Federal Agencies: US Department of Defense (DoD); US Department of Energy (DOE); US Health and Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Basic, Applied and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering; Fossil Energy Research and Development; COVID19 – Discovery and Applied Research for Technological Innovations to Improve Human Health; Research and Technology Development; Office of Science and Financial Assistance Program; Air Force Defense Research Sciences Program; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Health Center Program Cluster: Community Health Centers; and AIDS Education and Training Centers ALN #s: 12.630; 81.089; 93.286; 12.910; 81.049; 12.800; 93.837; 93.224; and 93.145 Award Numbers: ARMY W911NF-17-2-0196; DOE DE-FE0031581; DOE DE-FE0032049; NIH 1 R21 EB031310A; DARPA HR011-23-2-0004; DOE DE-SC0018420; AF FA9550-23-1-0609; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; HRSA 5 U1OHA29293-09-03; and HRSA 5 U1OHA32109-07 Federal Award Year 2023 – 2024 Questioned Costs: None 2024-002. Finding: Cash Management – Timeliness of Subrecipient Payments The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not make certain subrecipient payments timely and the controls in place did not identify the late payments. Condition: Out of thirty-two subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign under the Research & Development Cluster, twelve payments (38%) were not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payments ranged from 35-201 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipients. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Out of eight subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois Chicago under the Research & Development Cluster, one payment (13%) was not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payment was 32 days after the receipt of billing from the subrecipient. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Out of eighteen subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois Chicago under the Health Center Program Cluster: Community Health Centers and AIDS Education and Training Centers, five payments (28%) were not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payments ranged from 42-120 days after the receipt of billing from the subrecipients. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-002. Finding: Cash Management – Timeliness of Subrecipient Payments (Continued) Criteria: Under Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.305(b)(3)), when the reimbursement method is used, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must make payment within 30 calendar days after receipt of the billing, unless the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity reasonably believes the request to be improper. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires nonfederal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls deigned to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure subrecipient payments are made timely. Cause: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign officials stated the multi-layered review and approval process along with staffing deficiencies and workload challenges caused the situations for the exceptions noted. University of Illinois Chicago officials stated the one payment was paid 32 days from receipt of the invoice due to high volumes of invoice processing at fiscal year end and the payment due date coinciding with a holiday. The five other subrecipient payments were due to high staff workloads and occurred prior to the fiscal year 2023 corrective action implementation. Effect: Without proper program cash management processes and procedures, late subrecipient payments could result in the loss of future funding. (Finding Code No. 2024-002; 2023-006; 2022-008) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes, policies and procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of federal funds to the subrecipient. University Response: Accepted. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Defense (DoD); US Department of Energy (DOE); US Health and Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Basic, Applied and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering; Fossil Energy Research and Development; COVID19 – Discovery and Applied Research for Technological Innovations to Improve Human Health; Research and Technology Development; Office of Science and Financial Assistance Program; Air Force Defense Research Sciences Program; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Health Center Program Cluster: Community Health Centers; and AIDS Education and Training Centers ALN #s: 12.630; 81.089; 93.286; 12.910; 81.049; 12.800; 93.837; 93.224; and 93.145 Award Numbers: ARMY W911NF-17-2-0196; DOE DE-FE0031581; DOE DE-FE0032049; NIH 1 R21 EB031310A; DARPA HR011-23-2-0004; DOE DE-SC0018420; AF FA9550-23-1-0609; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; HRSA 5 U1OHA29293-09-03; and HRSA 5 U1OHA32109-07 Federal Award Year 2023 – 2024 Questioned Costs: None 2024-002. Finding: Cash Management – Timeliness of Subrecipient Payments The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not make certain subrecipient payments timely and the controls in place did not identify the late payments. Condition: Out of thirty-two subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign under the Research & Development Cluster, twelve payments (38%) were not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payments ranged from 35-201 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipients. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Out of eight subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois Chicago under the Research & Development Cluster, one payment (13%) was not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payment was 32 days after the receipt of billing from the subrecipient. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Out of eighteen subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois Chicago under the Health Center Program Cluster: Community Health Centers and AIDS Education and Training Centers, five payments (28%) were not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payments ranged from 42-120 days after the receipt of billing from the subrecipients. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-002. Finding: Cash Management – Timeliness of Subrecipient Payments (Continued) Criteria: Under Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.305(b)(3)), when the reimbursement method is used, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must make payment within 30 calendar days after receipt of the billing, unless the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity reasonably believes the request to be improper. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires nonfederal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls deigned to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure subrecipient payments are made timely. Cause: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign officials stated the multi-layered review and approval process along with staffing deficiencies and workload challenges caused the situations for the exceptions noted. University of Illinois Chicago officials stated the one payment was paid 32 days from receipt of the invoice due to high volumes of invoice processing at fiscal year end and the payment due date coinciding with a holiday. The five other subrecipient payments were due to high staff workloads and occurred prior to the fiscal year 2023 corrective action implementation. Effect: Without proper program cash management processes and procedures, late subrecipient payments could result in the loss of future funding. (Finding Code No. 2024-002; 2023-006; 2022-008) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes, policies and procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of federal funds to the subrecipient. University Response: Accepted. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Department of Energy (DOE), US Health & Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI); Office of Science Financial Assistance Program; Fossil Energy Research and Development; Alcohol Research Programs; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research; Vision Research ALN #s: 10.310; 81.049; 81.089; 93.273; 93.837; 93.846; and 93.867 Award Numbers: AG NIFA 2021-68012-35898; DOE DE-SC0018420; DOE DE-FE0032049; SNAP 5P50AA022538 10; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; Snp 5R01AR081448-02; and NEI 5 P30 EY001792-45 Questioned Costs: None 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not have sufficient rationale documented for the noncompetitive procurement method selected within their iBuy system at the time of approval of the purchase to allow a reviewer to determine the appropriateness of the procurement method in the Research and Development Cluster. Condition: The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago’s internal controls over small purchases include review and approval of a purchase requisition form that documents the procurement method selected. Within the iBuy system, when a noncompetitive procurement method is selected, a radio button allows for selection of one of several circumstances where noncompetitive procurement is permitted by 2 CFR 200.320, including that the procurement can only be fulfilled by a single source. When this selection is made, additional information supporting this rationale should be available to the reviewer to determine that this noncompetitive procurement method is appropriate. We noted instances where there was not evidence that this information was available to the reviewer at the time of the approval. Out of twenty-nine small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, for five transactions (17%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Out of eleven small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Chicago, for six transactions (55%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Based on additional information provided to us during our testing, there were no indications that the noncompetitive procurement methods selected were inappropriate. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement (Continued) Criteria: 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 procurement procedures are properly followed and support is properly maintained as required by 2 CFR 200.318. Cause: University officials stated a single e-procurement system is used to collect and capture procurement-related information. The electronic system required selection of the relevant procurement method in the form of a radio button, but did not require additional information in the central procurement file. Rather, this information was maintained by the requesting unit. Effect: If the procurement purchase requisition forms do not include sufficient supporting documentation of the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected, the University could approve payments of federal funds to vendors that do not meet federal regulations. (Finding Code 2024-004) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes within the iBuy system for noncompetitive procurement transactions to ensure sufficient documentation is included to support the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected. University Response: Accepted. While the University agrees that the supporting documentation was not captured in the electronic payment system, the rationale was available in other University records. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Department of Energy (DOE), US Health & Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI); Office of Science Financial Assistance Program; Fossil Energy Research and Development; Alcohol Research Programs; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research; Vision Research ALN #s: 10.310; 81.049; 81.089; 93.273; 93.837; 93.846; and 93.867 Award Numbers: AG NIFA 2021-68012-35898; DOE DE-SC0018420; DOE DE-FE0032049; SNAP 5P50AA022538 10; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; Snp 5R01AR081448-02; and NEI 5 P30 EY001792-45 Questioned Costs: None 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not have sufficient rationale documented for the noncompetitive procurement method selected within their iBuy system at the time of approval of the purchase to allow a reviewer to determine the appropriateness of the procurement method in the Research and Development Cluster. Condition: The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago’s internal controls over small purchases include review and approval of a purchase requisition form that documents the procurement method selected. Within the iBuy system, when a noncompetitive procurement method is selected, a radio button allows for selection of one of several circumstances where noncompetitive procurement is permitted by 2 CFR 200.320, including that the procurement can only be fulfilled by a single source. When this selection is made, additional information supporting this rationale should be available to the reviewer to determine that this noncompetitive procurement method is appropriate. We noted instances where there was not evidence that this information was available to the reviewer at the time of the approval. Out of twenty-nine small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, for five transactions (17%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Out of eleven small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Chicago, for six transactions (55%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Based on additional information provided to us during our testing, there were no indications that the noncompetitive procurement methods selected were inappropriate. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement (Continued) Criteria: 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 procurement procedures are properly followed and support is properly maintained as required by 2 CFR 200.318. Cause: University officials stated a single e-procurement system is used to collect and capture procurement-related information. The electronic system required selection of the relevant procurement method in the form of a radio button, but did not require additional information in the central procurement file. Rather, this information was maintained by the requesting unit. Effect: If the procurement purchase requisition forms do not include sufficient supporting documentation of the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected, the University could approve payments of federal funds to vendors that do not meet federal regulations. (Finding Code 2024-004) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes within the iBuy system for noncompetitive procurement transactions to ensure sufficient documentation is included to support the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected. University Response: Accepted. While the University agrees that the supporting documentation was not captured in the electronic payment system, the rationale was available in other University records. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Department of Energy (DOE), US Health & Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI); Office of Science Financial Assistance Program; Fossil Energy Research and Development; Alcohol Research Programs; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research; Vision Research ALN #s: 10.310; 81.049; 81.089; 93.273; 93.837; 93.846; and 93.867 Award Numbers: AG NIFA 2021-68012-35898; DOE DE-SC0018420; DOE DE-FE0032049; SNAP 5P50AA022538 10; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; Snp 5R01AR081448-02; and NEI 5 P30 EY001792-45 Questioned Costs: None 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not have sufficient rationale documented for the noncompetitive procurement method selected within their iBuy system at the time of approval of the purchase to allow a reviewer to determine the appropriateness of the procurement method in the Research and Development Cluster. Condition: The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago’s internal controls over small purchases include review and approval of a purchase requisition form that documents the procurement method selected. Within the iBuy system, when a noncompetitive procurement method is selected, a radio button allows for selection of one of several circumstances where noncompetitive procurement is permitted by 2 CFR 200.320, including that the procurement can only be fulfilled by a single source. When this selection is made, additional information supporting this rationale should be available to the reviewer to determine that this noncompetitive procurement method is appropriate. We noted instances where there was not evidence that this information was available to the reviewer at the time of the approval. Out of twenty-nine small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, for five transactions (17%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Out of eleven small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Chicago, for six transactions (55%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Based on additional information provided to us during our testing, there were no indications that the noncompetitive procurement methods selected were inappropriate. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement (Continued) Criteria: 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 procurement procedures are properly followed and support is properly maintained as required by 2 CFR 200.318. Cause: University officials stated a single e-procurement system is used to collect and capture procurement-related information. The electronic system required selection of the relevant procurement method in the form of a radio button, but did not require additional information in the central procurement file. Rather, this information was maintained by the requesting unit. Effect: If the procurement purchase requisition forms do not include sufficient supporting documentation of the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected, the University could approve payments of federal funds to vendors that do not meet federal regulations. (Finding Code 2024-004) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes within the iBuy system for noncompetitive procurement transactions to ensure sufficient documentation is included to support the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected. University Response: Accepted. While the University agrees that the supporting documentation was not captured in the electronic payment system, the rationale was available in other University records. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Defense (DoD); US Department of Energy (DOE); US Health and Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Basic, Applied and Advanced Research in Science and Engineering; Fossil Energy Research and Development; COVID19 – Discovery and Applied Research for Technological Innovations to Improve Human Health; Research and Technology Development; Office of Science and Financial Assistance Program; Air Force Defense Research Sciences Program; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Health Center Program Cluster: Community Health Centers; and AIDS Education and Training Centers ALN #s: 12.630; 81.089; 93.286; 12.910; 81.049; 12.800; 93.837; 93.224; and 93.145 Award Numbers: ARMY W911NF-17-2-0196; DOE DE-FE0031581; DOE DE-FE0032049; NIH 1 R21 EB031310A; DARPA HR011-23-2-0004; DOE DE-SC0018420; AF FA9550-23-1-0609; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; HRSA 5 U1OHA29293-09-03; and HRSA 5 U1OHA32109-07 Federal Award Year 2023 – 2024 Questioned Costs: None 2024-002. Finding: Cash Management – Timeliness of Subrecipient Payments The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not make certain subrecipient payments timely and the controls in place did not identify the late payments. Condition: Out of thirty-two subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign under the Research & Development Cluster, twelve payments (38%) were not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payments ranged from 35-201 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipients. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Out of eight subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois Chicago under the Research & Development Cluster, one payment (13%) was not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payment was 32 days after the receipt of billing from the subrecipient. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Out of eighteen subrecipient payments tested which were made by the University of Illinois Chicago under the Health Center Program Cluster: Community Health Centers and AIDS Education and Training Centers, five payments (28%) were not submitted within 30 days after receipt of the billing from the subrecipient. The payments ranged from 42-120 days after the receipt of billing from the subrecipients. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-002. Finding: Cash Management – Timeliness of Subrecipient Payments (Continued) Criteria: Under Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.305(b)(3)), when the reimbursement method is used, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity must make payment within 30 calendar days after receipt of the billing, unless the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity reasonably believes the request to be improper. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires nonfederal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls deigned to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure subrecipient payments are made timely. Cause: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign officials stated the multi-layered review and approval process along with staffing deficiencies and workload challenges caused the situations for the exceptions noted. University of Illinois Chicago officials stated the one payment was paid 32 days from receipt of the invoice due to high volumes of invoice processing at fiscal year end and the payment due date coinciding with a holiday. The five other subrecipient payments were due to high staff workloads and occurred prior to the fiscal year 2023 corrective action implementation. Effect: Without proper program cash management processes and procedures, late subrecipient payments could result in the loss of future funding. (Finding Code No. 2024-002; 2023-006; 2022-008) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes, policies and procedures to minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of federal funds to the subrecipient. University Response: Accepted. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Department of Energy (DOE), US Health & Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI); Office of Science Financial Assistance Program; Fossil Energy Research and Development; Alcohol Research Programs; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research; Vision Research ALN #s: 10.310; 81.049; 81.089; 93.273; 93.837; 93.846; and 93.867 Award Numbers: AG NIFA 2021-68012-35898; DOE DE-SC0018420; DOE DE-FE0032049; SNAP 5P50AA022538 10; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; Snp 5R01AR081448-02; and NEI 5 P30 EY001792-45 Questioned Costs: None 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not have sufficient rationale documented for the noncompetitive procurement method selected within their iBuy system at the time of approval of the purchase to allow a reviewer to determine the appropriateness of the procurement method in the Research and Development Cluster. Condition: The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago’s internal controls over small purchases include review and approval of a purchase requisition form that documents the procurement method selected. Within the iBuy system, when a noncompetitive procurement method is selected, a radio button allows for selection of one of several circumstances where noncompetitive procurement is permitted by 2 CFR 200.320, including that the procurement can only be fulfilled by a single source. When this selection is made, additional information supporting this rationale should be available to the reviewer to determine that this noncompetitive procurement method is appropriate. We noted instances where there was not evidence that this information was available to the reviewer at the time of the approval. Out of twenty-nine small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, for five transactions (17%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Out of eleven small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Chicago, for six transactions (55%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Based on additional information provided to us during our testing, there were no indications that the noncompetitive procurement methods selected were inappropriate. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement (Continued) Criteria: 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 procurement procedures are properly followed and support is properly maintained as required by 2 CFR 200.318. Cause: University officials stated a single e-procurement system is used to collect and capture procurement-related information. The electronic system required selection of the relevant procurement method in the form of a radio button, but did not require additional information in the central procurement file. Rather, this information was maintained by the requesting unit. Effect: If the procurement purchase requisition forms do not include sufficient supporting documentation of the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected, the University could approve payments of federal funds to vendors that do not meet federal regulations. (Finding Code 2024-004) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes within the iBuy system for noncompetitive procurement transactions to ensure sufficient documentation is included to support the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected. University Response: Accepted. While the University agrees that the supporting documentation was not captured in the electronic payment system, the rationale was available in other University records. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Department of Energy (DOE), US Health & Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI); Office of Science Financial Assistance Program; Fossil Energy Research and Development; Alcohol Research Programs; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research; Vision Research ALN #s: 10.310; 81.049; 81.089; 93.273; 93.837; 93.846; and 93.867 Award Numbers: AG NIFA 2021-68012-35898; DOE DE-SC0018420; DOE DE-FE0032049; SNAP 5P50AA022538 10; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; Snp 5R01AR081448-02; and NEI 5 P30 EY001792-45 Questioned Costs: None 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not have sufficient rationale documented for the noncompetitive procurement method selected within their iBuy system at the time of approval of the purchase to allow a reviewer to determine the appropriateness of the procurement method in the Research and Development Cluster. Condition: The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago’s internal controls over small purchases include review and approval of a purchase requisition form that documents the procurement method selected. Within the iBuy system, when a noncompetitive procurement method is selected, a radio button allows for selection of one of several circumstances where noncompetitive procurement is permitted by 2 CFR 200.320, including that the procurement can only be fulfilled by a single source. When this selection is made, additional information supporting this rationale should be available to the reviewer to determine that this noncompetitive procurement method is appropriate. We noted instances where there was not evidence that this information was available to the reviewer at the time of the approval. Out of twenty-nine small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, for five transactions (17%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Out of eleven small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Chicago, for six transactions (55%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Based on additional information provided to us during our testing, there were no indications that the noncompetitive procurement methods selected were inappropriate. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement (Continued) Criteria: 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 procurement procedures are properly followed and support is properly maintained as required by 2 CFR 200.318. Cause: University officials stated a single e-procurement system is used to collect and capture procurement-related information. The electronic system required selection of the relevant procurement method in the form of a radio button, but did not require additional information in the central procurement file. Rather, this information was maintained by the requesting unit. Effect: If the procurement purchase requisition forms do not include sufficient supporting documentation of the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected, the University could approve payments of federal funds to vendors that do not meet federal regulations. (Finding Code 2024-004) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes within the iBuy system for noncompetitive procurement transactions to ensure sufficient documentation is included to support the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected. University Response: Accepted. While the University agrees that the supporting documentation was not captured in the electronic payment system, the rationale was available in other University records. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Federal Agencies: US Department of Agriculture (USDA), US Department of Energy (DOE), US Health & Human Services (HHS) Program Names: Research & Development Cluster: Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI); Office of Science Financial Assistance Program; Fossil Energy Research and Development; Alcohol Research Programs; Cardiovascular Diseases Research; Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research; Vision Research ALN #s: 10.310; 81.049; 81.089; 93.273; 93.837; 93.846; and 93.867 Award Numbers: AG NIFA 2021-68012-35898; DOE DE-SC0018420; DOE DE-FE0032049; SNAP 5P50AA022538 10; SNAP 5R01HL152692-04; Snp 5R01AR081448-02; and NEI 5 P30 EY001792-45 Questioned Costs: None 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago did not have sufficient rationale documented for the noncompetitive procurement method selected within their iBuy system at the time of approval of the purchase to allow a reviewer to determine the appropriateness of the procurement method in the Research and Development Cluster. Condition: The University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago’s internal controls over small purchases include review and approval of a purchase requisition form that documents the procurement method selected. Within the iBuy system, when a noncompetitive procurement method is selected, a radio button allows for selection of one of several circumstances where noncompetitive procurement is permitted by 2 CFR 200.320, including that the procurement can only be fulfilled by a single source. When this selection is made, additional information supporting this rationale should be available to the reviewer to determine that this noncompetitive procurement method is appropriate. We noted instances where there was not evidence that this information was available to the reviewer at the time of the approval. Out of twenty-nine small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, for five transactions (17%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Out of eleven small purchase procurement transactions tested at the University of Illinois Chicago, for six transactions (55%), there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of review and approval. Based on additional information provided to us during our testing, there were no indications that the noncompetitive procurement methods selected were inappropriate. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. 2024-004. Finding: Internal Controls over Procurement (Continued) Criteria: 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 procurement procedures are properly followed and support is properly maintained as required by 2 CFR 200.318. Cause: University officials stated a single e-procurement system is used to collect and capture procurement-related information. The electronic system required selection of the relevant procurement method in the form of a radio button, but did not require additional information in the central procurement file. Rather, this information was maintained by the requesting unit. Effect: If the procurement purchase requisition forms do not include sufficient supporting documentation of the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected, the University could approve payments of federal funds to vendors that do not meet federal regulations. (Finding Code 2024-004) Recommendation: We recommend the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and the University of Illinois Chicago review current processes within the iBuy system for noncompetitive procurement transactions to ensure sufficient documentation is included to support the rationale for the noncompetitive method of procurement selected. University Response: Accepted. While the University agrees that the supporting documentation was not captured in the electronic payment system, the rationale was available in other University records. The University will take steps to address the recommendation in this finding.
Department of Homeland Security Federal Financial Assistance Listing #97.036 COVID‐19 Disaster Grants – Public Assistance Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and conditions of the federal award. Condition: Our testing identified eleven instances where contract labor costs were over claimed under the program due to a calculation error. Monument Health’s methodology for identifying contract labor attributable to COVID to be based upon identifying total contact labor and multiplying by the percentage of COVID patient days as a percentage of total patient days. The methodology also identified certain cost centers were to be excluded from the calculation, including behavioral health and med/surg nursing. Based upon review of management’s allocation percentage, it was noted the behavioral health and med/surg nursing COVID patient days were included within the total COVID patient days; therefore, a higher percentage of COVID patient days to total patient days was calculated. The calculation percentage was then utilized to calculate contract labor attributable to COVID for contract labor costs identified from July 2, 2022 through May 11, 2023. Cause: The review process did not identify the behavioral health and med/surg nursing COVID patient days being improperly included within the calculation of contract labor attributable to COVID. Effect: Monument Health’s control did not detect or correct the calculation error identified, which resulted in expenditures being claimed under the federal program that may be unallowable and a reasonable possibility that Monument Health would not be able to detect and correct noncompliance in a timely manner. Questioned Costs: There are questioned costs in the amount of $58,985. Context: A non‐statistical sample of 60 out of 2,565 total transactions were selected for testing, which accounted for $178,483 of $10,295,993 of federal program expenditures. In addition, five individually significant items were selected for testing which accounted for $1,066,229 of federal program expenditures. Testing was also performed over the calculation of contract labor attributable to COVID patient days as a percentage of total patient days for the period from July 1, 2021 to July 1, 2022 and from July 2, 2022 to May 11, 2023. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No Recommendation: We recommend Monument Health review and strengthen the controls surrounding the calculations of expenditures being claimed under the grant. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Assistance Listing, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 19.510, Department of State, U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, Federal Award Identification Number and Year - SPRMCO23CA0007; SPRMCO23CA0371; SPRMCO23CA0368; SPRMCO23CA0189 Pass through Entity - HIAS, Inc. Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303 requires that recipients of federal awards establish, document and maintain effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200 Appendix XI Part 3. Cash Management requires that recipients establish written procedures to meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 and the terms of the grant award, expenditures must be incurred before reimbursement of federal funds is requested. 2 CFR 200 subpart E Cost Principles requires recipients to follow allowability requirements as defined in the grant award and within general cost principles. 2 CFR 200 requires that costs be expended in accordance with the period of performance defined within the award agreement. Condition - In performing our audit procedures, there was no evidence of a system of internal control over the cash management requirements, including a written policy, related to reimbursement of funds on a per refugee basis. In addition, we noted that reimbursement was requested prior to incurring expenses on a per refugee basis. There were also refugee costs coded incorrectly within the general ledger. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - When gaining an understanding of internal control over compliance for cash management, we noted a lack of internal controls in place to ensure that expenses on a per refugee basis were incurred prior to requesting reimbursement. In testing the compliance requirements for cash management, we were unable to test compliance on a per refugee basis. Each month, funds become available based on the number of refugees who arrived and been allocated to the program. We noted that in one month, $5,300 was available to be spent on new arrivals; however, only $2,285 was spent on the new arrivals and $3,015 was improperly spent on refugees who had arrived previously and for which reimbursement had already been received. In total, over the entire term of the grant, and based on the total number of refugees served, the appropriate amount of funds were requested for reimbursement. In addition, we noted one instance where refugee costs were applied to an incorrect award based on the period of performance and the allowable 90-day resettlement period. These costs were within the total amount allowed for each of the awards, but were not assigned correctly within the general ledger. Cause and Effect - There was not a sufficient cash management policy in place and there were no internal controls in place to ensure reimbursement requests were made only after expenses had been incurred on a per refugee basis. Recommendation - The organization should establish a written cash management policy which encompasses per refugee spending and ensure there is an effective review process in place to ensure that reimbursement is not requested prior to funds being incurred on a per refugee basis. This process should ensure that general ledger expenses are reconciled to per refugee spending and that the correct award funds are utilized for the specified refugee. In addition, the general ledger expenses should be coded in such a manner to facilitate this review on a per-refugee basis. These improvements will ensure that only allowable costs are recorded in the federal grant general ledger codes and are requested for reimbursement. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Agree with finding. Financial policies will be updated to include cash management requirements to ensure expenditures are incurred, including any required per client expenditures, prior to reimbursement requests. During the year under audit, there was not a reconciliation between individual refugee spending and the general ledger expenses. Subsequent to year end a new process was put in place to compare the individual refugee ledgers to the reimbursement request to ensure no expenditures were requested in advance and that refugee spending is coded to the appropriate general ledger account based on the specific award funding.
Assistance Listing, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 19.510, Department of State, U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, Federal Award Identification Number and Year - SPRMCO23CA0007; SPRMCO23CA0371; SPRMCO23CA0368; SPRMCO23CA0189 Pass through Entity - HIAS, Inc. Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303 requires that recipients of federal awards establish, document and maintain effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200 Appendix XI Part 3. Cash Management requires that recipients establish written procedures to meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 and the terms of the grant award, expenditures must be incurred before reimbursement of federal funds is requested. 2 CFR 200 subpart E Cost Principles requires recipients to follow allowability requirements as defined in the grant award and within general cost principles. 2 CFR 200 requires that costs be expended in accordance with the period of performance defined within the award agreement. Condition - In performing our audit procedures, there was no evidence of a system of internal control over the cash management requirements, including a written policy, related to reimbursement of funds on a per refugee basis. In addition, we noted that reimbursement was requested prior to incurring expenses on a per refugee basis. There were also refugee costs coded incorrectly within the general ledger. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - When gaining an understanding of internal control over compliance for cash management, we noted a lack of internal controls in place to ensure that expenses on a per refugee basis were incurred prior to requesting reimbursement. In testing the compliance requirements for cash management, we were unable to test compliance on a per refugee basis. Each month, funds become available based on the number of refugees who arrived and been allocated to the program. We noted that in one month, $5,300 was available to be spent on new arrivals; however, only $2,285 was spent on the new arrivals and $3,015 was improperly spent on refugees who had arrived previously and for which reimbursement had already been received. In total, over the entire term of the grant, and based on the total number of refugees served, the appropriate amount of funds were requested for reimbursement. In addition, we noted one instance where refugee costs were applied to an incorrect award based on the period of performance and the allowable 90-day resettlement period. These costs were within the total amount allowed for each of the awards, but were not assigned correctly within the general ledger. Cause and Effect - There was not a sufficient cash management policy in place and there were no internal controls in place to ensure reimbursement requests were made only after expenses had been incurred on a per refugee basis. Recommendation - The organization should establish a written cash management policy which encompasses per refugee spending and ensure there is an effective review process in place to ensure that reimbursement is not requested prior to funds being incurred on a per refugee basis. This process should ensure that general ledger expenses are reconciled to per refugee spending and that the correct award funds are utilized for the specified refugee. In addition, the general ledger expenses should be coded in such a manner to facilitate this review on a per-refugee basis. These improvements will ensure that only allowable costs are recorded in the federal grant general ledger codes and are requested for reimbursement. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Agree with finding. Financial policies will be updated to include cash management requirements to ensure expenditures are incurred, including any required per client expenditures, prior to reimbursement requests. During the year under audit, there was not a reconciliation between individual refugee spending and the general ledger expenses. Subsequent to year end a new process was put in place to compare the individual refugee ledgers to the reimbursement request to ensure no expenditures were requested in advance and that refugee spending is coded to the appropriate general ledger account based on the specific award funding.
Assistance Listing, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 19.510, Department of State, U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, Federal Award Identification Number and Year - SPRMCO23CA0007; SPRMCO23CA0371; SPRMCO23CA0368; SPRMCO23CA0189 Pass through Entity - HIAS, Inc. Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303 requires that recipients of federal awards establish, document and maintain effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200 Appendix XI Part 3. Cash Management requires that recipients establish written procedures to meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 and the terms of the grant award, expenditures must be incurred before reimbursement of federal funds is requested. 2 CFR 200 subpart E Cost Principles requires recipients to follow allowability requirements as defined in the grant award and within general cost principles. 2 CFR 200 requires that costs be expended in accordance with the period of performance defined within the award agreement. Condition - In performing our audit procedures, there was no evidence of a system of internal control over the cash management requirements, including a written policy, related to reimbursement of funds on a per refugee basis. In addition, we noted that reimbursement was requested prior to incurring expenses on a per refugee basis. There were also refugee costs coded incorrectly within the general ledger. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - When gaining an understanding of internal control over compliance for cash management, we noted a lack of internal controls in place to ensure that expenses on a per refugee basis were incurred prior to requesting reimbursement. In testing the compliance requirements for cash management, we were unable to test compliance on a per refugee basis. Each month, funds become available based on the number of refugees who arrived and been allocated to the program. We noted that in one month, $5,300 was available to be spent on new arrivals; however, only $2,285 was spent on the new arrivals and $3,015 was improperly spent on refugees who had arrived previously and for which reimbursement had already been received. In total, over the entire term of the grant, and based on the total number of refugees served, the appropriate amount of funds were requested for reimbursement. In addition, we noted one instance where refugee costs were applied to an incorrect award based on the period of performance and the allowable 90-day resettlement period. These costs were within the total amount allowed for each of the awards, but were not assigned correctly within the general ledger. Cause and Effect - There was not a sufficient cash management policy in place and there were no internal controls in place to ensure reimbursement requests were made only after expenses had been incurred on a per refugee basis. Recommendation - The organization should establish a written cash management policy which encompasses per refugee spending and ensure there is an effective review process in place to ensure that reimbursement is not requested prior to funds being incurred on a per refugee basis. This process should ensure that general ledger expenses are reconciled to per refugee spending and that the correct award funds are utilized for the specified refugee. In addition, the general ledger expenses should be coded in such a manner to facilitate this review on a per-refugee basis. These improvements will ensure that only allowable costs are recorded in the federal grant general ledger codes and are requested for reimbursement. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Agree with finding. Financial policies will be updated to include cash management requirements to ensure expenditures are incurred, including any required per client expenditures, prior to reimbursement requests. During the year under audit, there was not a reconciliation between individual refugee spending and the general ledger expenses. Subsequent to year end a new process was put in place to compare the individual refugee ledgers to the reimbursement request to ensure no expenditures were requested in advance and that refugee spending is coded to the appropriate general ledger account based on the specific award funding.
Assistance Listing, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 19.510, Department of State, U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, Federal Award Identification Number and Year - SPRMCO23CA0007; SPRMCO23CA0371; SPRMCO23CA0368; SPRMCO23CA0189 Pass through Entity - HIAS, Inc. Finding Type - Significant deficiency Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303 requires that recipients of federal awards establish, document and maintain effective internal control that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200 Appendix XI Part 3. Cash Management requires that recipients establish written procedures to meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200.305 and the terms of the grant award, expenditures must be incurred before reimbursement of federal funds is requested. 2 CFR 200 subpart E Cost Principles requires recipients to follow allowability requirements as defined in the grant award and within general cost principles. 2 CFR 200 requires that costs be expended in accordance with the period of performance defined within the award agreement. Condition - In performing our audit procedures, there was no evidence of a system of internal control over the cash management requirements, including a written policy, related to reimbursement of funds on a per refugee basis. In addition, we noted that reimbursement was requested prior to incurring expenses on a per refugee basis. There were also refugee costs coded incorrectly within the general ledger. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - When gaining an understanding of internal control over compliance for cash management, we noted a lack of internal controls in place to ensure that expenses on a per refugee basis were incurred prior to requesting reimbursement. In testing the compliance requirements for cash management, we were unable to test compliance on a per refugee basis. Each month, funds become available based on the number of refugees who arrived and been allocated to the program. We noted that in one month, $5,300 was available to be spent on new arrivals; however, only $2,285 was spent on the new arrivals and $3,015 was improperly spent on refugees who had arrived previously and for which reimbursement had already been received. In total, over the entire term of the grant, and based on the total number of refugees served, the appropriate amount of funds were requested for reimbursement. In addition, we noted one instance where refugee costs were applied to an incorrect award based on the period of performance and the allowable 90-day resettlement period. These costs were within the total amount allowed for each of the awards, but were not assigned correctly within the general ledger. Cause and Effect - There was not a sufficient cash management policy in place and there were no internal controls in place to ensure reimbursement requests were made only after expenses had been incurred on a per refugee basis. Recommendation - The organization should establish a written cash management policy which encompasses per refugee spending and ensure there is an effective review process in place to ensure that reimbursement is not requested prior to funds being incurred on a per refugee basis. This process should ensure that general ledger expenses are reconciled to per refugee spending and that the correct award funds are utilized for the specified refugee. In addition, the general ledger expenses should be coded in such a manner to facilitate this review on a per-refugee basis. These improvements will ensure that only allowable costs are recorded in the federal grant general ledger codes and are requested for reimbursement. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - Agree with finding. Financial policies will be updated to include cash management requirements to ensure expenditures are incurred, including any required per client expenditures, prior to reimbursement requests. During the year under audit, there was not a reconciliation between individual refugee spending and the general ledger expenses. Subsequent to year end a new process was put in place to compare the individual refugee ledgers to the reimbursement request to ensure no expenditures were requested in advance and that refugee spending is coded to the appropriate general ledger account based on the specific award funding.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U– Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.302 and 2 CFR 200.303 outline key requirements for non-federal entities managing federal awards. Section 200.302 mandates that a financial management system be in place to prepare reports as required by both general and program-specific terms and conditions. It also requires tracing funds to a level of expenditure that demonstrates compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms of the federal award, including comparing expenditures with the budget for each federal award. Section 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards, ensuring reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal laws, regulations, and the award's terms and conditions. Condition: The District’s internal controls over budgeting for federal grants are insufficient to ensure compliance with federal regulations and to stay within the budgetary limits established by the federal awards, as specified in the Mississippi Comprehensive Automated Performance-based System (MCAPS), administered through the Mississippi Department of Education. Specifically, the District has not adequately adhered to budgeting restraints outlined for its federal grants. Our audit procedures identified the following instances where actual expenditures appear to exceed the budgeted amounts: Six-line items in the ARP ESSER grant, totaling $115,645.51. Five-line items in the ESSER II grant, totaling $31,135.42 Three-line items in the Special Education IDEA Part B grant, totaling $9,474.44. One-line item in the Title I, Part A grant, totaling $8,640.88. Context/ Perspective: This finding is a result of our budget to actual comparisons for federal grant purposes of major programs and the conditions cited appear to be a systematic issue. Cause: The District did not properly monitor budget limits established in MCAPS to ensure that budgeting requirements were fulfilled. Effect: Failure to remain within established budget limits in MCAPS could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: $146,780.93 (ESSER II and ARP ESSER) Recommendation: The District should establish additional internal controls to ensure that it remains within budget limits for each grant maintained in MCAPS. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing 84.010A - Title I Grants To Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listing: 84.027/84.027X/84.173/84.173X – Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Assistance Listing: 84.425U – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ARP ESSER) Repeat Finding: Yes Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.334 requires subrecipients to retain all Federal award records for three years from the date of submission of their final financial report. For awards that are renewed quarterly or annually, the recipient and subrecipient must retain records for three years from the date of submission of their quarterly or annual financial report, respectively. Records to be retained include but are not limited to financial records, supporting documentation, and statistical records. Federal agencies or pass-through entities may not impose any other record retention requirements except records must be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved and final action taken if any litigation, claim, or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year period. Condition: As part of our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll disbursements from the District’s grant expenditures from major programs, we observed the following instances where information required to ensure that these expenditures fulfilled requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 as follows was not obtained by the District or was otherwise unavailable for our examination: Sixteen instances where there was no documentation to determine the District obtained the required information to ensure that the vendor was not suspended or debarred. One instance where there was no invoice or credit memo to support the transaction. Numerous instances where an invoice was not included in the paid invoice. These invoices were made available to us for our examination on our fourth request Context/ Perspective: This finding is based on our statistically valid random sample of sixty non-payroll cash disbursements charged to major programs of the District. Effect: Failure to follow the federal and state requirements could affect future eligibility for federal award programs or could result in a loss or misappropriation of public assets. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that the District implement additional internal controls as necessary to ensure that proper records are maintained to adequately document its expenditures charged to federal grant programs. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Repeat Finding: No Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity establish, document and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should align with the 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 210.14(g) also requires school food authorities to follow fair and consistent methodologies to identify and allocate allowable indirect costs to the nonprofit school food service account, in accordance with 2 CFR part 200 as implemented by 2 CFR part 400. Condition: Our procedures indicate that the District’s internal control system is inadequate for ensuring that indirect costs charged to various federal grant programs are adequately documented and accurately calculated. Specifically: Child Nutrition Cluster: The District could not provide documentation of its calculation to support the $25,000 per quarter requested as reimbursement for indirect costs. Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER II): The District used an indirect cost rate from a prior year to calculate indirect costs charged to the ESSER II program which resulted in an overcharge of $68,829. Our procedures indicate that the District’s internal control system is insufficient to ensure that the indirect cost charged to the program is accurately calculated and based on calculations that meet the requirements outlined in Sections 2 CFR 200.303, 2 CFR 200.414 and Appendix VII to Part 200. Context/ Perspective: This finding arises from our audit procedures on internal control, where attempted to obtain documentation of the District's calculation and subsequent approval of reimbursement for indirect costs as well as other procedures performed by us recalculating indirect costs charged to certain federal grant programs. Cause: The District lacks the necessary internal controls to ensure that requests for reimbursement of indirect costs are accurately calculated, properly documented and approved by the appropriate director. Effect: The lack of adequate internal controls over the calculation of indirect cost reimbursement may increase the risk of misappropriation or loss of public funds. It could also result in inappropriate charges to the federal award, potentially leading to disallowed costs being applied to the program. Questioned Costs: $68,829 (Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief II) Recommendation: The District should implement stronger internal controls to ensure that indirect cost reimbursements are accurately calculated, properly documented, and approved by the appropriate federal grant program director. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Repeat Finding: No Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity establish, document and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should align with the 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 210.14(g) also requires school food authorities to follow fair and consistent methodologies to identify and allocate allowable indirect costs to the nonprofit school food service account, in accordance with 2 CFR part 200 as implemented by 2 CFR part 400. Condition: Our procedures indicate that the District’s internal control system is inadequate for ensuring that indirect costs charged to various federal grant programs are adequately documented and accurately calculated. Specifically: Child Nutrition Cluster: The District could not provide documentation of its calculation to support the $25,000 per quarter requested as reimbursement for indirect costs. Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER II): The District used an indirect cost rate from a prior year to calculate indirect costs charged to the ESSER II program which resulted in an overcharge of $68,829. Our procedures indicate that the District’s internal control system is insufficient to ensure that the indirect cost charged to the program is accurately calculated and based on calculations that meet the requirements outlined in Sections 2 CFR 200.303, 2 CFR 200.414 and Appendix VII to Part 200. Context/ Perspective: This finding arises from our audit procedures on internal control, where attempted to obtain documentation of the District's calculation and subsequent approval of reimbursement for indirect costs as well as other procedures performed by us recalculating indirect costs charged to certain federal grant programs. Cause: The District lacks the necessary internal controls to ensure that requests for reimbursement of indirect costs are accurately calculated, properly documented and approved by the appropriate director. Effect: The lack of adequate internal controls over the calculation of indirect cost reimbursement may increase the risk of misappropriation or loss of public funds. It could also result in inappropriate charges to the federal award, potentially leading to disallowed costs being applied to the program. Questioned Costs: $68,829 (Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief II) Recommendation: The District should implement stronger internal controls to ensure that indirect cost reimbursements are accurately calculated, properly documented, and approved by the appropriate federal grant program director. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Significant Deficiency Other Noncompliance Program: Assistance Listing: 10.553/10.555 – Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listing: 84.425D – Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund (ESSER II) Repeat Finding: No Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity establish, document and maintain effective internal control over a federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should align with the 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 210.14(g) also requires school food authorities to follow fair and consistent methodologies to identify and allocate allowable indirect costs to the nonprofit school food service account, in accordance with 2 CFR part 200 as implemented by 2 CFR part 400. Condition: Our procedures indicate that the District’s internal control system is inadequate for ensuring that indirect costs charged to various federal grant programs are adequately documented and accurately calculated. Specifically: Child Nutrition Cluster: The District could not provide documentation of its calculation to support the $25,000 per quarter requested as reimbursement for indirect costs. Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER II): The District used an indirect cost rate from a prior year to calculate indirect costs charged to the ESSER II program which resulted in an overcharge of $68,829. Our procedures indicate that the District’s internal control system is insufficient to ensure that the indirect cost charged to the program is accurately calculated and based on calculations that meet the requirements outlined in Sections 2 CFR 200.303, 2 CFR 200.414 and Appendix VII to Part 200. Context/ Perspective: This finding arises from our audit procedures on internal control, where attempted to obtain documentation of the District's calculation and subsequent approval of reimbursement for indirect costs as well as other procedures performed by us recalculating indirect costs charged to certain federal grant programs. Cause: The District lacks the necessary internal controls to ensure that requests for reimbursement of indirect costs are accurately calculated, properly documented and approved by the appropriate director. Effect: The lack of adequate internal controls over the calculation of indirect cost reimbursement may increase the risk of misappropriation or loss of public funds. It could also result in inappropriate charges to the federal award, potentially leading to disallowed costs being applied to the program. Questioned Costs: $68,829 (Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief II) Recommendation: The District should implement stronger internal controls to ensure that indirect cost reimbursements are accurately calculated, properly documented, and approved by the appropriate federal grant program director. Views of Responsible Officials: The Auditee’s Corrective Action Plan lists the District’s response to the findings.
Finding 2024-001: Special Tests and Provisions: Enrollment Reporting Program Name: Student Financial Assistance Cluster: Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, Assistance Listing No. 84.007 Federal Work-Study Program, Assistance Listing No. 84.033 Federal Pell Grant Program, Assistance Listing No. 84.063 Federal Direct Student Loans. Assistance Listing No. 84.268 Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Finding Type: Significant Deficiency on Internal Controls over Compliance Questioned Costs: None Criteria: Per Title 2 US Code of Federal Regulations Part 200.303a, non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In addition, the Department of Education relies on institution’s enrollments reports to determine a student’s enrollment status based on reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations or approved leaves-of-absence. According to 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 685.309, the University is required to submit changes in student attendance to the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) at a minimum of every 60 days. Context/Condition: Of the 43 students selected for enrollment reporting testing, eight student withdrawals within the sample were reported to NSLDS outside the maximum 60-day window. This was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not have effective controls in place to ensure timely reporting of all status changes. Effect: Without timely notification of withdrawals or graduation, the NSLDS is unable to accurately determine when a student enters repayment status. Recommendation: We recommend that the University review and update internal controls to ensure student enrollment status in the NSLDS is updated in a timely manner to ensure compliance with Federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See accompanying Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-001: Special Tests and Provisions: Enrollment Reporting Program Name: Student Financial Assistance Cluster: Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, Assistance Listing No. 84.007 Federal Work-Study Program, Assistance Listing No. 84.033 Federal Pell Grant Program, Assistance Listing No. 84.063 Federal Direct Student Loans. Assistance Listing No. 84.268 Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Finding Type: Significant Deficiency on Internal Controls over Compliance Questioned Costs: None Criteria: Per Title 2 US Code of Federal Regulations Part 200.303a, non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In addition, the Department of Education relies on institution’s enrollments reports to determine a student’s enrollment status based on reductions or increases in attendance levels, withdrawals, graduations or approved leaves-of-absence. According to 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2) and 685.309, the University is required to submit changes in student attendance to the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) at a minimum of every 60 days. Context/Condition: Of the 43 students selected for enrollment reporting testing, eight student withdrawals within the sample were reported to NSLDS outside the maximum 60-day window. This was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: The University did not have effective controls in place to ensure timely reporting of all status changes. Effect: Without timely notification of withdrawals or graduation, the NSLDS is unable to accurately determine when a student enters repayment status. Recommendation: We recommend that the University review and update internal controls to ensure student enrollment status in the NSLDS is updated in a timely manner to ensure compliance with Federal requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See accompanying Corrective Action Plan.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Education Stabilization Fund – Special Tests and Provisions - Wage Rate Requirements Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listing Number: 84.425D Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions - Wage Rate Requirements Audit Findings: Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR section 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal 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). 29 CFR 5.5 states in part: (1) Minimum wages. (i) All laborers and mechanics employed or working upon the site of the work (or under the United States Housing Act of 1937 or under the Housing Act of 1949 in the construction or development of the project), will be paid unconditionally and not less often than once a week, and without subsequent deduction or rebate on any account (except such payroll deductions as are permitted by regulations issued by the Secretary of Labor under the Copeland Act (29 CFR part 3)), the full amount of wages and bona fide fringe benefits (or cash equivalents thereof) due at time of payment computed at rates not less than those contained in the wage determination of the Secretary of Labor which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, regardless of any contractual relationship which may be alleged to exist between the contractor and such laborers and mechanics… (3)(ii)(A) The contractor shall submit weekly for each week in which any contract work is performed a copy of all payrolls to the (write in name of appropriate federal agency) if the agency is a party to the contract, but if the agency is not such a party, the contractor will submit the payrolls to the applicant, sponsor, or owner, as the case may be, for transmission to the (write in name of agency). 2 CFR 200 Appendix II states in part: In addition to other provisions required by the Federal agency or non-Federal entity; all contracts made by the non-Federal entity under the Federal award must contain provisions covering the following, as applicable. . . . (D) Davis-Bacon Act, as amended (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148). When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non-Federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3144, and 3146-3148) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5, “Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction”). In accordance with the statute, contractors must be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage determination made by the Secretary of Labor. In addition, contractors must be required to pay w ages not less than once a week.. . .” Condition: An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation in order to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements compliance requirements. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with the compliance requirements listed above. Effect: The failure to design and implement an effective internal control system enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: For 1 of 2 sample items tested, we noted the School Corporation expended approximately $212,000 on science room improvements, which was funded with ESSER II (84.425D) grant awards. The School Corporation did not properly include Davis-Bacon wage rate requirements in the vendor contract. Additionally, the School Corporation did not obtain the weekly payroll reports certifications from the construction vendor to monitor compliance with Davis-Bacon wage rate requirements. Therefore, no review was performed to ensure that pay rates complied with the federal wage rate requirements. The lack of controls and noncompliance was isolated to fiscal year 2023. Identification as a repeat finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the School Corporation ensure vendor contracts with labor installation in excess of $2,000 which are funded by federal grants including Davis Bacon Wage Rate Requirement clauses and implement a formal process to ensure the required weekly payroll reports certifications are collected and reviewed to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268 Federal Award Identification Number: P063P221568, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance: 1. The Code of Federal Regulations, consisting of 34 CFR 685.309 and 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2), requires that enrollment status changes for students be reported to NSLDS within 30 days or within 60 days if the student with the status change will be reported on a scheduled transmission within 60 days of the change in status. Additionally, schools are required to certify enrollment at a minimum of every 60 days or every other month. 2. The Code of Federal Regulations, consisting of 34 CFR 685.309 and 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2), requires certain student enrollment information be reported to the Department of Education. Information provided to the Department of Education should agree to the institutions records. Condition: The change in status was not reported timely and the program begin date per the institutions records did not agree to information in the NSLDS. Questioned costs: None Context: This condition occurred in our statistically valid sample as follows: 1. The status was not reported timely for 4 out of 36 students 2. The Program Begin Date was incorrectly reported for 7 out of 35 students Cause: The Registrar's Office has been through several transitions over the past five years and training has been inadequate during this period. Specifically, there was not sufficient training on enrollment submissions, error resolutions, and timely updates. Effect: 1. The published program length reported to NSLDS is used to determine the students maximum and remaining eligibility periods under the 150% limit. By not reporting the correct length, the calculation of the 150% would be incorrect and the grace period begin date would be incorrect. 2. The NSLDS system is not updated timely with the student information which may cause over awarding should the student transfer to another institution and the students may not properly enter the repayment period. Repeat Finding: Yes, 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend the College review its reporting procedures to ensure that students statuses are accurately and timely reported to NSLDS as required by regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268 Federal Award Identification Number: P063P221568, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance: 1. The Code of Federal Regulations, consisting of 34 CFR 685.309 and 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2), requires that enrollment status changes for students be reported to NSLDS within 30 days or within 60 days if the student with the status change will be reported on a scheduled transmission within 60 days of the change in status. Additionally, schools are required to certify enrollment at a minimum of every 60 days or every other month. 2. The Code of Federal Regulations, consisting of 34 CFR 685.309 and 34 CFR 690.83(b)(2), requires certain student enrollment information be reported to the Department of Education. Information provided to the Department of Education should agree to the institutions records. Condition: The change in status was not reported timely and the program begin date per the institutions records did not agree to information in the NSLDS. Questioned costs: None Context: This condition occurred in our statistically valid sample as follows: 1. The status was not reported timely for 4 out of 36 students 2. The Program Begin Date was incorrectly reported for 7 out of 35 students Cause: The Registrar's Office has been through several transitions over the past five years and training has been inadequate during this period. Specifically, there was not sufficient training on enrollment submissions, error resolutions, and timely updates. Effect: 1. The published program length reported to NSLDS is used to determine the students maximum and remaining eligibility periods under the 150% limit. By not reporting the correct length, the calculation of the 150% would be incorrect and the grace period begin date would be incorrect. 2. The NSLDS system is not updated timely with the student information which may cause over awarding should the student transfer to another institution and the students may not properly enter the repayment period. Repeat Finding: Yes, 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend the College review its reporting procedures to ensure that students statuses are accurately and timely reported to NSLDS as required by regulations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.007, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A221791, P007A231791, P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Public Law 106-102) requires financial institutions to explain their information-sharing practices to their customers and to safeguard sensitive data. (16 CFR 314) The Federal Trade Commission considers Title IV-eligible institutions that participate in Title IV Educational Assistance Programs as financial institutions and subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (16 CFR 313.3(k)(2)(vi). Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers, (16 CFR 314.3(a)). The elements that an institution must address in its written information security program are at 16 CFR 314.4. Condition: Certain elements of the Colleges information security program were not meeting GLBA requirements. Questioned costs: None Context: The Colleges written information security program did not cover the requirement to provide for the design and implementation of safeguards to control the risks the institution identifies through its risk assessment (16 CFR 314.4(c)). At a minimum, the institutions written information security program must address the implementation of the minimum safeguards identified in 16 CFR 314.4(c)(1) through (8). Cause: The gaps in the Colleges information security program, during the specified audit period, stemmed from prior deficiencies in documentation and procedural enforcement, which were exacerbated by staff turnover and resource constraints. Effect: Information security management may not be optimized and responses delayed without the written plan. Repeat Finding: Yes, 2023-002 Recommendation: We recommend the College ensure its written information security program addresses the required minimum elements as outlined in 16 CFR 314.4. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.007, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A221791, P007A231791, P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Public Law 106-102) requires financial institutions to explain their information-sharing practices to their customers and to safeguard sensitive data. (16 CFR 314) The Federal Trade Commission considers Title IV-eligible institutions that participate in Title IV Educational Assistance Programs as financial institutions and subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (16 CFR 313.3(k)(2)(vi). Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers, (16 CFR 314.3(a)). The elements that an institution must address in its written information security program are at 16 CFR 314.4. Condition: Certain elements of the Colleges information security program were not meeting GLBA requirements. Questioned costs: None Context: The Colleges written information security program did not cover the requirement to provide for the design and implementation of safeguards to control the risks the institution identifies through its risk assessment (16 CFR 314.4(c)). At a minimum, the institutions written information security program must address the implementation of the minimum safeguards identified in 16 CFR 314.4(c)(1) through (8). Cause: The gaps in the Colleges information security program, during the specified audit period, stemmed from prior deficiencies in documentation and procedural enforcement, which were exacerbated by staff turnover and resource constraints. Effect: Information security management may not be optimized and responses delayed without the written plan. Repeat Finding: Yes, 2023-002 Recommendation: We recommend the College ensure its written information security program addresses the required minimum elements as outlined in 16 CFR 314.4. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.007, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A221791, P007A231791, P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Public Law 106-102) requires financial institutions to explain their information-sharing practices to their customers and to safeguard sensitive data. (16 CFR 314) The Federal Trade Commission considers Title IV-eligible institutions that participate in Title IV Educational Assistance Programs as financial institutions and subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (16 CFR 313.3(k)(2)(vi). Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers, (16 CFR 314.3(a)). The elements that an institution must address in its written information security program are at 16 CFR 314.4. Condition: Certain elements of the Colleges information security program were not meeting GLBA requirements. Questioned costs: None Context: The Colleges written information security program did not cover the requirement to provide for the design and implementation of safeguards to control the risks the institution identifies through its risk assessment (16 CFR 314.4(c)). At a minimum, the institutions written information security program must address the implementation of the minimum safeguards identified in 16 CFR 314.4(c)(1) through (8). Cause: The gaps in the Colleges information security program, during the specified audit period, stemmed from prior deficiencies in documentation and procedural enforcement, which were exacerbated by staff turnover and resource constraints. Effect: Information security management may not be optimized and responses delayed without the written plan. Repeat Finding: Yes, 2023-002 Recommendation: We recommend the College ensure its written information security program addresses the required minimum elements as outlined in 16 CFR 314.4. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.007, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A221791, P007A231791, P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Public Law 106-102) requires financial institutions to explain their information-sharing practices to their customers and to safeguard sensitive data. (16 CFR 314) The Federal Trade Commission considers Title IV-eligible institutions that participate in Title IV Educational Assistance Programs as financial institutions and subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (16 CFR 313.3(k)(2)(vi). Institutions are required to develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive information security program that is written in one or more readily accessible parts. The regulations require the written information security program to include nine elements for institutions with 5,000 or more customers, (16 CFR 314.3(a)). The elements that an institution must address in its written information security program are at 16 CFR 314.4. Condition: Certain elements of the Colleges information security program were not meeting GLBA requirements. Questioned costs: None Context: The Colleges written information security program did not cover the requirement to provide for the design and implementation of safeguards to control the risks the institution identifies through its risk assessment (16 CFR 314.4(c)). At a minimum, the institutions written information security program must address the implementation of the minimum safeguards identified in 16 CFR 314.4(c)(1) through (8). Cause: The gaps in the Colleges information security program, during the specified audit period, stemmed from prior deficiencies in documentation and procedural enforcement, which were exacerbated by staff turnover and resource constraints. Effect: Information security management may not be optimized and responses delayed without the written plan. Repeat Finding: Yes, 2023-002 Recommendation: We recommend the College ensure its written information security program addresses the required minimum elements as outlined in 16 CFR 314.4. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 84.063 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: P063P221568, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - Per 34 CFR 690.83(a)(2), an institution must submit Pell grant payment data to the Department of Education that reflects information reported at the institution. Condition: The amount of Pell grant paid to the student per the institutions records as of a certain date did not match the payment amounted reported in COD as of that same date. The difference was reported to COD as of a later date. Questioned costs: None Context: This condition occurred for one out of 16 students tested. Cause: The transmittal report was not reviewed closely enough to find that Pell Grant for one student had not fully transmitted. Effect: Accurate information is not provided to the Department of Education, as required. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the College evaluate its procedures and policies around reporting Pell disbursements to COD to ensure that student information is reported accurately and timely. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - Per 34 CFR 668.54(a)(1), an institution must verify information required by the Department of Education for applicants selected for verification by the Department of Education. Condition: Verification procedures were not completed for an applicant who was selected for verification by the Department of Education and who received Title IV aid. Questioned costs: $11,766 Context: This condition occurred for 1 out of 40 students selected for testing. Cause: A previous staff member indicated that verification had been completed by changing the status in Ellucian Colleague to complete. Therefore, it was not identified in reports that are reviewed for incomplete files. Effect: The student is awarded aid who is otherwise ineligible until verification procedures are completed. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: The College should review the procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure all necessary support and documentation is obtained and retained in the student files. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - Per 34 CFR 668.54(a)(1), an institution must verify information required by the Department of Education for applicants selected for verification by the Department of Education. Condition: Verification procedures were not completed for an applicant who was selected for verification by the Department of Education and who received Title IV aid. Questioned costs: $11,766 Context: This condition occurred for 1 out of 40 students selected for testing. Cause: A previous staff member indicated that verification had been completed by changing the status in Ellucian Colleague to complete. Therefore, it was not identified in reports that are reviewed for incomplete files. Effect: The student is awarded aid who is otherwise ineligible until verification procedures are completed. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: The College should review the procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure all necessary support and documentation is obtained and retained in the student files. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.063, 84.268, 84.033 Federal Award Identification Number: P007A241791, P033A221791, P063P221568, P033A231791, P063P231568, P063Q221568, P063Q231568, P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - Per 34 CFR 668.54(a)(1), an institution must verify information required by the Department of Education for applicants selected for verification by the Department of Education. Condition: Verification procedures were not completed for an applicant who was selected for verification by the Department of Education and who received Title IV aid. Questioned costs: $11,766 Context: This condition occurred for 1 out of 40 students selected for testing. Cause: A previous staff member indicated that verification had been completed by changing the status in Ellucian Colleague to complete. Therefore, it was not identified in reports that are reviewed for incomplete files. Effect: The student is awarded aid who is otherwise ineligible until verification procedures are completed. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: The College should review the procedures surrounding the verification process to ensure all necessary support and documentation is obtained and retained in the student files. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal program title: Student Financial Aid Cluster ALN Number: 84.268 Federal Award Identification Number: P268K231568, P268K241568 Award Period: July 1, 2023 June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Internal Control - Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non- Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance - The Code of Federal Regulations, 34 CFR 668.164(h) requires that credit balances on a student's ledger account derived from title IV funds must be returned to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no later than 14 days after the credit balance occurred. Condition: A credit balance was paid after 15 days, which exceeds the 14-day requirement to return the credit balance to the student. Questioned costs: None Context: This condition occurred for 1 out of 2 credit balances selected for testing. Cause: The voucher was inadvertently missed in our accounts payable process. As soon as the error was discovered, payment was remitted. We have implemented processes going forward to verify that all Parent Plus loans are paid out within 14 days. Effect: The College did not refund the student within 14 days for credit balances that arose from federal funds as required by regulations. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the College review and revise its policies for identifying and paying credit balances to ensure that it is paid to the student or parent as soon as possible, but no more than 14 days after the occurrence. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Program: AL 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families; AL 93.566 – Refugee and Entrant Assistance; AL 93.568 – Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP); AL 93.575 – Child Care and Development Block Grant; AL 93.658 – Foster Care Title IV-E; AL 93.659 – Adoption Assistance; AL 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant; AL 93.778 – Medical Assistance Program; AL 10.561 – State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Grant Number & Year: 2101NETANF, FFY 2021; 2301NERCMA, FFY 2023; 2401NERCMA, FFY 2024; 2301NELIEA, FFY 2023; 2301NECCDD, FFY 2023; 2301NEFOST, FFY 2023; 2401NEFOST, FFY 2024; 2401NEADPT, FFY 2024; 2301NESOSR, FFY 2023; 2401NESOSR, FFY 2024; 2405NE5ADM, FFY 2024; 202323S251443, FFY 2023 Federal Grantor Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture Criteria: 45 CFR § 75.405(a) (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.405 (January 1, 2024) state, in part, the following: A cost is allocable to a particular Federal award or other cost objective if the goods or services involved are chargeable or assignable to that Federal award or cost objective in accordance with relative benefits received. 45 CFR § 75.403 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.403 (January 1, 2024) provide the following, in relevant part: Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. * * * * (g) Be adequately documented. See also §§ 75.300 through 75.309. Per 45 CFR § 75.303 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.303 (January 1, 2024): 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. Title 45 CFR § 75.302 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.302 (January 1, 2024) require financial management systems of the State sufficient to permit preparation of required reports and permit the tracing of funds to expenditures adequate to establish the use of these funds were in accordance with applicable regulations. Title 471 NAC 25, Attachment A, Claiming Issues, C. Offset of Revenues (eff. 10/4/2020), states, in part: • All applicable credits must be offset against claims for Medicaid funds. Applicable credits refer to those receipts or reduction of expenditure type transactions that offset or reduce expense items allocable to federal awards as direct or indirect costs; • A program may not claim any federal match for administrative activities if its total cost has already been paid by the revenue sources above. A government program may not be reimbursed in excess of its actual costs, i.e., make a profit. • The administrative costs incurred by DHHS to administer the School Based Admin program are: salaries, benefits, operating costs, and allocated costs (per the Nebraska Cost Allocation Plan). These costs are reported on the CMS-64.10 Base Line 29. • DHHS will refund 50% of that fee to CMS and will be reported on form CMS 64-10 Base, Line 19. • DHHS will subtract the amount received for the 3% fee from the total paid to the schools as a cost allocation adjustment and report the net amount CMS 64.10 Base form, Line 19. This will occur each quarter as part of the normal cost allocation adjustment process prior to running the final cost allocation module (distribution) in Enterprise One (NIS). Similar wording is found in the Medicaid School-Based Administrative Claiming Guide provided by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (May 2003), Section V (“Claiming Issues”), C. (“Offset Revenues”): Certain revenues must offset allocation costs in order to reduce the total amount of costs in which the federal government will participate. To the extent the funding sources have paid or would pay for the costs at issue, federal Medicaid funding is not available and the costs must be removed from total costs . . . . The following include some of the revenue offset categories which must be applied in developing the net costs: * * * * • All applicable credits must be offset against claims for Medicaid funds. Applicable credits refer to those receipts or reduction of expenditure type transactions that offset or reduce expense items allocable to federal awards as direct or indirect costs. • A program may not claim any federal match for administrative activities if its total cost has already been paid by the revenue sources above. A government program may not be reimbursed in excess of its actual costs, i.e., make a profit. EnterpriseOne is the official accounting system for the State of Nebraska, and all expenditures are generated from it. Good internal control requires procedures to ensure that amounts charged to Federal funds are proper. According to 45 CFR § 75.511(a) (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.511(a) (January 1, 2024), “The auditee is responsible for follow-up and corrective action on all audit findings. As part of this responsibility, the auditee must prepare a summary schedule of prior audit findings.” Per 45 CFR § 75.511(b) and 2 CFR § 200.511(b), “The summary schedule of prior audit findings must report the status of all audit findings included in the prior audit’s schedule of findings and questioned costs.” 45 CFR § 75.511(b)(1) and 2 CFR § 200.511(b)(1), adds, “When audit findings were fully corrected, the summary schedule need only list the audit findings and state that corrective action was taken.” Finally, 45 CFR § 75.511(b)(2) and 2 CFR § 200.511(b)(2), provide, “When audit findings were not corrected or were only partially corrected, the summary schedule must describe the reasons for the finding’s recurrence and planned corrective action, and any partial corrective action taken.” Condition: Procedures to ensure journal entries and adjustments to the Public Assistance Cost Allocation Plan (PACAP) were not adequate, resulting in multiple Federal programs being overcharged. A similar finding was noted in the prior audit. The Summary Schedule of Prior Audit Findings lists the status as completed. Repeat Finding: 2023-029 Questioned Costs: $1,405,085 known See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Statistical Sample: No Context: We selected 10 journal entries related to the PACAP. We noted the following: • One journal entry to reconcile Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) expenditures to the PACAP did not properly account for $54,344 paid to Equifax Workforce Solutions for employment verification and credit reporting services utilized by the SNAP. As a result, Federal funds were overcharged by $27,172 and are considered questioned costs. • One journal entry moved $2,900,000 in expenses from cost center 25C20990 to cost center 25C21960 and 25C23001. Cost center 25C20990 is allocated to numerous Federal and State programs using program recipient counts to split up the costs. Meanwhile, cost center 25C23001 allocates 50% of the costs directly to Medicaid, and cost center 25C21960 is allocated to Economic Assistance programs using random moment time study (RMTS) results. Moving expenses between these cost centers caused amounts considered unallowable, or unsubstantiated, to be charged to Federal programs. As a result, the following programs were overcharged: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. We also selected five adjustments made to the PACAP and noted the following: • One adjustment was related to the Medicaid School-based Administration program. The Agency uses a contractor to determine the allowable Medicaid activities by school district. The Agency then makes payment to the schools for the Federal share of expenses. Schools are responsible for providing matching funds. However, the Agency does not make payment for the entire Federal share due. The Agency subtracts a 3% fee for administration. The Agency then essentially pays itself through a reconciliation journal entry. Below is the adjustment performed for the quarter ended December 31, 2023: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Administrative costs of the Agency are distributed through the PACAP to benefitting programs, and would include charges to Medicaid; therefore, the Federal portion of the 3% administration fee should be credited back to Medicaid; but was not. Therefore, we question the Federal share of $20,407 for the quarter tested. • One adjustment was done to fix allocation errors made on the PACAP for the quarter ended September 30, 2023. There are 42 cost centers on the PACAP that are allocated each quarter based on various statistics. Of these 42 cost centers, 32 were allocated using incorrect statistics. When the Agency tried to correct these errors, multiple calculation errors were made, resulting in numerous undercharges and overcharges. As a result, the following programs were overcharged: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Cause: Inadequate procedures to ensure that adjustments to the PACAP are proper and that journal entries are appropriate for each program. Effect: Unallowable expenditures were charged to Federal funds and an increased risk for errors, fraud, and noncompliance with Federal regulations. Recommendation: We recommend the Agency strengthen procedures to ensure adjusting entries are complete and accurate. We further recommend the Agency strengthen procedures to ensure compliance with Federal regulations. Management Response: Journal Entry out of 25C20990: Agency agrees. The repeat finding relating to the $2.9m Journal Entry is a repeat due to the JE having occurred QE 9/30/23 which is prior to the FY23 Audit Exit being distributed and prior to the corrective action plan having been completed. Corrective Action for this item was completed as part of the FY23 Corrective Action Plan in April 2024. It should be noted that the impact of this, along with most Cost Allocation impacts, also includes undercharges to Federal Grants. Net overcharge to Federal grants is approximately $300,000. Allocation Errors in the PACAP: Agency agrees. There was a systemic issue with allocations in the 9/30/23 quarter caused by the vendor that used to process the Agency’s cost allocation plan. This was the last quarter that the vendor performed services for the Agency. DHHS was in tandem setting up the new cost allocation system, which caused more constraints on staff, resulting in inadequate review of the vendor’s work. It is noted that Federal undercharges also occurred, netting to an approximately $85,000 undercharge to Federal Grants. Since the new vendor was exclusively implemented, staff no longer have time constraints which affect their ability to perform adequate vendor reviews. School-Based Admin: Agency disagrees that the Administrative Fee is being handled incorrectly, as the current process has been vetted and approved through CMS. The current process has been in effect since 2017 and has not been flagged by CMS during that time. APA Response: While the APA acknowledges that some undercharges may have occurred, it would not be appropriate to net undercharges of one program with overcharges to another program. The Agency was unable to provide any documentation to support the Federal grantor approved the handling of the administrative fee.
Program: AL 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families; AL 93.563 – Child Support Services; AL 93.566 – Refugee and Entrant Assistance; AL 93.568 – Low Income Home Energy Assistance (LIHEAP); AL 93.575 – Child Care and Development Block Grant; AL 93.658 – Foster Care Title IV-E; AL 93.659 – Adoption Assistance; AL 93.667 – Social Services Block Grant; AL 93.767 – Children’s Health Insurance Program; AL 93.778 – Medical Assistance Program; AL 10.561 – State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Grant Number & Year: 2101NETANF, FFY 2021; 2401NESCSS, FFY 2024; 2401NERCMA, FFY 2024; 2401NELIEA, FFY 2024; 2401NECCDD, FFY 2024; 2401NEFOST, FFY 2024; 2401NEADPT, FFY 2024; 2401NESOSR, FFY 2024; 2305NE3002, FFY 2023; 2405NE5ADM, FFY 2024; 202424S251443, FFY 2024 Federal Grantor Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture Criteria: 45 CFR § 75.303 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.303 (January 1, 2024) state, in relevant part, the following: 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. 45 CFR § 75.403 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.403 (January 1, 2024) require costs to be necessary, reasonable, and adequately documented. 45 CFR § 75.302 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.302 (January 1, 2024) require financial management systems of the State sufficient to permit both preparation of required reports and tracing of funds to expenditures adequate to establish that the use of those funds was in accordance with applicable regulations. 45 CFR § 75.405(a) (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.405(a) (January 1, 2024) state, in part, the following: A cost is allocable to a particular Federal award or other cost objective if the goods or services involved are chargeable or assignable to that Federal award or cost objective in accordance with relative benefits received. 45 CFR § 75.430(i) (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.430(i) (January 1, 2024) state, in relevant part, the following: (5) For states, local governments and Indian tribes, substitute processes or systems for allocating salaries and wages to Federal awards may be used in place of or in addition to the records described in paragraph (i)(1) of this section if approved by the cognizant agency for indirect cost. Such systems may include, but are not limited to, random moment sampling, “rolling” time studies, case counts, or other quantifiable measures of work performed. (i) Substitute systems which use sampling methods (primarily for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Medicaid, and other public assistance programs) must meet acceptable statistical sampling standards including: (A) The sampling universe must include all of the employees whose salaries and wages are to be allocated based on sample results except as provided in paragraph (i)(5)(iii) of this section; (B) The entire time period involved must be covered by the sample; and (C) The results must be statistically valid and applied to the period being sampled. Per the Public Assistance Cost Allocation Plan (PACAP), “Time and Effort Reporting means employee reporting of the amount of time they expend on specific programs and activities. Reporting is accomplished by coding time to specific programs or activities on the employee’s time card.” Per the State of Nebraska’s Work Instruction Document for Cost Allocation, Quarterly Statistics Gathering and Compilation, formatting the Time and Pay report used for labor hour allocations, includes, “Sort through the ‘Hours’ column removing any negative and 0 hours.” Good internal control requires procedures to ensure that amounts charged to Federal programs are proper. Condition: The Agency did not properly charge Federal programs for 21 of 28 allocations tested. A similar finding has been noted since 2013. Repeat Finding: 2023-030 Questioned Costs: $3,403,410 known See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Statistical Sample: No Context: We tested 28 PACAP allocations. We noted errors for 21 of 28 allocations tested, resulting in various programs undercharged or overcharged. We consider the overcharges to be questioned costs. We noted the following: Time and Effort Report Allocations Three of three cost allocations tested based on Time and Effort reporting were incorrect, resulting in questioned costs of $904,248. • We tested the allocation of cost center 25C21940 Field Office Resource Development for the quarter ended December 31, 2023, which allocated $1,266,933 of administrative costs, based on Time & Effort reports. The statistics used to calculate this allocation were not calculated correctly by the Agency. Negative hours should have been removed, and the percentage of costs split between Medicaid and CHIP was incorrect. Additionally, the payroll costs for 74 employees were charged to the cost center; however, three of the employees’ payroll costs should not have been charged to the cost center. The three employees included two Child and Family Services Specialist Supervisors (CFSSS) and a Program Specialist. The two CFSSS employees were, at one time, Resource Developers; however, when their roles changed, their pay source was not updated. The Program Specialist has been a Program Specialist since he was hired in April 2022. Two of the employees were noted as incorrect in the prior audit, but the Agency failed to update the system. As a result of these employees being charged to the Resource Development cost center instead of their appropriate cost centers, numerous programs were not charged correctly. Because of the error in allocation and the error in employee time coding, we questioned $27,988 costs for Foster Care. • We tested the allocation of cost center 25C20680 LS [Legal and Regulatory Services] General Teams for the quarter ended June 30, 2024, which allocated $1,275,286 of administrative costs, based on Time & Effort reports. Because of the issues detailed below, we question all Federal share of costs for cost center 25C20680 and 25C20710 for the quarter, totaling $608,069. o The cost center was not allocated using the Federally approved Time and Effort method. The Agency provided, “Unfortunately, we didn't get a chance to update our PCAP to reflect the change on this allocation method. For this group, we have change [sic] the method from Time and Effort to Time Study.” o The Agency’s time study consisted of hours worked for 11 of the 52 employees coded to the cost center. The hours used were from three weeks (July 24, 2023, to August 11, 2023). This does not appear adequate, as only 11 employees for three weeks were included, and this method was not approved by the Federal grantor. A similar time study was used for cost center 25C20710 (LS Hearing Team) to allocate $263,134. o The allocation statistics the Agency calculated for cost center 25C20680 were used on cost center 25C20710, and the allocation statistics calculated for cost center 25C20710 were used on cost center 25C20680, causing major variances in how the costs were allocated. o A business unit included in cost center 25C20680 should have been coded to cost center 25C20710. o Two employees paid from cost center 25C20680 (an Internal Auditor and Office Technician) were not involved in the LS General Teams and should not have been paid from the cost center. • We tested the allocation of cost center 25C20945 IST Fiscal Projects Administration for the quarter ended December 31, 2023, which was to allocate $524,480 of administrative costs, based on “a statistical analysis activity benefiting specific programs that IST Finance is responsible for processing.” The PACAP contradicts itself, later listing the allocation method of this cost center as a “Time and Effort” statistic. During testing, we noted the cost center was using a statistic prepared by “analysis” prior to December 31, 2020, and the same numbers have been used since then. Because the statistic used is clearly outdated, we question the Federal share of the entire allocation, totaling $268,191. Questioned costs by Program for Time and Effort Allocations are as follows: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. RMTS Allocations For five of five allocations tested based on Random Moment Time Study (RMTS) observations, the RMTS Summary report was not allocated correctly to the various State and Federal programs, resulting in $104,074 in Federal questioned costs. The following RMTS allocations were tested: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. • RMTS observations were not properly determined. We reviewed two quarters to determine if observations were correctly counted. The December quarter allocation included 3,613 activity observations, and the June quarter included 4,382 observations. We noted the following: o 23 RMTS observations were “reassigned” and coded to a response that was different from the original response. The original observation would have been charged to State funding; however, reassigning resulted in the observations being allocated to various Federal programs. o Five observations were not included on the quarterly reports because these reports were created before all observations for the quarter were submitted. o Two observations were validated by a supervisor; however, they were reassigned to a different activity. The Agency was unable to provide an explanation for why these observations were reassigned after being validated. o One observation was not included on the quarterly report. The Agency was unable to identify which response was not included or why it was not included. • The Agency did not properly allocate observations in accordance with the PACAP for 2 of the 83 activities in the quarter ended December 31, 2023, and 3 of the 76 activities in the quarter ended June 30, 2024: o One RMTS observation for the December quarter and 13 June quarter observations were to SNAP and AABD, which, per the PACAP, should be coded half to SNAP and half to State. The Agency incorrectly coded one-third to SNAP, one-third to State, and one-third to SSBG. o One June quarter observation was for TANF, Employment First, and SNAP. As this is coded to three activities, it should be split three ways, but the Agency allocated half to TANF and half to SNAP. o Per the PACAP, Child Protection Initial Assessment is allocated to Foster Care, Guardianship, and Adoption. For both quarters tested, there was an observation not split between all applicable programs. • The P&S IV-E and Non-IV-E allocation for the quarter ending December 31, 2023, included expenses from two business units, totaling $2,466,426, that should have been included in the cost center for Case Management Training. As a result, Foster Care was undercharged, and Adoption and Guardianship were overcharged. Questioned costs by Program for RMTS Allocations are as follows: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Labor Hours Statistics The PACAP includes 38 cost centers allocated to State and Federal programs through labor hours. Over $65 million in costs were allocated by labor hours during the 2024 State fiscal year. We tested six of these allocations, and all six allocations had errors. Below is a summary of allocations tested: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. We noted the following issues: • The PACAP defines various labor hour (LH) statistics to be used to allocate costs. Labor hour statistics used were incorrect. o LH1 statistics should include all Agency hours worked (i.e., does not include paid leave) and exclude two-thirds of the labor hours from 24-hour facilities. The Agency did not remove negative hours and did not exclude two-thirds of the hours in the 24-hour facilities. LH1 also excluded hours from numerous cost centers that should have been included. o The LH2 statistic (LH1 hours excluding all hours worked in field offices and 24-hour facilities) incorrectly included hours from five field office cost centers, totaling 627,646 hours. Additionally, hours from two cost centers, totaling 119 hours, were improperly excluded. o The LH4 statistic (which is based on hours paid, including leave hours) did not remove negative hours and did not include leave pay type codes (such as civil leave, injury leave, and holiday leave). In addition, for one quarter tested, the Agency incorrectly applied the Medicaid match rate to the Medicaid hours, thus undercharging Medicaid and overcharging multiple Federal programs. o One cost center tested should have included labor hours for the division. The total hours used should have been 857,278, but the Agency failed to include three cost centers, totaling 10,065 hours. Additionally, one cost center with 1,036 hours was included twice. • The Agency implemented new allocation software starting with the quarter ended December 31, 2023. Two of six allocations tested were not set up properly. o Human Resource Development costs should have been allocated to 169 benefiting cost centers but were only allocated to four cost centers. o LH4 statistics were not applied properly in the cost allocation software, resulting in three unrelated cost centers being overcharged, while not charging any costs to six of the cost centers that should have been included. The errors noted above resulted in numerous misallocations, with many programs having undercharges and/or overcharges. Due to the intricacies of the PACAP allocations, we were unable to determine total questioned costs. However, we were able to identify the following overcharges that we consider to be questioned costs. See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Direct Allocations For 1 of 10 direct allocations tested, the amount directly allocated to a final cost center or method of allocation was incorrect, based on the Federally approved Public Assistance Cost Allocation Plan (PACAP). We tested the allocation of cost center 25C21795 (Protection and Safety New Worker training) for the quarter ending December 31, 2023, in the amount of $484,991, which is directly (i.e., 100%) allocated to Foster Care. We noted four business units mapped to the wrong cost center, which resulted in $26,802 questioned costs for Adoption Assistance. Recipient Counts The PACAP includes five cost centers allocated to State and Federal programs based on recipient counts per NFOCUS and MMIS reports. NFOCUS and MMIS are applications used to manage various programs such as SNAP, Child Care, TANF, and Medicaid. Over $28 million in costs were allocated using these counts during the State fiscal year 2024. We tested the allocations for three quarters and noted all three were incorrect because the recipient counts used in the allocations did not agree to support. We noted the following: • The Agency did not maintain the detail for the recipients of Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The numbers used in the allocations for Medicaid and CHIP were maintained on a summary spreadsheet. The counts used for all three allocations tested, pulled from the summary spreadsheet, did not include Medicaid Expansion recipients in the count of Medicaid recipients, thus undercharging Medicaid for all three quarters tested and overcharging all other programs included in the allocation. Furthermore, when we requested detailed reports to support the numbers on the summary spreadsheet, the Agency was unable to provide detailed reports at the time of the allocation. Instead, the reports showed recipients for Medicaid and CHIP for December 2023, March 2024, and June 2024, as of September 2024. The detailed report did not agree to the summary spreadsheets. • One cost center for the Expansion Call Center used outdated counts, dating back to at least the quarter ending December 31, 2020. • Multiple other recipient counts were off due to clerical errors: o The counts for TANF Solely State Funded Plan were wrong for each quarter tested. The December, March, and June quarter counts included 0, 1,623, and 2,072 recipients when the supported number was 1,623, 1,832, and 1,985, respectively. o The March quarter counts for SNAP included 2,000 fewer recipients than what was supported. o The March quarter counts included an additional 26 recipients in AABD – State Supplement. o The June quarter counts included an additional 19 recipients for “DD SERVICE COORDINATION – State Only” and 1 additional recipient for Child Welfare that were unsupported. We recalculated each quarter’s allocation, based on the supported recipient counts available, and have the following questioned costs: See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Other We tested the allocation of cost center 25C23823 iServe IAPD H971 – Shared, which allocated $13,523,554 in project costs. The iServe Nebraska Portal, which is an application for Nebraskans to apply for benefits from Federal and State programs, began implementation in July 2021, and went live in October 2023, replacing ACCESSNebraska. For the implementation phase of the project, the Agency allocated costs to only the following four programs: LIHEAP, TANF, SNAP, and Medicaid. However, there are other Federal and State programs that will utilize the iServe application. We reviewed documentation obtained in the prior year, including correspondence from the Agency’s Federal contacts, which stated, “As long as SNAP, Medicaid, LIHEAP, and TANF are the only benefiting programs for the State’s iServe Nebraska Portal project, the State may just include these four programs in the development of its cost allocation plan. If/when the State decides to add other Federal programs that will benefit from enhancements to the portal, it will need to revisit and adjust its cost allocation plan.” In addition to SNAP, Medicaid, LIHEAP, and TANF, other programs went live during the fiscal year, including Child Care, SSBG, Refugee Assistance, and various State programs. We noted the following: • The SSBG program began implementation October 1, 2023, and went live April 1, 2024, but no costs were allocated to the program. • The Refugee Assistance program began implementation on March 1, 2024, but no costs were allocated to the program. • The allocation method had been updated by the Federal grantor as of October 1, 2023; however, the Budget Team was unaware of this update until our inquiry. The allocation now includes Child Care and some State-funded programs, such as Assistance to the Aged, Blind, or Disabled Program and State Disability Program. The new allocation was approved for the quarter ended December 31, 2023, and the Agency made adjustments to allocate those costs. However, the implementation date began in 2021 and, as noted in the prior audit, the Agency did not allocate any implementation costs to these programs. This does not agree with “APPENDIX D – Benefit Programs Associated With iServe Portal and iServe IBEEM Projects,” which includes more benefitting programs than the allocation method used. We were unable to determine questioned costs for the cost center. The total costs allocated from the iServe project for fiscal year 2024 are noted below. See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Cause: Inadequate procedures to ensure that allocations were adequately supported and calculated correctly. Effect: Without adequate documentation to support the allocation of costs, there is increased risk of programs not being charged the proper amounts. Recommendation: We recommend the Agency improve procedures to ensure that employee pay is recorded correctly in E1; system reports are set up correctly, and formatting instructions are followed; and costs are properly allocated and charged, based on supporting documentation. Management Response: Time and Effort: Agency partially agrees. A retroactive PACAP amendment has been submitted for the Legal cost center allocation method changes (from Time and Effort to Time Study). Note the change in allocation method is not materially different in that both methods are calculating hours spent in support of programs/activities. The time study consists of the hours of the Attorneys in each cost center (the referenced 11 staff). The additional staff that were not part of the time study are the support staff (Paralegals and admins) to the Attorneys, whose hours would be indicative of the hours spent on projects and activities by the Attorneys. The approved PACAP had already stated that the Time and Effort reporting was from the Attorneys (for Legal Hearings cost center, they are referred to as “Hearing Officers”). Federal undercharges did occur and incorporating them into the finding changes it from an overcharge of $608,000 to a net Federal overcharge of $41,000. Regarding the IST Fiscal Projects Admin cost center, Agency agrees that method was outdated and agrees to the questioned cost. RMTS Allocations: Agency agrees. It should be noted that the Agency reassigned the cases due to having the knowledge that staff incorrectly selected the state-only response “Non-DHHS Activities”, which is used for staff members who are temporarily reassigned off their current caseworker role and are performing activity unrelated to any of the work covered under the RMTS system vs. the intended “General Administration” activity. Labor Hours Statistics: Agency Agrees. Significant Federal undercharges also occurred and will be netted with the Federal overcharges. Recipient Counts: Agency Agrees. Significant Federal undercharges also occurred and will be netted with the Federal overcharges. Other: Agency will continue to update the allocation of iServe in accordance with the most recent CMS approved Advanced Planning Documents. APA Response: While the APA acknowledges that some undercharges may have occurred, it would not be appropriate to net undercharges of one program with overcharges to another program.
Program: AL 93.778 - Medical Assistance Program; AL 93.959 - Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse; AL 93.767 - Children’s Health Insurance Program; AL 93.575 – Child Care and Development Block Grant; AL 10.561 – State Administrative Matching Grants for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Grant Number & Year: 2405NE5ADM, FFY 2024; 2305NE5ADM, FFY 2023; 23B1NESAPT, FFY 2023; 20242S251443, FFY 2024; 2301NECCDD; FFY 2023; 52305NE3002; FFY 2023 Federal Grantor Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture Criteria: 45 CFR § 75.405(a) (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.405 (January 1, 2024) state, in part, the following: A cost is allocable to a particular Federal award or other cost objective if the goods or services involved are chargeable or assignable to that Federal award or cost objective in accordance with relative benefits received. 45 CFR § 75.403 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.403 (January 1, 2024) provide the following, in relevant part: Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. * * * * (g) Be adequately documented. See also §§ 75.300 through 75.309. Per 45 CFR § 75.303 (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.303 (January 1, 2024): 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. 45 CFR § 75.430(i) (October 1, 2023) and 2 CFR § 200.430(i) (January 1, 2024) require payroll expenses charged to Federal awards to be based on official records that accurately reflect the work performed. Good internal control and sound accounting practices require policies and procedures to ensure that all payroll costs are properly recorded within the State accounting system and allocated to the proper funding source for activities performed. Condition: The Agency did not have adequate procedures to ensure payroll charges were proper. A similar finding was noted in the prior audit. We also noted no attempt was made to recover apparently fraudulent payroll expenses. Repeat Finding: 2023-031 Questioned Costs: $11,866 known See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Statistical Sample: No Context: We tested 25 employee paychecks paid with Federal funds. Five of the 25 employees tested had payroll charged to the Substance Abuse and Prevention Block Grant (SAPTBG). We tested the May 1, 2024, paycheck for an Administrator. Payroll expenses were allocated 100% to the SAPTBG. However, the Agency could not provide documentation to show that 100% of the Administrator’s time was working on projects related to the SAPTBG. Based on some of the job duties of the employee, it appeared some time could have been coded to the Community Mental Health Services grant. All payroll for the period was questioned. Federal SAPTBG payroll charges tested totaled $6,908, and we noted $2,963 in sampled questioned costs. Federal payroll charges for SAPTBG totaled $473,739. We tested the January 24, 2024, paycheck for an IT Business Systems Analyst and noted the initial payroll expenses were split among several Economic and Assistance programs based on a time study that was effective during fiscal year 2022. Per the Fiscal Project Analyst, an updated study had not been done and should be done annually. The payroll expenses charged to the cost center were then allocated based on a time and effort study that had not been updated since at least September 2020. Payroll expenses charged to the Federal programs were questioned, and potential dollars at risk totaled over $5,000,000. See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Additionally, we reviewed the disciplinary actions against employees during the fiscal year. One employee tested was terminated on September 26, 2023, for falsifying the number of overtime hours worked. While working remotely on Saturday and Sundays, the employee would work only 30-60 minutes; however, he would then claim 10 hours of overtime for both of those days. The Agency reviewed the employee’s overtime hours reported to the supervisor, the KRONOS timecards, and time stamps of the work completed outside the employee’s scheduled shifts for the timeframe of May 7, 2023, through August 11, 2023. The employee reported and was paid for 469.5 overtime hours; however, the Agency determined the employee worked only 34.5 hours of overtime, a difference of 435 hours. The employee was paid $17,052 for overtime hours that were never worked in just a three-month timeframe. During fiscal year 2024, the Medicaid grant was overcharged $7,780 in apparently fraudulent payroll expenses for this employee. The employee was terminated, but no further action was taken against him. Moreover, no attempt was made to recover the amounts paid to the employee for the falsification of hours worked. Cause: Inadequate policies and procedures for review and documentation of payroll expenses. Effect: Without adequate documentation to support the allocation of costs, there is an increased risk of programs not being charged the proper amounts. Recommendation: We recommend the Agency improve procedures to ensure that employee pay is recorded correctly in the State accounting system, and those costs are properly allocated and charged. Management Response: Agency agrees.