(2024-070) Title: Internal control over Medicaid drug rebates needs improvement Prior Year Findings: See schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table State Department: Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Allowable costs/cost principles Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; Section 1927 of the Social Security Act (42 USC 1396r-8) The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Section 1927 of the Social Security Act requires manufacturers that wish to have their outpatient drugs covered by Medicaid to enter into an agreement with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) under which the manufacturers agree to pay rebates for drugs dispensed and paid for by the State Medicaid agencies under the State plan. Drug rebates are shared between the State and Federal government. Condition: Drug manufacturers are required to submit a list of all covered outpatient drugs, along with each drug’s average manufacturer price and “best price” to CMS. Utilizing this information, CMS calculates a unit rebate amount (URA) for each covered outpatient drug and provides the amounts to the State on a quarterly basis. The Department is required to maintain drug utilization data that identifies, by National Drug Code (NDC), the number of units of each covered outpatient drug for which the Department has paid pharmacy providers. The utilization data is provided to CMS and the manufacturers. The number of dispensed units is applied to the URA to determine the rebate amount due from each manufacturer. The State contracts with a vendor to calculate the drug rebate amounts and invoice manufacturers for drug rebates. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) identified that the Department does not have procedures in place to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the drug rebate amounts invoiced by the vendor. Though the Department validates that only rebatable drugs are invoiced and all rebatable drugs are included for invoicing, this review is performed after the invoicing cycle. In addition, the Department does not compare drug utilization data to the number of dispensed units invoiced, or corroborate that the correct URA is applied to each NDC to ensure that the vendor has calculated the rebate correctly. Context: In fiscal year 2024, the State invoiced approximately $300 million for rebatable drugs and received approximately $216 million in rebates. Of the $216 million in rebates, approximately $144 million was returned to the Federal government. Due to the amount of time rebate negotiations may take, discrepancies will exist between the invoiced total and the total amount of rebates received. Cause: • Lack of adequate procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Inaccurate or incomplete invoicing of drug rebates would result in overpayments or underpayments to the State and Federal government. • Noncompliance with Federal regulations Recommendation: We recommend that the Department implement procedures to confirm the drug rebate amounts calculated and invoiced by the vendor are accurate and complete, including: • validating that only rebatable drugs are invoiced and all rebatable drugs are included for invoicing; • comparing drug utilization data to the number of dispensed units invoiced; and • corroborating the correct URA is applied to each NDC. This will ensure that correct drug rebate amounts are returned to the State and Federal government. Corrective Action Plan: See F-28 Management’s Response: The Department disagrees with this finding. PRIMS (Pharmacy Rebate Information Management System), provided to the State of Maine by a third-party vendor, is a proven system in production in many locations and PRIMS has passed a wide variety of Federal and State audits. The drug rebate program is complex and there are numerous steps in the process which have already been demonstrated and/or provided to the Office of State Auditor. The controls described to the State Auditor previously (Pre-invoicing controls, pharmacy claims controls and medical claims controls) address all three of the Auditors’ Recommendations. Contact: Michelle Probert, Director, Office of MaineCare Services, DHHS, 207-287-2093 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the State to establish and maintain effective internal controls. The Department’s Management Response stating that the vendor’s drug rebate information system “is a proven system in production in many locations” that “has passed a wide variety of Federal and State audits” only further validates that the Department is fully relying on the vendor to ensure the accuracy and completeness of drug rebate invoices. As stated in Management’s Response “the drug rebate program is complex” which further emphasizes the need for proper oversight. Existing reliance on the vendor demonstrates that the Department does not have adequate oversight procedures in place. In addition, the Department asserts controls are in place to address OSA’s Recommendation; however, the controls referenced in Management’s Response do not adequately address the risk associated with the issues noted in the Condition. The pre-invoicing controls referenced by the Department are performed at a summary level and the pharmacy and medical claims controls are not directly tied to the drug rebate invoicing process. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 24-1106-07)
(2024-070) Title: Internal control over Medicaid drug rebates needs improvement Prior Year Findings: See schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table State Department: Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Allowable costs/cost principles Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; Section 1927 of the Social Security Act (42 USC 1396r-8) The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Section 1927 of the Social Security Act requires manufacturers that wish to have their outpatient drugs covered by Medicaid to enter into an agreement with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) under which the manufacturers agree to pay rebates for drugs dispensed and paid for by the State Medicaid agencies under the State plan. Drug rebates are shared between the State and Federal government. Condition: Drug manufacturers are required to submit a list of all covered outpatient drugs, along with each drug’s average manufacturer price and “best price” to CMS. Utilizing this information, CMS calculates a unit rebate amount (URA) for each covered outpatient drug and provides the amounts to the State on a quarterly basis. The Department is required to maintain drug utilization data that identifies, by National Drug Code (NDC), the number of units of each covered outpatient drug for which the Department has paid pharmacy providers. The utilization data is provided to CMS and the manufacturers. The number of dispensed units is applied to the URA to determine the rebate amount due from each manufacturer. The State contracts with a vendor to calculate the drug rebate amounts and invoice manufacturers for drug rebates. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) identified that the Department does not have procedures in place to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the drug rebate amounts invoiced by the vendor. Though the Department validates that only rebatable drugs are invoiced and all rebatable drugs are included for invoicing, this review is performed after the invoicing cycle. In addition, the Department does not compare drug utilization data to the number of dispensed units invoiced, or corroborate that the correct URA is applied to each NDC to ensure that the vendor has calculated the rebate correctly. Context: In fiscal year 2024, the State invoiced approximately $300 million for rebatable drugs and received approximately $216 million in rebates. Of the $216 million in rebates, approximately $144 million was returned to the Federal government. Due to the amount of time rebate negotiations may take, discrepancies will exist between the invoiced total and the total amount of rebates received. Cause: • Lack of adequate procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Inaccurate or incomplete invoicing of drug rebates would result in overpayments or underpayments to the State and Federal government. • Noncompliance with Federal regulations Recommendation: We recommend that the Department implement procedures to confirm the drug rebate amounts calculated and invoiced by the vendor are accurate and complete, including: • validating that only rebatable drugs are invoiced and all rebatable drugs are included for invoicing; • comparing drug utilization data to the number of dispensed units invoiced; and • corroborating the correct URA is applied to each NDC. This will ensure that correct drug rebate amounts are returned to the State and Federal government. Corrective Action Plan: See F-28 Management’s Response: The Department disagrees with this finding. PRIMS (Pharmacy Rebate Information Management System), provided to the State of Maine by a third-party vendor, is a proven system in production in many locations and PRIMS has passed a wide variety of Federal and State audits. The drug rebate program is complex and there are numerous steps in the process which have already been demonstrated and/or provided to the Office of State Auditor. The controls described to the State Auditor previously (Pre-invoicing controls, pharmacy claims controls and medical claims controls) address all three of the Auditors’ Recommendations. Contact: Michelle Probert, Director, Office of MaineCare Services, DHHS, 207-287-2093 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the State to establish and maintain effective internal controls. The Department’s Management Response stating that the vendor’s drug rebate information system “is a proven system in production in many locations” that “has passed a wide variety of Federal and State audits” only further validates that the Department is fully relying on the vendor to ensure the accuracy and completeness of drug rebate invoices. As stated in Management’s Response “the drug rebate program is complex” which further emphasizes the need for proper oversight. Existing reliance on the vendor demonstrates that the Department does not have adequate oversight procedures in place. In addition, the Department asserts controls are in place to address OSA’s Recommendation; however, the controls referenced in Management’s Response do not adequately address the risk associated with the issues noted in the Condition. The pre-invoicing controls referenced by the Department are performed at a summary level and the pharmacy and medical claims controls are not directly tied to the drug rebate invoicing process. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 24-1106-07)
(2024-071) Title: Internal control over Medicaid paid medical claims needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Allowable costs/cost principles Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.403; MaineCare Benefits Manual, Chapter 101, Section 90 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. To be allowable under Federal awards, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be adequately documented. The MaineCare Benefits Manual states that the Medicaid program will reimburse at the lowest applicable rate for covered physician services. Condition: The Department’s Office of MaineCare Services (OMS) is billed by medical providers for services provided to Medicaid members. Provider reimbursement rates for certain medical services increased January 1, 2024; however, providers continued to bill OMS utilizing outdated rates until a retroactive adjustment was processed by OMS in March 2024 for certain medical services reimbursed in January and February. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 60 paid medical claims and identified one claim that was reimbursed at a higher than authorized rate. As a result, OMS overpaid the provider by $5. To determine the pervasiveness of the error, OSA reviewed all claims for the same medical service paid between January 1 and the March 2024 retroactive adjustment and found 510 claims that were never retroactively adjusted. A total of $3,300 was identified as overpaid to providers. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2024, $2.2 billion was paid to providers for medical claims. Cause: • Lack of supervisory oversight • Lack of adequate procedures to ensure all medical claims are paid correctly Effect: • Inaccurate paid claims resulted in overpayments and may also result in underpayments to providers. • Potential questioned costs and disallowances Recommendation: We recommend that the Department enhance oversight procedures to ensure that authorized provider reimbursement rates are utilized, and any retroactive adjustments are applied to all affected paid claims accurately and completely. This will ensure that Medicaid claims are not overpaid or underpaid to providers. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OMS has determined that there is an issue with the manual intervention taken by the third-party vendor to prepare this report. This caused some claims that required adjustment to be excluded from the report. Through discussion with the vendor, OMS has determined that the vendor does not have a standardized procedure to prepare this report for OMS. Maine will require the vendor to prepare a Desk Level Procedure (DLP) for the preparation of this report. This DLP will be reviewed by the State and the report will go through testing and validation, as necessary, before the report is used again. Contact: Michelle Probert, Director, Office of MaineCare Services, DHHS, 207-287-2093 (State Number: 24-1106-06)
(2024-071) Title: Internal control over Medicaid paid medical claims needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Allowable costs/cost principles Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.403; MaineCare Benefits Manual, Chapter 101, Section 90 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. To be allowable under Federal awards, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be adequately documented. The MaineCare Benefits Manual states that the Medicaid program will reimburse at the lowest applicable rate for covered physician services. Condition: The Department’s Office of MaineCare Services (OMS) is billed by medical providers for services provided to Medicaid members. Provider reimbursement rates for certain medical services increased January 1, 2024; however, providers continued to bill OMS utilizing outdated rates until a retroactive adjustment was processed by OMS in March 2024 for certain medical services reimbursed in January and February. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 60 paid medical claims and identified one claim that was reimbursed at a higher than authorized rate. As a result, OMS overpaid the provider by $5. To determine the pervasiveness of the error, OSA reviewed all claims for the same medical service paid between January 1 and the March 2024 retroactive adjustment and found 510 claims that were never retroactively adjusted. A total of $3,300 was identified as overpaid to providers. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2024, $2.2 billion was paid to providers for medical claims. Cause: • Lack of supervisory oversight • Lack of adequate procedures to ensure all medical claims are paid correctly Effect: • Inaccurate paid claims resulted in overpayments and may also result in underpayments to providers. • Potential questioned costs and disallowances Recommendation: We recommend that the Department enhance oversight procedures to ensure that authorized provider reimbursement rates are utilized, and any retroactive adjustments are applied to all affected paid claims accurately and completely. This will ensure that Medicaid claims are not overpaid or underpaid to providers. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OMS has determined that there is an issue with the manual intervention taken by the third-party vendor to prepare this report. This caused some claims that required adjustment to be excluded from the report. Through discussion with the vendor, OMS has determined that the vendor does not have a standardized procedure to prepare this report for OMS. Maine will require the vendor to prepare a Desk Level Procedure (DLP) for the preparation of this report. This DLP will be reviewed by the State and the report will go through testing and validation, as necessary, before the report is used again. Contact: Michelle Probert, Director, Office of MaineCare Services, DHHS, 207-287-2093 (State Number: 24-1106-06)
(2024-071) Title: Internal control over Medicaid paid medical claims needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Allowable costs/cost principles Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.403; MaineCare Benefits Manual, Chapter 101, Section 90 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. To be allowable under Federal awards, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be adequately documented. The MaineCare Benefits Manual states that the Medicaid program will reimburse at the lowest applicable rate for covered physician services. Condition: The Department’s Office of MaineCare Services (OMS) is billed by medical providers for services provided to Medicaid members. Provider reimbursement rates for certain medical services increased January 1, 2024; however, providers continued to bill OMS utilizing outdated rates until a retroactive adjustment was processed by OMS in March 2024 for certain medical services reimbursed in January and February. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 60 paid medical claims and identified one claim that was reimbursed at a higher than authorized rate. As a result, OMS overpaid the provider by $5. To determine the pervasiveness of the error, OSA reviewed all claims for the same medical service paid between January 1 and the March 2024 retroactive adjustment and found 510 claims that were never retroactively adjusted. A total of $3,300 was identified as overpaid to providers. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2024, $2.2 billion was paid to providers for medical claims. Cause: • Lack of supervisory oversight • Lack of adequate procedures to ensure all medical claims are paid correctly Effect: • Inaccurate paid claims resulted in overpayments and may also result in underpayments to providers. • Potential questioned costs and disallowances Recommendation: We recommend that the Department enhance oversight procedures to ensure that authorized provider reimbursement rates are utilized, and any retroactive adjustments are applied to all affected paid claims accurately and completely. This will ensure that Medicaid claims are not overpaid or underpaid to providers. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OMS has determined that there is an issue with the manual intervention taken by the third-party vendor to prepare this report. This caused some claims that required adjustment to be excluded from the report. Through discussion with the vendor, OMS has determined that the vendor does not have a standardized procedure to prepare this report for OMS. Maine will require the vendor to prepare a Desk Level Procedure (DLP) for the preparation of this report. This DLP will be reviewed by the State and the report will go through testing and validation, as necessary, before the report is used again. Contact: Michelle Probert, Director, Office of MaineCare Services, DHHS, 207-287-2093 (State Number: 24-1106-06)
(2024-071) Title: Internal control over Medicaid paid medical claims needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Allowable costs/cost principles Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.403; MaineCare Benefits Manual, Chapter 101, Section 90 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. To be allowable under Federal awards, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be adequately documented. The MaineCare Benefits Manual states that the Medicaid program will reimburse at the lowest applicable rate for covered physician services. Condition: The Department’s Office of MaineCare Services (OMS) is billed by medical providers for services provided to Medicaid members. Provider reimbursement rates for certain medical services increased January 1, 2024; however, providers continued to bill OMS utilizing outdated rates until a retroactive adjustment was processed by OMS in March 2024 for certain medical services reimbursed in January and February. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 60 paid medical claims and identified one claim that was reimbursed at a higher than authorized rate. As a result, OMS overpaid the provider by $5. To determine the pervasiveness of the error, OSA reviewed all claims for the same medical service paid between January 1 and the March 2024 retroactive adjustment and found 510 claims that were never retroactively adjusted. A total of $3,300 was identified as overpaid to providers. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2024, $2.2 billion was paid to providers for medical claims. Cause: • Lack of supervisory oversight • Lack of adequate procedures to ensure all medical claims are paid correctly Effect: • Inaccurate paid claims resulted in overpayments and may also result in underpayments to providers. • Potential questioned costs and disallowances Recommendation: We recommend that the Department enhance oversight procedures to ensure that authorized provider reimbursement rates are utilized, and any retroactive adjustments are applied to all affected paid claims accurately and completely. This will ensure that Medicaid claims are not overpaid or underpaid to providers. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OMS has determined that there is an issue with the manual intervention taken by the third-party vendor to prepare this report. This caused some claims that required adjustment to be excluded from the report. Through discussion with the vendor, OMS has determined that the vendor does not have a standardized procedure to prepare this report for OMS. Maine will require the vendor to prepare a Desk Level Procedure (DLP) for the preparation of this report. This DLP will be reviewed by the State and the report will go through testing and validation, as necessary, before the report is used again. Contact: Michelle Probert, Director, Office of MaineCare Services, DHHS, 207-287-2093 (State Number: 24-1106-06)
(2024-073) Title: Internal control over DG – PA program special reporting needs improvement Prior Year Findings: See schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Reporting Type of Finding: Material weakness Material noncompliance Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 170 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Agencies must report each subaward that equals or exceeds the first-tier subaward threshold of $30,000 in Federal funds in the public-facing Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) Subawards Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: When an amount exceeding the first-tier subaward threshold is awarded to a subrecipient of the Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) program, Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) must collect and enter data into FSRS. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 33 DG – PA subawards totaling $8,864,828 that exceeded the first-tier subaward threshold. Federal regulations require the following information for identified noncompliance to be included in FFATA findings: • two subawards totaling $364,133 were not reported; • 27 subawards totaling $8,246,776 were not reported timely; • no subaward amounts were reported incorrectly; and • 21 subawards reported incorrect key data elements. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2024, MEMA was required to report 280 first-tier subawards totaling approximately $57 million under the DG – PA program. First-tier subawards account for 83 percent of the program’s fiscal year 2024 expenditures. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of resources Effect: • Noncompliance with Federal regulations • Accurate first-tier subaward information for the DG – PA program was not reported to the Federal government timely and included inaccurate or incomplete information. This information may be used for programmatic, policy, or statistical purposes. Recommendation: We recommend that the Department enhance policies and procedures to ensure that first-tier subawards are reported accurately, timely, and in accordance with Federal regulations. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. MEMA’s procedure for Federal Financial Reporting already includes a standardized workbook template to compile Federal and State financial data for each grant award and facilitate accurate completion of the SF-425 form. The workbook is prepared by one MEMA staff member, and the resulting draft SF-425 form is reviewed by another MEMA staff member prior to finalization and signature by MEMA’s Authorized Representative. MEMA engaged with Federal funding partners in FY2024 to understand the appropriate data validation processes for financial reporting within the Public Assistance Grants Portal and Payment Management System (PMS), including participation in a training workshop and receiving data validation feedback from reviewers at the Federal level. These reporting process refinements will be reflected in updates to the existing SOP, and an additional review tab will be incorporated into the existing SF-425 preparatory workbooks to document review and data validation steps in detail. Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-03)
(2024-073) Title: Internal control over DG – PA program special reporting needs improvement Prior Year Findings: See schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Reporting Type of Finding: Material weakness Material noncompliance Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 170 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Agencies must report each subaward that equals or exceeds the first-tier subaward threshold of $30,000 in Federal funds in the public-facing Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) Subawards Reporting System (FSRS). Condition: When an amount exceeding the first-tier subaward threshold is awarded to a subrecipient of the Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) program, Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) must collect and enter data into FSRS. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 33 DG – PA subawards totaling $8,864,828 that exceeded the first-tier subaward threshold. Federal regulations require the following information for identified noncompliance to be included in FFATA findings: • two subawards totaling $364,133 were not reported; • 27 subawards totaling $8,246,776 were not reported timely; • no subaward amounts were reported incorrectly; and • 21 subawards reported incorrect key data elements. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2024, MEMA was required to report 280 first-tier subawards totaling approximately $57 million under the DG – PA program. First-tier subawards account for 83 percent of the program’s fiscal year 2024 expenditures. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of resources Effect: • Noncompliance with Federal regulations • Accurate first-tier subaward information for the DG – PA program was not reported to the Federal government timely and included inaccurate or incomplete information. This information may be used for programmatic, policy, or statistical purposes. Recommendation: We recommend that the Department enhance policies and procedures to ensure that first-tier subawards are reported accurately, timely, and in accordance with Federal regulations. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. MEMA’s procedure for Federal Financial Reporting already includes a standardized workbook template to compile Federal and State financial data for each grant award and facilitate accurate completion of the SF-425 form. The workbook is prepared by one MEMA staff member, and the resulting draft SF-425 form is reviewed by another MEMA staff member prior to finalization and signature by MEMA’s Authorized Representative. MEMA engaged with Federal funding partners in FY2024 to understand the appropriate data validation processes for financial reporting within the Public Assistance Grants Portal and Payment Management System (PMS), including participation in a training workshop and receiving data validation feedback from reviewers at the Federal level. These reporting process refinements will be reflected in updates to the existing SOP, and an additional review tab will be incorporated into the existing SF-425 preparatory workbooks to document review and data validation steps in detail. Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-03)
(2024-074) Title: Internal control over DG – PA program cash management needs improvement Prior Year Findings: See schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management Administrative and Financial Services State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Security and Employment Service Center Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Cash management Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 31 CFR 205(A); 2024 Treasury-State Agreement (Maine) The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. A Treasury-State Agreement (TSA) documents the accepted funding techniques and methods for calculating interest agreed upon by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the State. The funding technique agreed upon in the State’s TSA for the Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) program is the “actual drawdown – weekly” method. This method specifies that the State shall make weekly drawdowns based on actual expenditures which occurred in the past weekly period. Condition: The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) administers the DG – PA program for the State. The Department of Administrative and Financial Services’ Security and Employment Service Center (SESC) is responsible for requesting drawdowns of Federal funds in order to pay DG – PA program expenditures on behalf of MEMA. MEMA reviews, authorizes, and submits approved invoices to SESC for payment. SESC then requests Federal funds based on the approved invoices and processes the authorized payment once Federal funds are received. SESC completed 69 Federal grant drawdowns for the DG – PA program in fiscal year 2024, which is not consistent with the TSA requirements that only allow for weekly drawdowns. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) performed analytical procedures and identified a drawdown that was drawn in advance of actual disbursement. OSA reviewed additional drawdowns and identified other drawdowns during fiscal year 2024 that were also drawn in advance of actual disbursement. This process is not consistent with TSA requirements. As a result, MEMA had excess cash on hand during fiscal year 2024 and is not in compliance with cash management requirements. Context: In fiscal year 2024, there were 69 Federal grant drawdowns totaling approximately $69 million for the DG – PA program. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Noncompliance with Federal regulations • The Federal government may improve more stringent program-specific cash management requirements based on noncompliance. Recommendation: We recommend that the Department implement policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the funding techniques specified in the TSA when requesting Federal funds. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. Corrective action was already implemented mid-way through State Fiscal Year 2024 as polices and procedures were updated, and a weekly draw process has been since been used. The Security and Employment Service Center began reconciling draw requests as part of these updated procedures. A majority of the cash on hand was due to contract modifications as the cash was drawn but the payments could not be made until the contract modifications were completed in the accounting system. MEMA made subsequent updates to the cash management process to avoid drawing for payments that might be impacted by unanticipated delays in the final two weeks of each quarter. In addition, the department discussed modifying the Treasury-State Agreement (TSA) with the Office of the State Treasurer. The 2025 TSA lists a Weekly Drawdown - Actual & Estimate funding technique for this major program as some of these payments are too substantial for the State to process and have to wait for reimbursement. Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-04)
(2024-074) Title: Internal control over DG – PA program cash management needs improvement Prior Year Findings: See schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management Administrative and Financial Services State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Security and Employment Service Center Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Cash management Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 31 CFR 205(A); 2024 Treasury-State Agreement (Maine) The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. A Treasury-State Agreement (TSA) documents the accepted funding techniques and methods for calculating interest agreed upon by the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the State. The funding technique agreed upon in the State’s TSA for the Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) program is the “actual drawdown – weekly” method. This method specifies that the State shall make weekly drawdowns based on actual expenditures which occurred in the past weekly period. Condition: The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) administers the DG – PA program for the State. The Department of Administrative and Financial Services’ Security and Employment Service Center (SESC) is responsible for requesting drawdowns of Federal funds in order to pay DG – PA program expenditures on behalf of MEMA. MEMA reviews, authorizes, and submits approved invoices to SESC for payment. SESC then requests Federal funds based on the approved invoices and processes the authorized payment once Federal funds are received. SESC completed 69 Federal grant drawdowns for the DG – PA program in fiscal year 2024, which is not consistent with the TSA requirements that only allow for weekly drawdowns. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) performed analytical procedures and identified a drawdown that was drawn in advance of actual disbursement. OSA reviewed additional drawdowns and identified other drawdowns during fiscal year 2024 that were also drawn in advance of actual disbursement. This process is not consistent with TSA requirements. As a result, MEMA had excess cash on hand during fiscal year 2024 and is not in compliance with cash management requirements. Context: In fiscal year 2024, there were 69 Federal grant drawdowns totaling approximately $69 million for the DG – PA program. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Noncompliance with Federal regulations • The Federal government may improve more stringent program-specific cash management requirements based on noncompliance. Recommendation: We recommend that the Department implement policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the funding techniques specified in the TSA when requesting Federal funds. Corrective Action Plan: See F-29 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. Corrective action was already implemented mid-way through State Fiscal Year 2024 as polices and procedures were updated, and a weekly draw process has been since been used. The Security and Employment Service Center began reconciling draw requests as part of these updated procedures. A majority of the cash on hand was due to contract modifications as the cash was drawn but the payments could not be made until the contract modifications were completed in the accounting system. MEMA made subsequent updates to the cash management process to avoid drawing for payments that might be impacted by unanticipated delays in the final two weeks of each quarter. In addition, the department discussed modifying the Treasury-State Agreement (TSA) with the Office of the State Treasurer. The 2025 TSA lists a Weekly Drawdown - Actual & Estimate funding technique for this major program as some of these payments are too substantial for the State to process and have to wait for reimbursement. Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-04)
(2024-075) Title: Internal control over DG – PA program financial reporting needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.302 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must maintain accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with reporting requirements. Condition: The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) administers the Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) program for the State. MEMA is required to submit quarterly DG – PA Federal Financial Reports (FFRs) to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Regional Office. FFRs provide FEMA with the status of funds for the award, Federal expenditures, and cost-sharing requirements. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested four FFRs due in fiscal year 2024 and found: • one FFR inaccurately reported total Federal funds authorized as $889,510 when the correct total was $617,318; • one FFR inaccurately reported the recipient share of expenditures as $712,412 when the correct share was $159,382; and • one FFR inaccurately reported total Federal funds authorized as $640,654 when the correct total was $1,469,390, and the recipient share of expenditures as $842,604 when the correct share was $434,484. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: During fiscal year 2024, 33 FFRs were required to be filed by MEMA for the DG – PA program. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures to ensure data used for financial reporting is complete and accurate • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Noncompliance with Federal reporting requirements • Inaccurate tracking of subawards may result in noncompliance with Federal matching requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that MEMA enhance policies and procedures to ensure that FFRs are accurate and include all required information for compliance with Federal reporting requirements. Corrective Action Plan: See F-30 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. Corrective action was implemented at the end of State Fiscal Year 2024. Untimely reports were primarily due to a backlog of required reporting that was brought up to date over the fiscal year as a corrective action to the prior year finding. In the current monthly reporting process, award data is provided by grant program experts to avoid incorrect data elements, and reporting is reviewed for completeness by a staff member not involved in report submission. In the third quarter of FY2025, the FFATA reporting system was retired from FSRS.gov and transferred to SAM.gov, further minimizing the possibility of incorrect data elements being reported. MEMA will update the existing SOP for FFATA reporting to address specifics related to the new reporting process within SAM.gov Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-02)
(2024-075) Title: Internal control over DG – PA program financial reporting needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.302 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must maintain accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with reporting requirements. Condition: The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) administers the Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) program for the State. MEMA is required to submit quarterly DG – PA Federal Financial Reports (FFRs) to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Regional Office. FFRs provide FEMA with the status of funds for the award, Federal expenditures, and cost-sharing requirements. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested four FFRs due in fiscal year 2024 and found: • one FFR inaccurately reported total Federal funds authorized as $889,510 when the correct total was $617,318; • one FFR inaccurately reported the recipient share of expenditures as $712,412 when the correct share was $159,382; and • one FFR inaccurately reported total Federal funds authorized as $640,654 when the correct total was $1,469,390, and the recipient share of expenditures as $842,604 when the correct share was $434,484. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: During fiscal year 2024, 33 FFRs were required to be filed by MEMA for the DG – PA program. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures to ensure data used for financial reporting is complete and accurate • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Noncompliance with Federal reporting requirements • Inaccurate tracking of subawards may result in noncompliance with Federal matching requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that MEMA enhance policies and procedures to ensure that FFRs are accurate and include all required information for compliance with Federal reporting requirements. Corrective Action Plan: See F-30 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. Corrective action was implemented at the end of State Fiscal Year 2024. Untimely reports were primarily due to a backlog of required reporting that was brought up to date over the fiscal year as a corrective action to the prior year finding. In the current monthly reporting process, award data is provided by grant program experts to avoid incorrect data elements, and reporting is reviewed for completeness by a staff member not involved in report submission. In the third quarter of FY2025, the FFATA reporting system was retired from FSRS.gov and transferred to SAM.gov, further minimizing the possibility of incorrect data elements being reported. MEMA will update the existing SOP for FFATA reporting to address specifics related to the new reporting process within SAM.gov Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-02)
(2024-076) Title: Internal control over the submission of DG – PA program Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards information needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.510 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the State’s financial statements which must include the total Federal awards expended. At a minimum, the SEFA must include the total amount provided to subrecipients from each Federal program. Condition: The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) must complete and submit exhibits and related schedules to the Office of the State Controller (OSC) at the close of each fiscal year to report Federal award information for inclusion on the State’s SEFA. OSC is responsible for compiling this information on behalf of the State. MEMA submitted schedules to OSC that incorrectly reported $91,471 of expenditures under ALN 97.050 Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households – Other Needs that should have been reported under ALN 97.036 Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) (Presidentially Declared Disasters). MEMA procedures do not require review of schedules prior to submission to OSC. Context: In fiscal year 2024, DG – PA expenditures totaled approximately $68 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: Inaccurate reporting of expenditure amounts on the SEFA, which is submitted to the Federal government, may result in incorrect information used for programmatic, policy, or statistical purposes. Recommendation: We recommend that MEMA implement policies and procedures that require a comprehensive review of SEFA schedules prior to submission to OSC. Corrective Action Plan: See F-30 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. MEMA will work with Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management staff to develop an agency-specific procedure for comprehensive review of the agency’s Federal expenditures at an appropriate point in the department’s annual SEFA reporting process. Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-01)
(2024-076) Title: Internal control over the submission of DG – PA program Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards information needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management State Bureau: Maine Emergency Management Agency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security Assistance Listing Title: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) (COVID-19) Assistance Listing Number: 97.036 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-77 to E-78 Compliance Area: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.510 The Department must establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the State’s financial statements which must include the total Federal awards expended. At a minimum, the SEFA must include the total amount provided to subrecipients from each Federal program. Condition: The Maine Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) must complete and submit exhibits and related schedules to the Office of the State Controller (OSC) at the close of each fiscal year to report Federal award information for inclusion on the State’s SEFA. OSC is responsible for compiling this information on behalf of the State. MEMA submitted schedules to OSC that incorrectly reported $91,471 of expenditures under ALN 97.050 Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households – Other Needs that should have been reported under ALN 97.036 Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (DG – PA) (Presidentially Declared Disasters). MEMA procedures do not require review of schedules prior to submission to OSC. Context: In fiscal year 2024, DG – PA expenditures totaled approximately $68 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: Inaccurate reporting of expenditure amounts on the SEFA, which is submitted to the Federal government, may result in incorrect information used for programmatic, policy, or statistical purposes. Recommendation: We recommend that MEMA implement policies and procedures that require a comprehensive review of SEFA schedules prior to submission to OSC. Corrective Action Plan: See F-30 Management’s Response: The Department agrees with this finding. MEMA will work with Defense, Veterans and Emergency Management staff to develop an agency-specific procedure for comprehensive review of the agency’s Federal expenditures at an appropriate point in the department’s annual SEFA reporting process. Contact: Sunny Cyr, Business Office Director, MEMA, DVEM, 207-707-2507 (State Number: 24-1502-01)
Finding 2024-004, Documentation of Case Note Review (Assistance Listing 16.575) Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.303(a) (Internal Controls). All recipient and subrecipient must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition and Context: The Agency’s maintains client case notes to track the services provided to program participants. These case notes are subject to periodic reviews by a Supervisor. We reviewed 25 samples and noted no documentation the review for any of the samples. Cause: The Agency’s policies for maintaining case notes do not require a sign-off by the Supervisor. Effect: The lack of documented supervisory review weakens internal controls over case note management, increasing the risk of errors, incomplete records, or noncompliance with program requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No. Questioned Costs: None. Recommendation: We recommend that the Agency enhance its policies and procedures for case note management by implementing a formal supervisory review process. This should include a documented sign-off by the supervisor to confirm the review has been completed, ensuring compliance with internal control requirements.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - Eligibility Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listings Number: 84.010 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S010A210014, S010A220014, S010A230014 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Audit Finding: Significant Deficiency Condition and Context Eligibility for Title I is determined on the Eligible School Summary of the Title I application. Enrollment and poverty numbers are automatically pulled from the Indiana Department of Education's (IDOE) Official Pupil Enrollment (PE) count for each school into the Eligible School Summary page of the Title I application. The counts that are prepopulated should be based on the School Corporation's records as of October of the prior fiscal year. During the audit period, the School Corporation submitted two Title I applications. The School Corporation was required to use the October 2021 PE report data for the 2022-2023 Title I application and the October 2022 PE report data for the 2023-2024 Title I application submitted to the IDOE. Data to be submitted included student socioeconomic status information. Additionally, the School Corporation receives enrollment and poverty data from nonpublic schools that receive Title I funding. The School Corporation must manually enter that information into the Title I application. During the review, we noted that both the PE report and the enrollment and poverty data was prepared and reviewed by the Title I Director. No other reviews were performed. The lack of internal controls was a systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause The Title I Director reviews all the information that is prepopulated by the IDOE in the Title I application and confirms all nonpublic schools information reported in the application. However, officials were not aware that a second review should take place prior to submission with procedures performed by the second reviewer properly documented. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, proper documentation of a review of the Title I application was not maintained. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation design and implement a proper system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that would provide segregation of duties to ensure appropriate reviews, approvals, and oversight are taking place and the review is documented. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of the report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - Eligibility Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listings Number: 84.010 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S010A210014, S010A220014, S010A230014 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Audit Finding: Significant Deficiency Condition and Context Eligibility for Title I is determined on the Eligible School Summary of the Title I application. Enrollment and poverty numbers are automatically pulled from the Indiana Department of Education's (IDOE) Official Pupil Enrollment (PE) count for each school into the Eligible School Summary page of the Title I application. The counts that are prepopulated should be based on the School Corporation's records as of October of the prior fiscal year. During the audit period, the School Corporation submitted two Title I applications. The School Corporation was required to use the October 2021 PE report data for the 2022-2023 Title I application and the October 2022 PE report data for the 2023-2024 Title I application submitted to the IDOE. Data to be submitted included student socioeconomic status information. Additionally, the School Corporation receives enrollment and poverty data from nonpublic schools that receive Title I funding. The School Corporation must manually enter that information into the Title I application. During the review, we noted that both the PE report and the enrollment and poverty data was prepared and reviewed by the Title I Director. No other reviews were performed. The lack of internal controls was a systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause The Title I Director reviews all the information that is prepopulated by the IDOE in the Title I application and confirms all nonpublic schools information reported in the application. However, officials were not aware that a second review should take place prior to submission with procedures performed by the second reviewer properly documented. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, proper documentation of a review of the Title I application was not maintained. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation design and implement a proper system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that would provide segregation of duties to ensure appropriate reviews, approvals, and oversight are taking place and the review is documented. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of the report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the School Corporation complied with the earmarking requirements. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the required level of expenditures for nonpublic school students with disabilities was met and to ensure nonpublic school expenditures were appropriately identified and reported. The Special Education Director allocated a portion of the salaries of the teachers that provided services to nonpublic schools and requested reimbursement based on this calculation. There was no documentation of how the calculation was performed or that a review of that calculation by another individual occurred. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The Special Education Director is responsible for reporting and tracking funds spent related to the required proportionate share amounts for each grant. The Special Education Director had a procedure in place to request nonpublic school expenditures related to each grant; however, the procedure was not properly documented to allow examiners to verify amounts reimbursed. Examiners were also not able to confirm a secondary review was in place over this procedure, other than the preparation and review by the Special Education Director. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the earmarking requirements could not be verified as having been met. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure nonpublic proportionate share funds are appropriately allocated to the member school based on expenses charged directly on behalf of the member school and that the calculated expenditures are reviewed by another individual. Supporting documentation for these expenses should be retained for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): H027X210084, H173X210104, H173A210104, H027A220084, H027A230084 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000. Therefore, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under; and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The school corporation did not have policies and procedures with regards to purchases that exceed $10,000. Two separate vendor transactions were identified in the range below the simplified acquisition threshold and above the micro-purchase threshold as traditional procurement transactions. No quotes or bids related to each transaction were presented for audit purposes, and no documentation to support the rationale for not providing full and open competition was provided. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Four vendors were selected to confirm the school corporation was verifying suspension and debarment status. The school corporation informed examiners they confirm status to Sam.gov, a sufficient procedure, however they did not retain documentation that this was performed prior to disbursing federal funds to the vendors. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 ANDERSON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause Management of the School Corporation had not established policies and procedures related to federal procurement standards or suspension and debarment verification, as such no procedures were performed to maintain documentation related to the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect The failure to establish internal controls enabled noncompliance to go undetected. Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the School Corporation could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. The failure to comply with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirement. This should include documenting the procurement process taken by management for transactions with vendors exceeding the simplified acquisition and small purchase thresholds. When utilizing vendors providing specialized services, documentation should be prepared and maintained by management to support sole source procurement decisions when competitive is limited due to the nature of the service. We also recommend implementing an annual control to review and document suspension and debarment checks for all vendors funded with Special Education grant funds that meet the covered transaction threshold of $25,000. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States; COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027; 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-042-ARP; 22619-042-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northeast Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for the simplified acquisition threshold and for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. Procurement When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold. Therefore, the SAT threshold is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. When the purchase value exceeds the micro-purchase threshold but is less than the simplified acquisition threshold, a small purchase occurs. Small purchases require documented full and open competition or a documented rationale for limited competition. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements totaling $379,313, which exceeded the SAT threshold of $150,000. The Cooperative did not obtain sealed bids or competitive proposals nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements in the amount of $55,374, which were less than the SAT threshold of $150,000 but exceeded the $50,000 micro-purchase threshold and was selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) For 2023-2024, three vendors with disbursements totaling $175,125 were identified as being less than the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 but exceeding the $50,000 micropurchase threshold and were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes for two of the three vendors, and there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the Cooperative in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, the Cooperative disclosed there were not any documented internal controls or procedures. Nine covered transactions were identified. The covered transactions totaling $803,836 were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not verify the suspension and debarment status of the tested vendors prior to payment. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal Procurement Methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Cooperative noted that the American Rescue Plan (ARP) portion of the Special Education grant was new for 2022-2023 and 2023-2024. The ARP funding gave opportunity for types of expenditures that do not typically get expensed using Special Education funding. The transactions noted within the Condition and Context were from the ARP portion of the grant, which provided property or services that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Management of the Cooperative was unaware of the procurement requirements when property or services exceed the micro-purchase threshold. In addition, management of the Cooperative was unaware of the suspension and debarment requirements when a covered transaction is expected to equal or exceed $25,000. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Cooperative could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the reduction of future federal funding to the Cooperative. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Cooperative's management design and implement a system of internal controls related to procurement and suspension and debarment procedures to ensure procurement requirements are met and to ensure entities are neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, prior to entering into any covered transactions. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States; COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027; 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-042-ARP; 22619-042-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northeast Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for the simplified acquisition threshold and for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. Procurement When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold. Therefore, the SAT threshold is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. When the purchase value exceeds the micro-purchase threshold but is less than the simplified acquisition threshold, a small purchase occurs. Small purchases require documented full and open competition or a documented rationale for limited competition. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements totaling $379,313, which exceeded the SAT threshold of $150,000. The Cooperative did not obtain sealed bids or competitive proposals nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements in the amount of $55,374, which were less than the SAT threshold of $150,000 but exceeded the $50,000 micro-purchase threshold and was selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) For 2023-2024, three vendors with disbursements totaling $175,125 were identified as being less than the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 but exceeding the $50,000 micropurchase threshold and were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes for two of the three vendors, and there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the Cooperative in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, the Cooperative disclosed there were not any documented internal controls or procedures. Nine covered transactions were identified. The covered transactions totaling $803,836 were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not verify the suspension and debarment status of the tested vendors prior to payment. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal Procurement Methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Cooperative noted that the American Rescue Plan (ARP) portion of the Special Education grant was new for 2022-2023 and 2023-2024. The ARP funding gave opportunity for types of expenditures that do not typically get expensed using Special Education funding. The transactions noted within the Condition and Context were from the ARP portion of the grant, which provided property or services that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Management of the Cooperative was unaware of the procurement requirements when property or services exceed the micro-purchase threshold. In addition, management of the Cooperative was unaware of the suspension and debarment requirements when a covered transaction is expected to equal or exceed $25,000. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Cooperative could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the reduction of future federal funding to the Cooperative. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Cooperative's management design and implement a system of internal controls related to procurement and suspension and debarment procedures to ensure procurement requirements are met and to ensure entities are neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, prior to entering into any covered transactions. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States; COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027; 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-042-ARP; 22619-042-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northeast Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for the simplified acquisition threshold and for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. Procurement When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold. Therefore, the SAT threshold is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. When the purchase value exceeds the micro-purchase threshold but is less than the simplified acquisition threshold, a small purchase occurs. Small purchases require documented full and open competition or a documented rationale for limited competition. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements totaling $379,313, which exceeded the SAT threshold of $150,000. The Cooperative did not obtain sealed bids or competitive proposals nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements in the amount of $55,374, which were less than the SAT threshold of $150,000 but exceeded the $50,000 micro-purchase threshold and was selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) For 2023-2024, three vendors with disbursements totaling $175,125 were identified as being less than the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 but exceeding the $50,000 micropurchase threshold and were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes for two of the three vendors, and there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the Cooperative in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, the Cooperative disclosed there were not any documented internal controls or procedures. Nine covered transactions were identified. The covered transactions totaling $803,836 were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not verify the suspension and debarment status of the tested vendors prior to payment. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal Procurement Methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Cooperative noted that the American Rescue Plan (ARP) portion of the Special Education grant was new for 2022-2023 and 2023-2024. The ARP funding gave opportunity for types of expenditures that do not typically get expensed using Special Education funding. The transactions noted within the Condition and Context were from the ARP portion of the grant, which provided property or services that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Management of the Cooperative was unaware of the procurement requirements when property or services exceed the micro-purchase threshold. In addition, management of the Cooperative was unaware of the suspension and debarment requirements when a covered transaction is expected to equal or exceed $25,000. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Cooperative could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the reduction of future federal funding to the Cooperative. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Cooperative's management design and implement a system of internal controls related to procurement and suspension and debarment procedures to ensure procurement requirements are met and to ensure entities are neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, prior to entering into any covered transactions. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States; COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027; 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-042-ARP; 22619-042-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northeast Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for the simplified acquisition threshold and for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. Procurement When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold. Therefore, the SAT threshold is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. When the purchase value exceeds the micro-purchase threshold but is less than the simplified acquisition threshold, a small purchase occurs. Small purchases require documented full and open competition or a documented rationale for limited competition. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements totaling $379,313, which exceeded the SAT threshold of $150,000. The Cooperative did not obtain sealed bids or competitive proposals nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. For 2022-2023, the Cooperative had one vendor with disbursements in the amount of $55,374, which were less than the SAT threshold of $150,000 but exceeded the $50,000 micro-purchase threshold and was selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes nor was there documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) For 2023-2024, three vendors with disbursements totaling $175,125 were identified as being less than the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 but exceeding the $50,000 micropurchase threshold and were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes for two of the three vendors, and there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the Cooperative in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, the Cooperative disclosed there were not any documented internal controls or procedures. Nine covered transactions were identified. The covered transactions totaling $803,836 were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not verify the suspension and debarment status of the tested vendors prior to payment. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal Procurement Methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Cooperative noted that the American Rescue Plan (ARP) portion of the Special Education grant was new for 2022-2023 and 2023-2024. The ARP funding gave opportunity for types of expenditures that do not typically get expensed using Special Education funding. The transactions noted within the Condition and Context were from the ARP portion of the grant, which provided property or services that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Management of the Cooperative was unaware of the procurement requirements when property or services exceed the micro-purchase threshold. In addition, management of the Cooperative was unaware of the suspension and debarment requirements when a covered transaction is expected to equal or exceed $25,000. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Cooperative could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the reduction of future federal funding to the Cooperative. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Cooperative's management design and implement a system of internal controls related to procurement and suspension and debarment procedures to ensure procurement requirements are met and to ensure entities are neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, prior to entering into any covered transactions. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Equipment and Real Property Management Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Number: 84.425U Federal Award Number or Year (or Other Identifying Number): S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Equipment and Real Property Management Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context A property record or capital asset listing which would include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the federal award identification number), who holds title, the acquisition date, cost of the property, percentage of federal participation in the project costs for the federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, and use and condition of the property is to be maintained for assets purchased that exceed the School Corporation's capitalization threshold. The School Corporation purchased 21 pieces of equipment totaling $218,573 during the audit period, of which 4 were selected for testing. The 4 items selected for testing were listed on the School Corporation's capital asset listing; however, the listing did not include the percentage of federal participation or the use and condition of property. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.313(d)(1) states: "Property records must be maintained that include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the FAIN), who holds title, the acquisition date, and cost of the property, percentage of Federal participation in the project costs for the Federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, use and condition of the property, and any ultimate disposition data including the date of disposal and sale price of the property." Cause The School Corporation was unaware of the requirements to track the percentage of federal participation in the project costs for the federal award under which the property was acquired and the use and condition of the property. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, assets added to the capital assets listing did not include all the required elements. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure asset records include all the necessary information and new assets are added. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Equipment and Real Property Management Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Number: 84.425U Federal Award Number or Year (or Other Identifying Number): S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Equipment and Real Property Management Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context A property record or capital asset listing which would include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the federal award identification number), who holds title, the acquisition date, cost of the property, percentage of federal participation in the project costs for the federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, and use and condition of the property is to be maintained for assets purchased that exceed the School Corporation's capitalization threshold. The School Corporation purchased 21 pieces of equipment totaling $218,573 during the audit period, of which 4 were selected for testing. The 4 items selected for testing were listed on the School Corporation's capital asset listing; however, the listing did not include the percentage of federal participation or the use and condition of property. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 DEKALB COUNTY EASTERN COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.313(d)(1) states: "Property records must be maintained that include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the FAIN), who holds title, the acquisition date, and cost of the property, percentage of Federal participation in the project costs for the Federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, use and condition of the property, and any ultimate disposition data including the date of disposal and sale price of the property." Cause The School Corporation was unaware of the requirements to track the percentage of federal participation in the project costs for the federal award under which the property was acquired and the use and condition of the property. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, assets added to the capital assets listing did not include all the required elements. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure asset records include all the necessary information and new assets are added. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster – Internal Controls Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY2023, FY2024 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement Audit Finding: Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in this part." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal Entity must use one of the following methods of procurement. . . . (b) Procurement by small purchase procedures. Small purchase procedures are those relatively simple and informal procurement methods for securing services, supplies, or other property that do not cost more than the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. . . ." Condition: An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the Child Nutrition Program and Procurement compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance with the Procurement compliance requirement. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: The School Corporation utilizes two vendors for the majority of food and supplies purchases for the food service program. One vendor is procured through a purchasing cooperative, Southwest Indiana Co-op, where the School Corporation is a member. The other vendor met the simplified acquisition threshold for fiscal year 2023 and the small purchase threshold for fiscal year 2024. The School Corporation was unable to provide any supporting documentation for the procurement process undertaken as required by the School Corporation’s procurement policy. Management stated the items purchased were chosen based on a comparison of prices with two other vendors, however, management had no documented support for the rationale or process to determine which vendor would be selected for food and supplies purchases. The sample item amount disbursed was $151,511 for food purchases in FY23 and $129,583 for food purchases in FY24. The School Corporation did properly confirm the vendor was not debarred or suspended. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: Yes, see Finding 2022-001 in the prior period audit report. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to ensure that the School Corporation’s procurement policy is adhered to and all documentation is maintained for the procurements performed by the School Corporation. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster – Internal Controls Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY2023, FY2024 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement Audit Finding: Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in this part." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal Entity must use one of the following methods of procurement. . . . (b) Procurement by small purchase procedures. Small purchase procedures are those relatively simple and informal procurement methods for securing services, supplies, or other property that do not cost more than the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. . . ." Condition: An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the Child Nutrition Program and Procurement compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance with the Procurement compliance requirement. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: The School Corporation utilizes two vendors for the majority of food and supplies purchases for the food service program. One vendor is procured through a purchasing cooperative, Southwest Indiana Co-op, where the School Corporation is a member. The other vendor met the simplified acquisition threshold for fiscal year 2023 and the small purchase threshold for fiscal year 2024. The School Corporation was unable to provide any supporting documentation for the procurement process undertaken as required by the School Corporation’s procurement policy. Management stated the items purchased were chosen based on a comparison of prices with two other vendors, however, management had no documented support for the rationale or process to determine which vendor would be selected for food and supplies purchases. The sample item amount disbursed was $151,511 for food purchases in FY23 and $129,583 for food purchases in FY24. The School Corporation did properly confirm the vendor was not debarred or suspended. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: Yes, see Finding 2022-001 in the prior period audit report. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to ensure that the School Corporation’s procurement policy is adhered to and all documentation is maintained for the procurements performed by the School Corporation. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster – Internal Controls Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY2023, FY2024 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement Audit Finding: Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in this part." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal Entity must use one of the following methods of procurement. . . . (b) Procurement by small purchase procedures. Small purchase procedures are those relatively simple and informal procurement methods for securing services, supplies, or other property that do not cost more than the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. . . ." Condition: An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the Child Nutrition Program and Procurement compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance with the Procurement compliance requirement. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: The School Corporation utilizes two vendors for the majority of food and supplies purchases for the food service program. One vendor is procured through a purchasing cooperative, Southwest Indiana Co-op, where the School Corporation is a member. The other vendor met the simplified acquisition threshold for fiscal year 2023 and the small purchase threshold for fiscal year 2024. The School Corporation was unable to provide any supporting documentation for the procurement process undertaken as required by the School Corporation’s procurement policy. Management stated the items purchased were chosen based on a comparison of prices with two other vendors, however, management had no documented support for the rationale or process to determine which vendor would be selected for food and supplies purchases. The sample item amount disbursed was $151,511 for food purchases in FY23 and $129,583 for food purchases in FY24. The School Corporation did properly confirm the vendor was not debarred or suspended. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: Yes, see Finding 2022-001 in the prior period audit report. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to ensure that the School Corporation’s procurement policy is adhered to and all documentation is maintained for the procurements performed by the School Corporation. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a 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: 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425U210013 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 wages 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: The School Corporation had six projects for various building improvements which were funded with ESSER III (84.425U) grant awards. The School Corporation did not properly include the Davis-Bacon wage rate requirements in the two vendor contracts tested. While the School Corporation did not include the wage rate requirements within their contracts, the weekly payroll reports certifications from the construction vendor to monitor compliance with Davis-Bacon wage rate requirements were obtained and reviewed by the School Corporation. Identification as a repeat finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the School Corporation implement a formal process to review construction contracts funded by federal awards to ensure the contract includes a clause for Davis-Bacon wage rate requirements to comply with federal labor regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Internal Controls over Eligibility Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Audit Finding: 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). . . ." 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 eligibility compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with eligibility requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: During testing over controls for eligibility, we noted there was no formal, secondary review for the applications entered in the food service software determining eligibility. Additionally, there was no documented annual review by School Corporation personnel of the income eligibility guidelines used by the food service software. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to the grant agreement and eligibility compliance requirements. This includes documenting a formal review of the income eligibility guidelines updated in the food service software on an annual basis. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Internal Controls over Eligibility Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Audit Finding: 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). . . ." 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 eligibility compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with eligibility requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: During testing over controls for eligibility, we noted there was no formal, secondary review for the applications entered in the food service software determining eligibility. Additionally, there was no documented annual review by School Corporation personnel of the income eligibility guidelines used by the food service software. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to the grant agreement and eligibility compliance requirements. This includes documenting a formal review of the income eligibility guidelines updated in the food service software on an annual basis. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Internal Controls over Eligibility Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Eligibility Audit Finding: 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). . . ." 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 eligibility compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with eligibility requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: During testing over controls for eligibility, we noted there was no formal, secondary review for the applications entered in the food service software determining eligibility. Additionally, there was no documented annual review by School Corporation personnel of the income eligibility guidelines used by the food service software. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to the grant agreement and eligibility compliance requirements. This includes documenting a formal review of the income eligibility guidelines updated in the food service software on an annual basis. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
FINDING 2024-004 Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Finding: Material Weakness, Other Matters 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). . . ." 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 cash management compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with the reporting requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: $20,650.57 net overstatement of claimed meals Context: In a sample of 5 monthly claims for reimbursement selected for testing, the following compliance exceptions were noted: Management failed to submit the April 2023 claim for reimbursement in a timely manner (within 90 days) to the IDOE and was not reimbursed for meals served as a result. For the other 5 claims tested, the number of meals claimed did not agree to the supporting meal system reports. There was a gross overstatement of meals claimed of $21,188.92 and a gross understatement of meals claimed of $538.35 resulting in a net over-reimbursement of $20,650.57. We noted that the School Corporation has a secondary review control in place designed to review claims prior to submission to the IDOE. However, the control was not operating effectively to detect and prevent errors in the amount claimed for reimbursement. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management review internal controls in place and ensure the meal count data submit for reimbursement agrees to underlying meal count data obtained from the food service software. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
FINDING 2024-004 Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Finding: Material Weakness, Other Matters 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). . . ." 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 cash management compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with the reporting requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: $20,650.57 net overstatement of claimed meals Context: In a sample of 5 monthly claims for reimbursement selected for testing, the following compliance exceptions were noted: Management failed to submit the April 2023 claim for reimbursement in a timely manner (within 90 days) to the IDOE and was not reimbursed for meals served as a result. For the other 5 claims tested, the number of meals claimed did not agree to the supporting meal system reports. There was a gross overstatement of meals claimed of $21,188.92 and a gross understatement of meals claimed of $538.35 resulting in a net over-reimbursement of $20,650.57. We noted that the School Corporation has a secondary review control in place designed to review claims prior to submission to the IDOE. However, the control was not operating effectively to detect and prevent errors in the amount claimed for reimbursement. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management review internal controls in place and ensure the meal count data submit for reimbursement agrees to underlying meal count data obtained from the food service software. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
FINDING 2024-004 Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Finding: Material Weakness, Other Matters 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). . . ." 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 cash management compliance requirement. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with the reporting requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: $20,650.57 net overstatement of claimed meals Context: In a sample of 5 monthly claims for reimbursement selected for testing, the following compliance exceptions were noted: Management failed to submit the April 2023 claim for reimbursement in a timely manner (within 90 days) to the IDOE and was not reimbursed for meals served as a result. For the other 5 claims tested, the number of meals claimed did not agree to the supporting meal system reports. There was a gross overstatement of meals claimed of $21,188.92 and a gross understatement of meals claimed of $538.35 resulting in a net over-reimbursement of $20,650.57. We noted that the School Corporation has a secondary review control in place designed to review claims prior to submission to the IDOE. However, the control was not operating effectively to detect and prevent errors in the amount claimed for reimbursement. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management review internal controls in place and ensure the meal count data submit for reimbursement agrees to underlying meal count data obtained from the food service software. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
FINDING 2024-005 Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster – Internal Controls over Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 22-23, FY 23-24 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Finding: Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in this part." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal Entity must use one of the following methods of procurement. . . . (b) Procurement by small purchase procedures. Small purchase procedures are those relatively simple and informal procurement methods for securing services, supplies, or other property that do not cost more than the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. . . ." Condition: An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the Child Nutrition Program and Procurement compliance requirements. Cause: The School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls that would Fohave ensured compliance with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system placed the School Corporation at risk of noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements. A lack of segregation of duties within an internal control system could have also allowed noncompliance with the compliance requirements and allowed the misuse and mismanagement of federal funds and assets by not having proper oversight, reviews, and approvals over the activities of the programs. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: Procurement The School Corporation participates in K12’s Leading Indiana Cooperative (KLIC), which procures vendors for food purchases and other supplies on behalf of its members. During the audit period, the School Corporation also purchased food and supplies from vendors not procured by the Cooperative. One vendor with aggregate annual purchases of $62,545 and $49,614 for fiscal year 2023 and 2024, respectively, exceeded the small purchase threshold ($10,000 - $150,000). For the 2023 fiscal year, the School Corporation could not provide documentation showing the bids received from other vendors that were used to compare pricing. As it pertains to the 2024 fiscal year, the School Corporation could not provide any documentation surrounding the procurement of the small purchase vendor. Suspension and Debarment For the small purchase vendor noted above that was not procured by the Cooperative and had aggregate annual disbursements exceeding the federal suspension and debarment threshold of $25,000, the School Corporation did not provide documentation confirming that the vendor was not suspended or debarred before disbursing federal funds during fiscal year 2024. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: Yes, see finding 2022-003. Recommendation: We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls related to ensure that the School Corporation’s procurement policy is adhered to and quotes are obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as required for small purchase method procurements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.