and Food Service Assistant had other job responsibilities, and, therefore, were paid from multiple cost objectives. The amount of their compensation paid from the Child Nutrition Cluster (program) was based on a pre-determined percentage. No personnel activity reports or other time and effort documentation was presented to support the amounts charged to the program. The total amount paid from the School Lunch fund, for these positions, during the audit period was $48,502, which was considered questioned costs. 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 SOUTH DEARBORN COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.430(i) states in part: "Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities . . . (vii) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. . . ." Cause Management had not developed an effective system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that adequate supporting documentation be retained related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls, and to provide adequate supporting documentation, enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $48,502 were identified, as detailed in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish an effective system of internal controls and retain adequate supporting documentation related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2022-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, COVID-19 - School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, COVID-19 - National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 21-1600, 22-1600 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2020-001. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. The Food Service Director, Food Service Manager, and Food Service Assistant had other job responsibilities, and, therefore, were paid from multiple cost objectives. The amount of their compensation paid from the Child Nutrition Cluster (program) was based on a pre-determined percentage. No personnel activity reports or other time and effort documentation was presented to support the amounts charged to the program. The total amount paid from the School Lunch fund, for these positions, during the audit period was $48,502, which was considered questioned costs. 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 SOUTH DEARBORN COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.430(i) states in part: "Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities . . . (vii) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. . . ." Cause Management had not developed an effective system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance or that adequate supporting documentation be retained related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls, and to provide adequate supporting documentation, enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $48,502 were identified, as detailed in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish an effective system of internal controls and retain adequate supporting documentation related to the grant agreement and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.