Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development and Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.231, 14.267, 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Emergency Solutions Grant Program, Continuum of Care Program, Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: HH-21-03.4, CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18, H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in Subpart E 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Further, matching funds must also be allowable under Subpart E – Cost Principles. Per 2 CFR §200.430 Compensation – Personal Services: “Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-Federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-Federal entity’s written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the recipient or subrecipient; and (vi) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (vii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: (A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity performed; (B) Significant changes in the related work activity (as defined by the recipient’s or subrecipient’s written policies) are promptly identified and entered into the records. Short-term (such as one or two months) fluctuations between workload categories do not need to be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The recipient’s or subrecipient’s system of internal controls includes processes to perform periodic after-the-fact reviews of interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustments must be made so that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Condition: We noted that the Village allocated payroll expenditures to Emergency Solutions Grants Program, Continuum of Care Program, and Health Center Cluster during 2024 that lacked adequate or timely documentation. During our testing we noted instances where supervisor did not approve timesheets, instances where the incorrect allocation rate was utilized, and instances where attestations were not completed timely to support employee’s time allocated to the grant for reimbursement. • For Emergency Solutions Grants Program: o 41 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations • For Continuum of Care Program: o 2 out of 100 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. • For Continuum of Care Program in our testing of Matching Costs: o 2 out of 60 selections did not have approved timesheets. o 2 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate. • For Health Center Program Cluster: o 1 out of 60 selections utilized the incorrect allocation rate to the grant. o 14 out of 60 selections did not have timely completion of attestations. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies/procedures in place to timely prepare and complete timesheet attestations and approvals and reconcile to actual expenditures charged. Additionally, the Village relied heavily on manual processes that are more prone to error and did not have an adequate review process to identify and correct calculation errors. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to detect calculation errors and ensure attestations and timesheets were reviewed in a timely manner, the Village could incorrectly charge expenditures to the Federal program, or not request appropriate reimbursement the Village is entitled to under the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: Emergency Solutions Grants Program: None Continuum of Care Program Known Questioned Costs: $1,575 Continuum of Care Program Likely Questioned Costs: $172,053 Health Center Program Cluster: None above the $25,000 reporting threshold. Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Emergency Solutions Grants Program in 2024 were $377,797. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,217,865. Matching costs for the Continuum of Care Program in 2024 were $1,896,728. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Any costs not adequately supported by approved timesheet allocations or in excess of supported allocations are considered questioned costs. Repeat Finding: 2023-003, 2023-004, 2023-005 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village implement policies and procedures to ensure attestations are completed timely (i.e. quarterly) and to ensure timely review for any necessary budget to actual adjustments. Additionally, we recommend implementing system improvements to reduce manual entry and establishing policies to review reimbursement calculations before submission. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 & 93.527 Program: Health Center Program Cluster, COVID-19 Health Center Program Cluster Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: H80CS10606-16-00, H80CS10606-17-04, H80CS10606-17-05, H8GCS48224, H8L50900-01-00, H8NCS53911-01-04 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 2 CFR §200.403(e), costs must be in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Procedures (GAAP) to be allowable under Federal awards. Condition: During our testing of 2024 costs, we noted that 3 of the 60 payroll transactions selected for testing within the Health Center Program Cluster were incurred in 2023. This practice is not in accordance with GAAP, which require that costs be recorded in the period in which they are incurred. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that federal expenditures are properly accrued and recorded in the fiscal year in which the costs are actually incurred. Effect or Potential Effect: Failure to accrue costs in accordance with GAAP may result in expenditures being materially misstated on the SEFA that could lead to inaccurate reporting to the federal agencies. Questioned Costs: Health Center Program Cluster Known Questioned Costs: $473 Health Center Program Cluster Likely Questioned Costs: $26,444 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Payroll costs including fringe benefits for the Health Center Program Cluster in 2024 were $1,714,998. Repeat Finding: 2023-001 Recommendation: We recommend Village implement policies and procedures to accrue for federal expenditures in the period the costs were incurred to ensure costs are being recorded in accordance with GAAP and the SEFA is representative of all federal expenditures incurred in the reporting year. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.51(g), “HUD will only provide rental assistance for a unit if the rent is reasonable. The recipient or subrecipient must determine whether the rent charged for the unit receiving rental assistance is reasonable in relation to rents being charged for comparable unassisted units, taking into account the location, size, type, quality, amenities, facilities, and management and maintenance of each unit. Reasonable rent must not exceed rents currently being charged by the same owner for comparable unassisted units.” Condition: In accordance with 24 CFR §578.51(g), we noted that: • 5 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have a comparable unit analysis conducted. • 23 out of 60 rental payments did not have a comparable unit analysis completed in a timely manner prior to the tenant’s move-in or prior to increases in rent. • 1 out of 60 rental payments tested did not have documentation for amounts charged (such as lease agreements, rent increase letters, or invoices). • 6 out of 60 rental payments tested had errors in the rent reasonableness forms. • 3 of the 55 rental payments that did have rent reasonableness performed did not have rent reasonableness analyzed in the past 12-months of the rent payment. Cause: The Village did not appropriately retain or produce documentation verifying that rent reasonableness was assessed prior to move-in or during changes to lease terms, as required by its policies. Furthermore, not all supporting documentation for initial or changes to lease terms was obtained or retained. Effect or Potential Effect: The insufficient retention or creation of rent reasonableness forms and supporting documentation has led to ineffective operation of rent reasonableness controls, thereby not appropriately identifying rental amounts for the Village’s clients in need of rental assistance. Consequently, this deficiency could result in incorrect charges being applied to the Federal program. Questioned Costs: Known Questioned Costs: $6,678 Likely Questioned Costs: $170,185 Context: This is a condition identified per review of the Village’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Questioned costs were determined as the amounts paid without supporting rent reasonableness documentation. The total costs subject to rent reasonableness amounted to $2,429,908. Repeat Finding: 2023-006 Recommendation: We recommend that the Village enhance existing policies to ensure rent reasonableness is performed on all rental assistance. In addition, we recommend management ensures determinations are performed prior to move-in or rent changes being charged, and documentation is maintained for both the rent amount and reasonableness of the rent. We further recommend a policy be enacted for reviewing rent reasonableness on a periodic basis (i.e. annually) for those tenants that have not had a change in rent during the period. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
FINDING 2024-004 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): 2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with the COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 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 Excluded Parties List System (EPLS), collecting a certification from that person, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 JACKSON COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The County did not have any policies or procedures in place related to the suspension and debarment requirements. A population of ten covered transactions, totaling $1,093,302, that equaled or exceeded $25,000 paid from SLFRF funds were identified. Three of the transactions, totaling $405,660, were selected for testing. For each of the three transactions, the County did not verify the vendor's suspension or debarment status prior to payment due to the County not having polices or procedures in place to verify that contractors were neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, from participating in federal assistance programs or activities. 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). . . ." 31 CFR 19.300 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 do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the EPLS; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person if allowed by this rule; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The County was unable to provide documentation to demonstrate it had policies or procedures in place to verify suspension and debarment status for covered transactions it intends to pay with federal funds. The County was unable to provide documentation to demonstrate it had properly verified that contractors were neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, from participating in federal assistance programs or activities. 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, vendors and subrecipients to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 were not verified to be not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Any program funds the County used to pay vendors that have been suspended or debarred would be unallowable, and the funding agency could potentially recover them. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 JACKSON COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the County establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure contractors and subrecipients, as appropriate, are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into any contracts or subawards. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Finding: Material Weakness Condition and Context Recipients are required to submit quarterly or annual Project and Expenditure (P&E) reports to the U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury). The reporting periods, as well as the respective due dates, are based upon type of recipient and its population, as well as the recipient's allocation amount. Information to be reported includes projects funded, expenditures, and contracts for the appropriate reporting period. The County was classified as a county with a population below 250,000 residents that received an allocation of less than $10 million in COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. As such, the P&E report covering the period from April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024, was required to be submitted to the Treasury by April 30, 2024. The P&E report was submitted April 30, 2024, as required; however, there were no internal controls in place that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance related to the P&E report. One employee prepared and submitted the report without evidence of an oversight or review process. The lack of internal controls was systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 JACKSON COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (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). . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed and implemented by management of the County, which would include segregation of key functions. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the County's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls over reporting, the County cannot ensure that the reports submitted are materially accurate and correct. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the County design and implement a proper system of internal controls, including policies and procedures to ensure that the County provides the Treasury with complete and accurate information for the P&E report. 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: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): 2024 Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/ Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context As part of sound management of the federal award, the City was responsible for implementing a system of internal controls that would ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. The City had not properly designed or implemented such a system, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. Prior to the receipt of direct COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF), all eligible entities were required to execute a Financial Assistance Agreement (Agreement), which included the Award Terms and Conditions that recipients must comply with in carrying out the objectives of their award. Per the Agreement, the City was responsible for the effective administration of the federal award, as well as the application of sound management practices and administration of federal funds in a manner consistent with program objectives and terms and conditions of the award. Recipients may use SLFRF funds for any eligible expenses subject to the restrictions set forth in sections 602 and 603 of the Social Security Act, as added by section 9901 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. The SLFRF program provides substantial flexibility for each recipient to meet local needs within four separate eligible use categories. Recipients may use SLFRF funds to: • Respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency and its negative economic impacts; • Respond to workers performing essential work during the COVID-19 public health emergency by providing premium pay to eligible workers of eligible employers that have eligible workers who are performing essential work; • Provide government services, to the extent COVID-19 caused a reduction in revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year of the recipient; and • Make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure. The City elected to receive the standard revenue loss allowance, allowing it to claim its total SLFRF allocation of $3,821,386 as revenue loss to use for government services. The allocated funds may only be used to cover costs incurred from the period beginning on March 3, 2021, and ending on December 31, 2024. Obligations for costs incurred are required to be liquidated no later than December 31, 2026. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 CITY OF VINCENNES SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) During the audit period, the City completed one transfer of SLFRF funds from the Coronavirus State and Local Fi fund to the Grant Stipends fund in the amount of $30,000. The transfer was described as a reimbursement for stipends paid to essential workers. There was no documentation provided for audit to determine if the transfer was for allowable activities, met the cost objectives of the award, or that the associated expenditures were within the period of performance. The Grant Stipends fund was established in 2022, with total expenditures from the fund from 2022, 2023, and 2024 of only $28,009. Additionally, the transfer of SLFRF funds was commingled with other receipts into the Grant Stipends fund. Because the $30,000 transfer of SLFRF funds exceeded the total disbursements out of the Grant Stipends fund and because the City did not have an appropriate system in place to account for the federal expenditures separately from other grant and operating expenditures, we were unable to determine what, if any, expenditures from the Grant Stipends fund should be included in the population of federal expenditures under the award. Without a complete population of expenditures, we were unable to determine the City's compliance with the Activities Allowed or Unallowed, the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, and the Period of Performance compliance requirements. As such, the $30,000 transferred from the Coronavirus State and Local Fi fund is considered questioned costs. The City also did not have written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of 2 CFR 200. The lack of effective internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the situations described above. 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 200.300(b) states in part: "The non-Federal entity is responsible for complying with all requirements of the Federal award. . . ." 2 CFR 200.302 states in part: "(a) Each state must expend and account for the Federal award in accordance with state laws and procedures for expending and accounting for the state's own funds. In addition, the state's and the other non-Federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 CITY OF VINCENNES SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (b) The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (1) Identification, in its accounts, of all Federal awards received and expended and the Federal programs under which they were received. Federal program and Federal award identification must include, as applicable, the Assistance Listings title and number, Federal award identification number and year, name of the Federal agency, and name of the pass-through entity, if any. (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . . (3) Records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federallyfunded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, financial obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income and interest and be supported by source documentation. (4) Effective control over, and accountability for, all funds, property, and other assets. . . . (7) Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. . . . (g) be adequately documented. . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls over the SLFRF expenditures was not designed by management of the City to ensure the SLFRF funds were being used appropriately. The City did not have policies and procedures in place to ensure that expenditures of federal awards were allowable and occurred within the period of performance. The City initiated a transfer of SLFRF funds from the grant fund to another fund without proper supporting documentation. The City was unable to differentiate expenditures made from federal and nonfederal funds within its ledger for the Grant Stipends fund. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, a population of expenditures associated with the Grant Stipends fund could not be determined. As such, the City cannot ensure nor can we determine that expenditures of the grant were not unallowable, within the proper period, and adhered to established practices and policies. As a result, noncompliance in the form of questioned costs occurred and remained undetected. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 CITY OF VINCENNES SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs Questioned costs in the amount of $30,000 were identified as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended the City's management establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure that expenditures of federal awards are allowable and occur within the period of performance. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.