Information on the federal program – 16.575 – Crime Victim Assistance; U.S. Department of Justice; Texas Office of the Governor – Criminal Justice Division; Program years 2023-2024, 2024-2025 21.027 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds; U.S. Department of Treasury; Dallas County; Program years 2023-2024, 2024-2025 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Texas Health and Human Services Commission; Program years 2023-2024, 2024-2025 Type of Finding – Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance Criteria or specific requirement – The Uniform Guidance and TxGMS require auditees to establish and maintain internal controls to prevent or identify and correct noncompliance with direct and material compliance requirements in a timely fashion (2 CFR 200.303), specifically controls over: Activities Allowed/Allowable Cost (2 CFR 400); Cash Management (2 CFR 305); Reporting (2 CFR 328-330). Condition – The Family Place was unable to provide evidence supporting a review of: Purchase order, invoice, time card, financial report, and performance reports having occurred prior to submission or drawdown. Cause – With turnover and position vacancies, supporting documentation was not available to support evidence of a prior review. Effect or potential effect – Costs may be charged to the grant improperly or inaccurate reports may be submitted to the granting agencies. Questioned costs – None Context – Allowable Costs: Out of a population of 5,120 transactions, a sample of 126 was selected noting 19 did not have evidence of approval of timecards, invoices, or purchase orders prior to drawdown. Cash Management: Out of a population of 28 transactions, a sample of 6 drawdowns was selected noting 6 did not have evidence of approval of drawdowns prior to submission. Reporting: Out of a population of 45 financial and performance reports, a sample of 10 drawdowns was selected noting 10 did not have evidence of approval of drawdowns prior to submission. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Not applicable Recommendation – We recommend management ensure sufficient staffing and oversight to abide by internal processes and procedures which require prior approval of expenditures and reports prior to drawdown or submission. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – See accompanying corrective action plan.
Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number 81.086— Upper Midwest Inter‐Tribal EV Charging Community Network. Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs and Cost Principles, Activities Allowed or Unallowed Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 of Subpart D, "Post Federal Award Requirements Standards for Financial and Program Management," of the Uniform Guidance requires a nonfederal entity to establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, including Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs and Cost Principles. Condition: Controls were not operating as designed to ensure that all expenditures charged to the federal program were reviewed and approved. Causes: For two out of ten tested, expenses charged to the federal grant had no documentation of a review and approval prior to the Organization submitting for reimbursement. The Organization relied on a control activity where the Program Director sent an email to the Executive Director for each expense to obtain approval prior to submitting reimbursements. No documented review and approval for this process being performed was available for two expenses upon request by the audit team. Effect or Potential Effect: Unallowable costs or activities could be charged to the grant. Questioned Costs: None Context: There was not sufficient documentation available upon request to support a review and approval process of reimbursement expenses allocated to the grant. The Organization implemented a payment software that includes review and approval features in July of the fiscal year under audit and no errors were found after the implementation. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the organization continue using their payment software for all transactions relating to federal grants and ensure that all expenses are being reviewed and approved through that software. Views of Responsible Officials: Agree.
Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number 81.086— Upper Midwest Inter‐Tribal EV Charging Community Network. Compliance Requirement: Matching Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 of Subpart D, "Post Federal Award Requirements Standards for Financial and Program Management," of the Uniform Guidance requires a nonfederal entity to establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, including Cost Match principles. Condition: Controls were not implemented to monitor cost match partners’ activities to ensure their expenditures comply with allowable cost activities. Causes: For one of three cost matching amounts recorded in 2024, detail of amounts reported as cost match was not available upon request by auditors. It was obtained from the cost match partner, but the detail had not been obtained, reviewed, and approved by the Organization prior to being requested by auditors. Effect or Potential Effect: Unallowable costs or activities could be counted for cost match by match partners causing Native Sun to fall short of cost match requirements. Questioned Costs: None Context: The Organization did not initially have documentation with sufficient detail for expenses reported by cost match partners during 2024. Repeat Finding: Yes Recommendation: We recommend a control be implemented to monitor cost match partners including obtaining, reviewing and retaining support for reported cost match amounts. Views of Responsible Officials: Agree.
Federal Program: Student Financial Assistance Cluster, ALN No. 84.063 and 84.268 Federal Agency: U.S Department of Education Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 and July 1, 2024 - June 30, 2025 Criteria or Requirement: Per Title 2, U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200 (2 CFR 200), Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, (Subpart D, Section 200.303), the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition found, including facts that support the deficiency identified in the finding and information to provide proper perspective for judging the prevalence and consequences of the finding: The Health System, specifically the Covenant School of Nursing and Radiography (the Nursing School), did not follow requirements relative to the Student Financial Assistance program during the year ended December 31, 2024. During our testing, the Nursing School was unable to provide documentation supporting that various eligibility, reporting, special test and provision requirements were completed in accordance with Federal requirements. The Nursing School’s risk assessment and monitoring control activities were not designed at an appropriate level of precision to ensure adequate segregation of duties or evidence of controls operation related to the following direct and material compliance areas: eligibility, reporting, and special tests and provisions including enrollment reporting, return of title IV funds, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – student information security, and incentive compensation. The Federal expenditures under the Student Financial Assistance cluster were $2,728,263 during the year ended December 31, 2024. Cause and possible asserted effect: The Nursing School does not have appropriate segregation of duties and documentation of key control activities and their related precision levels related to the Student Financial Assistance cluster. Without appropriate controls in place, the Health System could incur unallowable expenditures or result in noncompliance with the requirements. Identification of questioned costs and how they were computed: None Whether the sampling was a statistically valid sample: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Identification of whether the audit finding is a repeat of a finding in the immediately prior audit and if so, the applicable prior year finding number: No. This finding was not a finding in the immediate prior year audit. Recommendations: For eligibility, reporting, and special tests and provisions including enrollment reporting, return of title IV funds, Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act – student information security, and incentive compensation, we recommend that management design and implement internal control procedures at the Nursing School to support the compliance requirements for the program including adequate segregation of duties, reviews at a sufficient level of precision to identify noncompliance, and proper evidence of control operation. Views of responsible officals: Management concurs with KPMG’s assessment that the risk assessment and monitoring control activities were not sufficiently designed to ensure adequate segregation of duties or to provide evidence of control operation. These gaps were primarily due to limited staffing and processes that have not evolved to meet all compliance requirements. Management will implement new control policies and procedures that ensure proper segregation of duties and introduce review mechanisms at a sufficient level of precision to detect and prevent noncompliance. These policies and procedures will be implemented by December 31, 2025.
Federal Program: Crime Victim Assistance – ALN 16.575, National Family Caregiver Support, Title III, Part E – ALN 93.052, Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (STLT) Health Department Response to Public Heath or Healthcare Crises – ALN 93.391, Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) Ebola Preparedness and Response Activities – ALN 93.817, Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse – ALN 93.959, Non-Profit Security Program – ALN 97.008 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Justice, U.S Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Federal Award Year: Various Criteria or Requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.328, The recipient or subrecipient must submit financial reports as required by the Federal award. Reports submitted annually by the recipient or subrecipient must be due no later than 90 calendar days after the reporting period. Reports submitted quarterly or semiannually must be due no later than 30 calendar days after the reporting period. Per 2 CFR 200.329, The recipient or subrecipient must submit performance reports as required by the Federal award. Intervals must be no less frequent than annually nor more frequent than quarterly except if specific conditions are applied (See § 200.208). Reports submitted annually by the recipient or subrecipient must be due no later than 90 calendar days after the reporting period. Reports submitted quarterly or semiannually must be due no later than 30 calendar days after the reporting period. A subrecipient must submit a final performance report to a pass-through entity no later than 90 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. Per the 2024 Compliance Supplement, non-federal entities may be required to submit special reports as required by the terms and conditions of the federal award. Per 2 CFR 200.303, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition found, including facts that support the deficiency identified in the finding and information to provide proper perspective for judging the prevalence and consequences of the finding: Of 20 financial reports tested, 9 were either not submitted timely or documentation was not available to substantiate when the report was submitted. Of 23 performance reports tested, 12 were either not submitted timely or documentation was not available to substantiate when the report was submitted. Of 9 special reports tested, 6 were either not submitted timely or documentation was not available to substantiate when the report was submitted. Cause and possible asserted effect: The Health System does not have an effective process and control to ensure timely submission of required reports per the terms and conditions of federal awards and applicable regulations and retainage of evidence of control operation (i.e. evidence of report submission). Identification of questioned costs and how they were computed: None Whether the sampling was a statistically valid sample: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Identification of whether the audit finding is a repeat of a finding in the immediately prior audit and if so, the applicable prior year finding number: No. This finding was not a finding in the immediate prior year audit. Recommendations: We recommend that the Health System review and enhance its current procedures to ensure that all required reporting applicable to federal awards is accurately identified, submission deadlines are met, and documentation of submissions is properly retained. Views of responsible officals: Management acknowledges the audit finding regarding timely submission of reports and retaining documentation of submissions. We will implement a new combined monitoring and record retention internal control process for financial, performance, and special reporting requirements, to ensure timely submission and retention of supporting documentation for required sponsor reporting. This process will be implemented by December 31, 2025.
Finding No: 2024-001 Activities Allowed or Unallowed/Allowable Costs Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number: 93.778 Program: Medicaid Assistance Program/Medicaid Cluster Award Years: January 1, 2024 – December 31, 2024 (a) Criteria or Requirement Per 2 CFR 200.303, a non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Additionally, the specific requirements for activities allowed or unallowed are unique to each federal program and are found in the federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award pertaining to the program. (b) Condition Found, Including Perspective For one of 40 payroll disbursements tested during the fiscal year 2024 reporting period there was one disbursement totaling $1,988 in which expenditure was approved, requested for reimbursement, and reimbursed by the federal agency, however, per the terms of the grant agreement this disbursement was not allowable. This disbursement was specifically related to a payroll code that was not frequently used by the System and a code typically removed from the reimbursement request before being submitted. (c) Possible Cause While the System performs a review of documentation before payments are requested for reimbursement, controls were not designed or implemented effectively to ensure that unallowable payroll charges were not submitted for reimbursement by the federal agency. (d) Questioned Cost No questioned costs as amounts did not exceed the threshold for reporting. (e) Effect Federal funds were expended for unallowable amounts and evidence of the effective operation of management review controls was not consistently maintained in accordance with Federal requirements. (f) Statistical Validity The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. (g) Repeat Finding in the Prior Year This finding is not a repeat finding. (h) Recommendation We recommend that the System strengthen controls over the management review process to prevent unallowable costs from being charged to Federal programs. (i) View of Responsible Officials Management concurs with the finding. While appropriate controls exist relative to management review of expenditures, opportunities exist to retrain staff and further enhance controls related to procedures for submission, review, and approval of expenditures before submission for reimbursement.
Criteria The Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.303) requires non-federal entities to establish internal controls to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. In addition, federal guidelines require the Organization to supervise the conduct of its volunteers, business partners, contractors and others aiding in administering its federal programs. Condition Internal controls over the SBRL program do not adequately regulate outcomes to grant recipients or provide sufficient disclosure of the Small Business Resiliency Loan program costs, benefits and requirements for participants. • The structure and terms of the grant program are confusing and there is no evidence the loan terms, associated costs and grant benefits were consistently communicated to borrowers. • Loan applications, underwriting materials and borrower training about program features, costs and benefits are decentralized across multiple Small Business Resource Networks (SBRNs), resulting in inconsistent loan and grant application submissions. • Borrowers with equal loan amounts received varying repayment terms, with some receiving longer terms and additional grant income without clear disclosure or equitable access. • Grant recipients were not clearly or consistently informed of the federal income tax consequences resulting from distributions out of the Collateral Account, which was established by the Benefit Distribution Agreement, when such distributions were used to cover missed loan payments and the end-of-loan term distributions. •There is no evidence these disparities were sufficiently explained to borrowers, leading to potential unequal treatment and potential financial harm. Cause The entity lacks standardized procedures for loan term disclosures, centralized underwriting protocols, and consistent communication of borrower grant benefits and federal income tax implications. There is insufficient oversight to ensure equitable treatment and transparency across SBRNs. Effect • Grant recipients may have been misled or disadvantaged due to unclear or unequal loan terms. • Grant funds may have been inequitably distributed, raising concerns about questioned costs and compliance with federal award conditions. Questioned Costs Estimated questioned costs include: • Loan disbursements with varying repayment terms: $4,755,500. Recommendation • Implement standardized loan application and cash flow analysis used to make underwritingdecisions and disclosures across all SBRNs. • Centralize or harmonize program training for SBRN and program administrators to ensureconsistent borrower treatment. • Clearly communicate eligibility for extended repayment terms and grant income Views of Responsible Officials Based on feedback and information available to the GoWest Foundation, the Foundation believes that the structure and terms of the grant program were less confusing to participants who spent time discussing it with the SBRN organizations than to an outside observer without the benefit of such contact. SBRN organizations were provided with uniform training materials and resources and each borrower completed the same application. The program had two primary objectives: 1) provide financial assistance to businesses treated as suffering disproportionate impacts from the pandemic (based on criteria established by the SLFRF program); and 2) help those businesses build or enhance their creditworthiness and their ability to navigate relationships with commercial lenders. The Foundation’s contact with borrowers and feedback from SBRN organizations reveals that a number of participants had a background of avoiding use of credit and suspicion of the financial services industry. Many of those participants self-limited their participation accordingly. In addition, different businesses experienced differing impacts from the pandemic and differing needs for assistance. GoWest worked diligently with the SBRN organizations to be sure that applicants received benefits consistent with their need and with the program terms. It may be that processes and procedures may not have been documented sufficiently to provide assurance to auditors. Similarly, individual case files may not have adequately reflected all of the supporting information that explained differences in levels of participation. However, the Foundation does not believe that these deficiencies had a material impact on equitable distribution of funds or on achievement of the desired results.
Criteria Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, as implemented by the U.S. Department of the Treasury through 31 CFR Part 35 and the 2022 Final Rule, SLFRF recipients must establish and maintain effective internal controls to ensure that funds are used for eligible purposes and that eligibility determinations are based on substantiated, risk-mitigated criteria. The 2024 SLFRF Compliance Supplement designates the program as “higher risk,” requiring enhanced scrutiny of eligibility and fraud prevention measures. Condition The program relied extensively on self-attestation by applicants as the standard method of verifying eligibility, without requiring supporting documentation or conducting verification procedures. These practices were applied broadly and not limited to exceptional cases. Cause Program administrators adopted simplified eligibility procedures including approved use of geographic indicators such as zip codes to expedite benefit delivery. However, they did not implement compensating controls or verification mechanisms to mitigate the increased risk of fraud and ineligible payments associated with self-attestation and geographic proxies. Effect The use of self-attestation as primary eligibility tools may result in: • Ineligible recipients receiving benefits. • Disparate treatment of similarly situated individuals outside designated ZIP codes. • Increased fraud risk, particularly in a program already designated as high-risk. • Noncompliance with federal eligibility and internal control requirements under Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.303 and §200.518). Questioned Costs Estimated questioned costs include: • One Hundred Twenty-Six loan disbursements and grant awards using self-attestation eligibility criteria: $1,983,326. Recommendation The entity should: 1. Reassess eligibility criteria to ensure they are substantiated, equitable, and compliant with federal requirements. 2. Limit self-attestation to exceptional cases and implement verification procedures for all standard applications. 3. Strengthen internal controls to detect and prevent fraud, including random audits, third-party verification, and data cross-checks. 4. Document eligibility determinations and maintain records to support compliance with SLFRF rules and audit standards. Views of Responsible Officials The Foundation recognizes that self-attestation regarding impact of the Covid pandemic carries some fraud risk. The self-attestation process was developed as directed by the Washington Department of Commerce (the state recipient that contracted with the Foundation) to permit businesses not located in a geographic area that was presumptively disproportionately affected by the pandemic to participate in the program. Participants were required to explain the pandemic impact that they suffered in sufficient detail as to allow verification. The process attempted to balance fraud prevention against the desire to streamline qualification and reduce barriers to participation. The Foundation recognizes that documentation of the evidence of pandemic related impacts for self-attestation borrowers could be better.
Finding 2024-001 – N: Special Tests and Provisions Information on the Federal Program: Grantor: United States Department of Health and Human Services Program Name: Health Centers Cluster Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 – Health Center Program (Community Health Centers, Migrant Health Centers, Health Care for the Homeless, and Public Housing Primary Care); 93.527 – Grants for New and Expanded Services under the Health Center Program Criteria or Specific Requirement: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200.303 of the Uniform Guidance states the following regarding internal control, “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).” Per 42 CFR sections 51c.303(e), (f), and (g) and 42 CFR sections 56.303(e), (f), and (g), health centers must prepare and apply a sliding fee discount schedule (SFDS) so that the amounts owed for health center services by eligible patients are adjusted (discounted) based on the patient’s ability to pay as defined by these subsections. Condition: Montefiore Health System, Inc. (the Health System) has an established policy for the Bronx Health Collective that includes a SFDS that complies with federal regulations. Per the policy, eligibility for application of the SFDS should be evaluated once a year. In our review of a sample of financial records for patients treated during the audit period, it was noted that for 14 out of 40 patient files selected for review, the Health System was unable to demonstrate that internal controls were operating effectively to ensure proper application of the Health System’s policy relating to the SFDS. Specifically, documentation supporting the application of the SFDS was not obtained within a year of the visit in line with the Health System’s policy. Cause: The deficiency appears to be due to inconsistent documentation and monitoring practices in the patient intake process. Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate documentation and effective internal controls, the auditee may improperly apply its SFDS policy. This could result in eligible patients being incorrectly charged for services, which may limit access to care and jeopardize compliance with program requirements. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Context: As part of our control testing over the compliance requirement, we reviewed a random sample of 40 patient financial records to assess the application of the Health System’s SFDS policy. The sample was designed to provide sufficient coverage of the population and identify potential control deficiencies. In 14 of the 40 patient files selected for review, the Health System was unable to demonstrate that internal controls were operating effectively to ensure proper application of the Health System’s policy relating to the SFDS. Specifically, documentation supporting the application of the SFDS was not obtained or tracked within the patient’s electronic medical record within a year of the visit in line with the Health System’s policy. In each of the instances where documentation was not available, there were no out-of-pocket costs charged to the patient. Identification as a repeat finding: This finding is not a repeat finding from the prior year. Recommendation: The Health System should improve its process by implementing standardized procedures for documenting income and family size, conducting regular staff training on eligibility determination and documentation requirements, and performing periodic internal reviews to ensure compliance with the SFDS policy including retention of evidence supporting the performance of the control. View of responsible officials: Management concurred with the audit finding and implemented standardized procedures to enhance screening and enrollment of patients. Additional controls are in place to ensure timely documentation of income and family size. In order to ensure compliance with the SFDS policy including documentation and retention, a policy was adopted requiring reviews on the day before visit, during visit and day after visit, as well as periodic retrospective reviews. There will be regular staff training on eligibility, determination and documentation requirements.
2024-001: Significant Deficiency Over Compliance with Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Program: Highway Planning and Construction and Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number(s): 20.205 and 21.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation and U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-through Entity: Colorado Department of Transportation (20.205 only) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.319 states that all procurement transactions under the Federal award must be conducted in a manner that provides full and open competition and is consistent with Federal procurement standards. 2 CFR 200.214 states in part that recipients and subrecipients are subject to the nonprocurement debarment and suspension regulations. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 in part states that a recipient of a Federal award must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award. Condition: We have selected and tested vendors for suspension and debarment with expenditures in excess of $25,000 for the Bridge CR-397 and EMS projects for compliance with suspension and debarment. We identified that two vendors were not properly verified for suspension and debarment prior to the contract execution date. Cause: Internal controls over suspension and debarment were properly designed but not operating effectively to verify that all vendors are in compliance with suspension and debarment. Effect: Our testing identified that the County’s internal controls over compliance with suspension and debarment are not operating effectively, which may cause the County to be out of compliance with Federal and grant requirements. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County re-evaluate the design of internal controls over suspension and debarment to be in compliance with the Federal requirements and the County’s procurement policy/procedures.
2024-003: Material Weakness Over Internal Controls with the Schedule Expenditures of Federal Awards Federal Program: Local Assistance and Tribal Consistency Fund and Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number(s): 21.032 and 21.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation and U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-through Entity: Colorado Department of Transportation (20.205 only) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.508 states that the auditee must prepare a schedule of expenditures of Federal awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the auditee’s financial statements. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 in part states that a recipient of a Federal award must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal awards. Condition: The expenditure amounts related to the 21.032 and 21.027 federal programs provided for the SEFA were materially misstated compared to the County’s accounting records. The County provides information to the auditors to assist with the preparation of the financial statements and the schedule of expenditure of federal awards. However, the information provided to the auditors for the SEFA did not match the information in the accounting records. Therefore, the County had material misstatements and prior year corrections (restatements) related to grants and federal awards. Cause: Lack of internal controls over financial reporting of the SEFA and federal expenditures.. Effect: This caused material audit adjustments to the financial statements and the significant corrections to the SEFA and potential for unidentified misstatements and lack of reporting of Federal awards on the SEFA. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish internal controls over grants management and SEFA preparation processes during that year to make sure that the Federal expenditures are properly reflected on the information used to prepare the SEFA and match the accounting records.
Reference Number: 2024-003 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: Community Development Block Grants Assistance Listing Number: 14.218 Award Number: B-19-UC-42-0001, B-20-UC-42-0001, B-21-UC-42-0001, B-22-UC-42-0001, B-23-UC-42-0001, B-24-UW-42-0001 Compliance Requirement: Program Income Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Condition The County did not timely and accurately report program income received which caused the County’s reporting to HUD to be inaccurate. Criteria or specific requirement Compliance: CFR 570.504(a) states that the receipt and expenditure of program income as defined in §570.500(a) shall be recorded as part of the financial transactions of the grant program. Additionally, CFR 570.504(b)(2)(ii)) requires that program income be disbursed for eligible activities before additional funds are drawn from the U.S. Treasury account. Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions the Federal award. These internal controls should comply 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). Context Program income reported on Line 05 of the PR 26 report was $787,553, an additional $131,863 was collected in fiscal year 2024 but not reported. Cause Amounts received by the County were not identified timely. Effect The amount reported by the County to HUD related to program income was inaccurate. Questioned Costs Management indicated that $131,863 of collections in fiscal year 2024 was omitted from the PR 26 report. Recommendation We recommend that management identify its collections related to program income in a timely manner, modify its draw request appropriately, and report the accurate amounts to HUD. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions The county will continue to report the correct amount of program income to HUD. Receipts will be entered more timely.
Reference Number: 2024-004 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: Community Development Block Grants Assistance Listing Number: 14.218 Award Number: B-19-UC-42-0001, B-20-UC-42-0001, B-21-UC-42-0001, B-22-UC-42-0001, B-23-UC-42-0001, B-24-UW-42-0001 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Condition The County could not report the prime awards within the required timeframes for its first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more. Criteria or specific requirement Compliance: Per the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) And Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 170 Appendix A, prime (direct) recipients of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Reports must be filed in FSRS by the end of the month following the month in which the prime recipient awards any sub-grant greater than or equal to $30,000. If the initial award is below $30,000 but subsequent grant modifications result in a total award equal to or over $30,000, the award will be subject to the reporting requirements as of the date the award exceeds $30,000. If the initial award equals or exceeds $30,000 but funding is subsequently de-obligated such that the total award amount falls below $30,000, the award continues to be subject to FFATA reporting requirements. As of March 8th 2025, FSRS.gov was retired, and all subaward reporting data and functionality are now on SAM.gov. Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions the Federal award. These internal controls should comply 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). Context The seven subawards selected for testing were not reported in FSRS or SAM.gov by the end of the month following the month in which the amounts were awarded. SEE SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS FOR CHART/TABLE Cause The County’s controls were not operating effectively to ensure the reporting was performed in accordance with federal requirements. Effect Subawards were not reported to FSRS or SAM.gov in accordance with FFATA requirements. Questioned Costs None noted. Recommendation We recommend that the County develop internal controls and procedures to ensure that FFATA reporting requirements are met and ensure that all required subawards are reported accurately and timely to FSRS or SAM.gov. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions All of the County’s 2024 grants have been entered into FFATA and our 2025 grants and going forward will be entered when awarded.
Reference Number: 2024-005 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S Department of Justice Federal Program: Congressionally Recommended Awards Assistance Listing Number: 16.753 Award Number: 15PBJA-23-GG-00920-BRND Compliance Requirement: Cash Management Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Condition The County received reimbursement for the total grant award amount prior to incurring expenditures. Criteria or specific requirement Compliance: Per 2 CFR section 200.305(b) For recipients and subrecipients other than States, payment methods must minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds from the Federal agency or the pass-through entity and the disbursement of funds by the recipient or subrecipient regardless of whether the payment is made by electronic funds transfer or by other means. Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions the Federal award. These internal controls should comply 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). Context The County received $2.5 million on July 1, 2024, for the grant, as of that date the general ledger reported no expenditures. The County incurred expenditures of $274,235 in October, $62,247 in November, and $2,160,518 in December. Cause The County’s controls were not operating effectively to ensure reimbursement request were performed in accordance with federal requirements. Effect The County had to return funding of $1,367,790 in November, which was subsequently drawn in December when expenditures were incurred. Questioned Costs None noted. Recommendation We recommend that the County develop internal controls and procedures to ensure drawdowns are performed in a manner to minimize the time between drawing and disbursing federal funds Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions Fiscal Clerk has been trained on proper drawdown of grant funds and accurate recording of expenditures.
Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.303, non-federal entities receiving federal awards must establish and maintain internal controls over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards. Condition During the testing there were two applications that did not include proof of review prior to the notice of eligibility being granted. Cause The primary cause of the errors identified was lack of administrative oversight and a lack of effective control activities such as effective review procedures and monitoring. Effect The Organization granted notices of eligibility to individuals without the required supporting documentation and/or proper approval. Questioned Costs Not applicable Context After an eligibility application is completed, it is given to a case manager for review. Prior to eligibility being granted, the case manager is supposed to sign that they have reviewed the eligibility application. Out of the sample of 40 files tested, two applications did not include proof of review prior to the notice of eligibility being granted. Recommendation We recommend the client implement controls to ensure all eligibility documentation is obtained and properly reviewed before granting eligibility. This includes providing regular staff training and conducting periodic internal audits to ensure compliance. Views of Responsible Officials See accompanying corrective action plan.
Finding No. 2024-001 – Cash Management | Identification of the Program: | Program Name: Research and Development Cluster: Basic Scientific Research, Department of Defense Awarding Office, 12.431; NSF Technology, Innovation and Partnerships, National Science Foundation, 47.084 | Criteria or Specific Requirements (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citations): 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a 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 and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).” According to page 3-C-5 of the 2024 OMB Compliance Supplement, expenses must be incurred before submitting a reimbursement request (2 CFR § 200.305(b)(3)). | Condition: During our testing of 2024 reimbursement requests (totaling $536,272), we noted that there was no evidence of review and approval of the requests to indicate whether the reviewer determined that expenditures submitted for reimbursement had been incurred prior to the request for reimbursement. Management has indicated this review does, in fact, take place, however, there is no evidence (i.e., sign off) on the request to indicate that the review had occurred. | Section III— Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) | Cause: Internal controls over the review and approval of the reimbursement requests were not effective. | Effect or Potential Effect: This could result in reimbursement for expenditures that have not been incurred and paid prior to reimbursement being requested. | Questioned Costs: None. | Context: As the sample size is small, we selected 10 cash disbursements for testing. There was no evidence of approval for all 10 reimbursement requests. | Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A – This is a first year Uniform Guidance audit. | Recommendation: Management should strengthen its internal controls over cash management related to reimbursement requests by having the reviewer sign off on the reimbursement request to support that the review had occurred. | View of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the findings and has developed a corrective action plan to address this finding.
Finding No. 2024-002 – Subrecipient Monitoring | Identification of the Program: | Program Name: Research and Development Cluster: Basic Scientific Research, Department of Defense Awarding Office, 12.431; NSF Technology, Innovation and Partnerships, National Science Foundation, 47.084 | Criteria or Specific Requirements (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citations): 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a 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 and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).” According to page 3-M-1 of the 2024 OMB Compliance Supplement, management is responsible for monitoring activities designed to evaluate subrecipient risk as required by the terms and conditions of the award. Such activities include: reviewing financial reports; following up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other; issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the PTE as required by 2 CFR section 200.521. | Section III— Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs (continued) | Condition: During our testing of 2024 subrecipient monitoring activities, we selected five subrecipients for testing noting that there was no evidence of management’s evaluation of each subrecipient or management’s review of the specific monitoring procedures performed. Through inquiry, management acknowledged that they complete an evaluation form for each subrecipient prior to contracting with the subrecipient although an evaluation of the risk of the subrecipient is not included on the form. Management also informed us that they review all expenditures and related supporting documentation provided by the subrecipient prior to paying their invoices, although evidence of performing such a review is not documented. | Cause: Internal controls over the review and approval of the subrecipient monitoring were not effective. | Effect or Potential Effect: This could result in granting subawards to and paying subrecipients who are of higher risk for compliance and/or subrecipients who have not been properly monitored to ensure they are complying with the grant terms. | Questioned Costs: None. | Context: As the sample size is small, we selected 5 subrecipients for testing out of a total of 5 subrecipients. | Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A – This is a first year Uniform Guidance audit.
FINDING 2024-003 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): FY 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-004. Condition and Context The County had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. Recipients are required to submit quarterly or annually Project and Expenditure (P&E) reports to the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury). The reporting periods, as well as the respective due dates, are based on the type of recipient and the recipient's 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 (SLFRF). 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. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 MIAMI COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The County submitted one P&E report during the audit period, which was obtained from the Treasury's website. Although one employee prepared the P&E report and another reviewed the entries, the system of internal controls was not effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, errors. The information submitted included amounts based on the incorrect period, amounts that should have been omitted, and amounts which were based on budgeted amounts instead of actual amounts, as such, the reports were not fairly presented. Errors identified included the following: Total Cumulative Obligations were overstated by $2,077,147. Total Current Obligations were overstated by $245,909. The lack of internal controls was a systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." Compliance and Reporting Guidance, State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, page 13, states in part: ". . . 10. Reporting. All recipients of federal funds must complete financial, performance, and compliance reporting as required and outlined in Part 2 of this guidance. Expenditures may be reported on a cash or accrual basis, as long as the methodology is disclosed and consistently applied. Reporting must be consistent with the definition of expenditures pursuant to 2 CFR 200.1. Your organization should appropriately maintain accounting records for compiling and reporting accurate, compliant financial data, in accordance with appropriate accounting standards and principles. . . ." 31 CFR 35.4(c) states in part: "Reporting and requests for other information. During the period of performance, recipients shall provide to the Secretary . . . periodic reports providing detailed accounting of the uses of funds . . ." Cause Although a system of internal controls over the P&E report was designed by management, which included segregation of duties, it was not documented, and it did not ensure that the County provided the Treasury with complete and accurate information related to the SLFRF awards. The officials were new and not familiar with the reporting requirements. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 MIAMI COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As such, the County did not accurately report when filing the P&E report for the period April 1, 2023 to March 31, 2024. 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 County. 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 that would ensure appropriate reviews, approvals and oversight are taking place. Additionally, management should develop 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.
Program: Continuum of Care Federal Financial Assistance Listing No.: 14.267 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Pass-through: Sacramento Steps Forward Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Grant Award Number: CA0955L9T032209, CA0955L9T032310, CA0143L9T032215, CA0143L9T032316, CA1303L9T032208, CA1303L9T032309 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and conditions of the federal award. The nonfederal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200 Appendix II requires certain provisions be included in contracts if criteria are met. Condition: The Organization’s documented procurement policy does not incorporate several required elements outlined in 2 CFR §§200.317 through 200.327. Missing elements include, but are not limited to: • Defined procurement methods and thresholds (e.g., micro-purchase, sealed bids), • Procedures to ensure full and open competition, • Requirements for cost or price analysis for purchases above the simplified acquisition threshold, • Affirmative steps to use small and minority businesses and women’s business enterprises, • Procedures for contract administration and oversight, • Inclusion of required contract provisions as listed in Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, • Standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest for employees involved in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Cause: The Organization’s procurement policy has not been updated to reflect the detailed procurement standards required under the Uniform Guidance. Effect: An incomplete procurement policy may lead to inconsistent practices and increase the risk of noncompliance with federal procurement requirements, potentially affecting the allowability and documentation of costs charged to federal awards. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context: This finding was identified during testing of the Organization’s procurement policy under the Continuum of Care Program. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: Partial repeat of Finding 2023-003. The prior finding included both procurement policy deficiencies and lack of suspension and debarment documentation. The current year finding relates only to the procurement policy. Recommendation: We recommend that management revise the Organization’s procurement policy to incorporate all required elements outlined in 2 CFR §§200.317 through 200.327, including definitions of procurement methods, competitive requirements, cost/price analysis, contract provisions, and oversight responsibilities. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
Program: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Assistance Listing No.: 93.558 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Passed-through: County of Sacramento Award No. and Year: DHA-PRTS-NM-07-25-A1; FY 2024 Compliance Requirement: Other - Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) §200.510(b) - Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) §200.510(b) states that the auditee (the Organization) must prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the auditee’s financial statements, which must include the total federal awards expended (including amounts provided to subrecipients) as determined in accordance with §200.502. In addition, section 200.303 of the Uniform Guidance state that that recipients and subrecipients must establish effective internal control over the federal awards, including controls over the accuracy of program information and expenditure amounts. Condition: During our audit procedures performed over the SEFA and expenditures reported for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program we noted the Organization overstated expenditures totaling $138,217. The December 31, 2024 SEFA was corrected for this reporting error. Cause: The Organization did not have adequate internal controls to ensure the Schedule was prepared completely and accurately. Effect: Prior to the correction, expenditures for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program were overstated by $138,217. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: No sampling was used. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We the recommend the Organization enhance internal controls to ensure federal expenditures are reported accurately and completely on the SEFA in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Procurement Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 92-02, 92-03, 92-04, 92-05 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment 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. Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a nonfederal entity. The State of Indiana has established a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 for informal procurement methods. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Small purchase procedures require that price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources or documented reasoning to support a single source provider. Two vendors were identified that were paid $10,500 and $59,408, respectively, during the audit period using federal funds under the award, thereby requiring small purchase procedures for both procurements. Both vendors were selected for testing. The City was unable to provide any documentation for either vendor that the procurement method used was appropriate or that the procurement provided full and open competition or rationale to support the determination to limit competition. Additionally, the history of the procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of the vendor, and the basis for the price, was not adequately documented for either vendor. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use document procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases- (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate." Cause The vendors in question had been utilized by the City for various services over the course of multiple years, including for several years under this award with the ongoing multi-year project. For continuity purposes, the City chose to limit competition when procuring the services. The City included the requirements for limiting competition in its purchasing policy but did not follow the established policy. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, noncompliance remained undetected. As a result, proper procurement procedures were not adhered to for all vendors. Without following the required methods for procurement, the City could be overpaying for services by not receiving the most competitive pricing. 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. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the City's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure expenditures made from federal awards use the appropriate procurement method and retain the documentation to support the procurement methods used in order to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the federal award. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-004 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 92-02, 92-03, 92-04, 92-05 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion 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. The City was required to submit two annual data reports to the Department of Agriculture. The Statement of Budget, Income and Equity (Form RD 442-2) report data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current income and expenditures and budgeted amounts. The Balance Sheet (Form RD 442-3) report data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current year assets and liabilities. Per the USDA Rural Utilities Service Borrower's Guide, both reports also required inclusion of comparative information for the prior year. Both reports were selected for testing. We were unable to trace either report to the City's records, nor could we verify the accuracy and completeness of either report. The following errors were identified: • The Form RD 442-2, which covered calendar year 2023, reported total income and expenses of $3,792,018 and $1,615,582, respectively. However, the City's ledger for the same period had total income and expenses of $3,985,851 and $3,740,788, respectively. This resulted in net income being overstated by $2,319,039. Additionally, only one amount was reported as comparative data for prior year activity. We were unable to determine what this amount represented and were unable to verify it to the prior period report or to the City's records. • The Form RD 442-3, which covered calendar year 2023, reported total assets and liabilities of $18,229,653 and $10,503,419, respectively. However, the City's records for the same period had total assets and liabilities of $39,216,648 and $12,758498, respectively. Additionally, no comparative amounts from the prior year were reported. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . ." 7 CFR 1780.47 states in part: "(a) Borrowers are required to provide RUS an annual audit or financial statements. . . . (e) Borrowers exempt from audits. All borrowers who are exempt from audits, will, within 60 days following the end of each fiscal year, furnish the RUS with annual financial statements, consisting of a verification of the organization's balance sheet and statement of income and expense by an appropriate official of the organization. Forms RD 442-2, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity,' and 442-3 may be used. (f) Management reports. These reports will furnish management with a means of evaluating prior decisions and serve as a basis for planning future operations and financial strategies. In those cases where revenues from multiple sources are pledged as security for an RUS loan, two reports will be required; one for the project being financed by RUS and one combining the entire operation of the borrower. In those cases where RUS loans are secured by general obligation bonds or assessments and the borrower combines revenues from all sources, one management report combining all such revenues is acceptable. The following management data will be submitted by the borrower to the processing office. These reports at a minimum will include a balance sheet and income and expense statement. . . . (2) Annual management reports. Prior to the beginning of each fiscal year the following will be submitted to the processing office. (If Form RD 442-2 is used as the annual management report, enter data in column three only of Schedule 1, and complete all of Schedule 2.) • The Form RD 442-3, which covered calendar year 2023, reported total assets and liabilities of $18,229,653 and $10,503,419, respectively. However, the City's records for the same period had total assets and liabilities of $39,216,648 and $12,758498, respectively. Additionally, no comparative amounts from the prior year were reported. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . ." 7 CFR 1780.47 states in part: "(a) Borrowers are required to provide RUS an annual audit or financial statements. . . . (e) Borrowers exempt from audits. All borrowers who are exempt from audits, will, within 60 days following the end of each fiscal year, furnish the RUS with annual financial statements, consisting of a verification of the organization's balance sheet and statement of income and expense by an appropriate official of the organization. Forms RD 442-2, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity,' and 442-3 may be used. (f) Management reports. These reports will furnish management with a means of evaluating prior decisions and serve as a basis for planning future operations and financial strategies. In those cases where revenues from multiple sources are pledged as security for an RUS loan, two reports will be required; one for the project being financed by RUS and one combining the entire operation of the borrower. In those cases where RUS loans are secured by general obligation bonds or assessments and the borrower combines revenues from all sources, one management report combining all such revenues is acceptable. The following management data will be submitted by the borrower to the processing office. These reports at a minimum will include a balance sheet and income and expense statement. . . . (2) Annual management reports. Prior to the beginning of each fiscal year the following will be submitted to the processing office. (If Form RD 442-2 is used as the annual management report, enter data in column three only of Schedule 1, and complete all of Schedule 2.)• The Form RD 442-3, which covered calendar year 2023, reported total assets and liabilities of $18,229,653 and $10,503,419, respectively. However, the City's records for the same period had total assets and liabilities of $39,216,648 and $12,758498, respectively. Additionally, no comparative amounts from the prior year were reported. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . ." 7 CFR 1780.47 states in part: "(a) Borrowers are required to provide RUS an annual audit or financial statements. . . . (e) Borrowers exempt from audits. All borrowers who are exempt from audits, will, within 60 days following the end of each fiscal year, furnish the RUS with annual financial statements, consisting of a verification of the organization's balance sheet and statement of income and expense by an appropriate official of the organization. Forms RD 442-2, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity,' and 442-3 may be used. (f) Management reports. These reports will furnish management with a means of evaluating prior decisions and serve as a basis for planning future operations and financial strategies. In those cases where revenues from multiple sources are pledged as security for an RUS loan, two reports will be required; one for the project being financed by RUS and one combining the entire operation of the borrower. In those cases where RUS loans are secured by general obligation bonds or assessments and the borrower combines revenues from all sources, one management report combining all such revenues is acceptable. The following management data will be submitted by the borrower to the processing office. These reports at a minimum will include a balance sheet and income and expense statement. . . . (2) Annual management reports. Prior to the beginning of each fiscal year the following will be submitted to the processing office. (If Form RD 442-2 is used as the annual management report, enter data in column three only of Schedule 1, and complete all of Schedule 2.) (i) Two copies of the management reports and proposed 'Annual Budget'. (ii) Financial information may be reported on Form RD 442-2 which includes Schedule 1, 'Statement of Budget, Income and Equity' and Schedule 2, 'Projected Cash Flow' or information in similar format. (iii) A copy of the rate schedule in effect at the time of submission. . . ." Cause The Clerk-Treasurer had served in the position for less than two years when the reports for 2024 were due and was inexperienced with the reporting requirements of the award. As a result, the Clerk-Treasurer did not properly prepare the reports. Additionally, the Clerk-Treasurer was solely responsible for preparing and submitting the reports with no oversight, review, or approval process that would have allowed for prevention, or detection and correction, of the noncompliance. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the City did not file an accurate and complete report for either annual report required under the federal award. As a result, material noncompliance occurred and remained undetected. By not reporting the comparative data, all information needed to determine the financial status of the City was not readily available. 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. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the City's management establish a proper system of internal controls and develop and implement reporting policies and procedures to ensure that all required reports are filed timely, accurately, and contain all the required information. 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 - 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 Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-002. 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 entering into subawards or covered transactions with COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) award funds, recipients are required to verify that vendors or subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from receiving federal funds. "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 can 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. Four covered transactions exceeding $25,000 for goods or services that were paid using SLFRF funds were identified during the audit period and two of them were selected for testing. The City did not verify the vendor's suspension and debarment status prior to entering into the covered transaction with either vendor. The amount paid to both vendors totaled $785,268. 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 City had conducted business with the two vendors in question in prior years, and due to the existing business relationship, opted to utilize both vendors for projects using federal funds under the award. The City included the various methods for verifying a vendor's suspension and debarment status in its purchasing policy but did not follow the established policy. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the City entered into covered transactions without verifying that the vendors were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from receiving federal funds. As a result, material noncompliance occurred and remained undetected. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statues, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the City's management establish a proper system of internal control and follow the City's established purchasing policy to ensure procedures for entering into covered transactions are followed and to retain documentation of the verification of a vendor's suspension and debarment status. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-006 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 Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion 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. The City was required to submit an annual Project and Expenditure (P&E) report to the U.S. Department of the Treasury. The P&E report data to be submitted included, but was not limited to, current period and total cumulative obligations and current period and total cumulative expenditures. We were unable to trace the annual P&E report to the City's records. The errors identified were as follows: • Total cumulative obligations were overstated by $23,337. • Total cumulative expenditures were understated by $171,136. • Current period expenditures were understated by $163,789. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302(b) states in part: "The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following . . . (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . ." 31 CFR 35.4(c) states in part: "Reporting and requests for other information. During the period of performance, recipients shall provide to the Secretary periodic reports providing detailed accounting of the uses of funds, . . ." Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Compliance and Reporting Guidance, page 10, states in part: ". . . 10. Reporting. All recipients of federal funds must complete financial, performance, and compliance reporting as required and outlined in Part 2 of this guidance. Expenditures may be reported on a cash or accrual basis, as long as the methodology is disclosed and consistently applied. Reporting must be consistent with the definition of expenditures pursuant to 2 CFR 200.1. Your organization should appropriately maintain accounting records for compiling and reporting accurate, compliant financial data, in accordance with appropriate accounting standards and principles. . . ." Cause The Clerk-Treasurer had served in the position for two years when the report for 2024 was due and was inexperienced with the reporting requirements of the award. As a result, the Clerk-Treasurer did not properly prepare the report. Additionally, the Clerk-Treasurer was solely responsible for preparing and submitting the report with no oversight, review, or approval process that would have allowed for prevention, or detection and correction, of the noncompliance. Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the City did not file an accurate annual P&E report as required under the federal award. As a result, material noncompliance 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. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the City's management establish a proper system of internal controls and develop and implement reporting policies and procedures to ensure that all required reports are complete and accurate when submitted. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
2024-006 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Prior Year Finding Number: 2023-005 Year of Finding Origination: 2020 Type of Finding: Internal Control Over Compliance and Compliance Severity of Deficiency: Significant Deficiency and Other Matter Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Program: 21.027 COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award Number and Year: SLFRP3474, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: N/A – Federal Direct Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.303 states that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the auditee is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Federal requirements prohibit non-federal entities from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 180.300 describes a required verification process. Prior to entering into the transaction, one of the following must be performed: (1) checking SAM.gov exclusions, (2) collecting a certification, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with the contracting party. Condition: The County did not verify that vendors were not debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or activities before entering into the covered transactions. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The County has revised its procurement policies to include components of federal procurement requirements related to suspension and debarment; these are pending review and approval by the Board of County Commissioners. The vendors paid with federal funds from this program were not listed as suspended or debarred on SAM.gov at the time of audit. Effect: Failure to verify vendors are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into a covered transaction may result in the County entering into a transaction with a vendor that is not authorized to provide goods and services under the grant. Cause: The County’s written procurement policy does not include requirements specific to suspension and debarment. Recommendation: We recommend the County include the specific components of federal procurement requirements in its written procurement policies and procedures. View of Responsible Official: Concur
2024-007 Reporting Prior Year Finding Number: N/A Year of Finding Origination: 2024 Type of Finding: Internal Control Over Compliance and Compliance Severity of Deficiency: Material Weakness and Modified Opinion Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Program: 21.027 COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award Number and Year: SLFRP3474, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: N/A – Federal Direct Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.303 states that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the auditee is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.510(b) states that the auditee must prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the auditee’s financial statements which must include the total federal awards expended as determined in accordance with § 200.502, basis for determining federal awards expended. In addition, the U.S. Department of the Treasury requires recipients of funds to submit Project and Expenditure reports that include, by project, current period obligations, cumulative obligations, current period expenditures, and cumulative expenditures. The frequency of reporting is dependent on the size of the entity and amount of funding received. Condition: During 2024, McLeod County identified an additional $1,302,426 in COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds expenditures that were not included in the County’s original SEFA nor in the original population of expenditures provided for audit. In addition, expenditures documented in the County’s annual Project and Expenditure report through March 31, 2025, were understated by $1,515,400, and expenditures documented in the County’s annual Project and Expenditure report through March 31, 2024, were understated by $374,095. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The U.S. Department of the Treasury relies on accurate reporting of program costs to ensure grant funds are spent in accordance with program requirements. McLeod County is required to submit annual Project and Expenditure reports; the County submitted annual reports in both April 2024 and April 2025. Effect: Federal expenditures provided to the auditors were not fairly reported in the SEFA. In addition, the County did not accurately report expenditures on its Project and Expenditure reports as of March 31, 2025, and March 31, 2024. Cause: Due to human error, the County reported funds as obligated instead of expended because of additional projects that are ongoing. Recommendation: We recommend the County implement controls that ensure proper identification of federal expenditures in accordance with program requirements and that federal program reports are accurate. We also recommend the County submit revised Project and Expenditure reports as of March 31, 2025, and March 31, 2024. View of Responsible Official: Concur
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Block Development Grants/Entitlement Cluster - 14.218 Multiple Awards and Award Years including COVID-19 funding Criteria or Specific Requirement – Reporting and Significant Deficiency The Quarterly Cash on Hand report must be submitted to the respective field office within 30 days after the end of the quarterly reporting period. Per 2 CFR 200.303, the non-Federal entities receiving federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control design to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: During our test work over the Community Block Development Grants/Entitlement Cluster, we noted the Unified Government submitted two of the quarterly reports for the CDBG Entitlement program after the 30 day deadline. Cause: The Unified Government's controls to ensure required report submissions occur were not operating effectively. Effect: Required reports were not submitted timely. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context: Out of two quarters selected for testing, one quarters reports were submitted past the 30 day deadline. CDBG Cash on Hand Report Due Quarterly (January 1, 2024-March 31, 2024) and CDBG-CV Cash on Hand Report Due Quarterly (January 1, 2024-March 31, 2024) were submitted on July 24, 2024, 85 days past the 30 day due date. Identification of Prior Year Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend that the Unified Government implement a process to ensure reports are submitted by the required due date. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree with the finding. See management corrective action plan.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, passed through Kansas Department of Aging and Disability Services Aging Cluster - ALN 93.044 - Special Programs for the Aging_Title III, Part B_Grants for Supportive Services and Senior Centers - 2301KSOASS ALN 93.045 - Special Programs for the Aging _Title III, Part C_Nutrition Services - 2301KSOAHD ALN 93.053 - Nutrition Services Incentive Program - 2301KSOAHD Criteria or Specific Requirement: Suspension and Debarment and Significant Deficiency In accordance with 2 CFR 200.214, non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR Section 180.215. Per 2 CFR 200.303, the non-Federal entities receiving federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control design to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition: Suspension and debarment checks were not completed for the subrecipient that received federal funds. Cause: For the Unified Government, this is typically included in the contracts, but was not included in the subrecipient contracts for this program and the Unified Government did not have another means of validating suspension and debarment. Effect: Federal funds could be paid to entities that are suspended or debarred. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Only one subrecipient received pass-through funding from the Unified Government. The single subrecipient under ALN 93.044, 93.045 and 93.053, receiving approximately $428,000, was not evaluated for suspension and debarment. It was noted after subsequent check, that the subrecipient was not suspended or debarred. Identification of Prior Year Finding: 2023-006, 2022-007, 2021-005, 2020-002 Recommendation: Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that suspension and debarment checks are performed on vendors and subrecipients alike prior to making purchases with federal funds. When newly established programs include subrecipients, we also recommend the contracts include suspension and debarment language. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree with the finding. See management corrective action plan.
Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF), ALN No. 21.027, Award No. 23-0208-HITC ARPA Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Repeat Finding: No Condition: During our testing of two expenditures, we noted that management was unable to provide supporting documentation that review procedures were performed on invoices before the preparation of disbursement of funds. Questioned Costs: None Context: For both expenditures tested in the population of two, management was not able to provide the required support showing that the invoices were reviewed before preparation of disbursement. Criteria: 2 CFR part 200 section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award including proper authorization and approval for purchases. Cause: There was significant turnover within the finance department of the City and the grants administration process was missing supervision by key personnel. The finding indicates that there should be some process improvements in how grant expenditures are reviewed and approved before disbursement of funds to provide evidence the compliance requirement are being met. Effect: Unallowable costs or activities could be funded by the federal grant. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure all disbursement of grant funds are reviewed and approved before disbursement as well as increase training efforts on disbursement policy requirements if there is future staffing turnover.
Section III – Findings and questioned costs for Federal awards U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency Passed through Missouri Department of Public Safety, State Emergency Management Agency Program Name: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) Assistance Listing #: 97.036 Finding: 2024 – 001 SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY Reporting Condition: During our original audit, the Cooperative initially failed to identify and properly report $878,271 of FEMA aid funding received from the State of Missouri. This error was identified subsequent to the issuance of the report and requires a re-issuance of the related audit reports. The internal control system did not prevent or detect this error to trigger the SEFA preparation process. Cause: The Cooperative's procedures for identifying and reporting federal expenditures were insufficient. The Cooperative finance personnel initially misunderstood the proper period for reporting FEMA disaster assistance expenditures. While the FEMA aid funding was approved by the State on December 20, 2024, with inspection by SEMA completed January 15, 2025, management initially concluded the expenditures should be reported in 2025 based on the cash receipt date. However, the expenditures should have been reported in 2024 when the eligible disaster recovery costs were actually incurred. This timing confusion, combined with the Cooperative's infrequent receipt of federal funding, resulted in the omission from the original 2024 SEFA. Effect: The initial error resulted in the audit report being issued without the required single audit report. While this error has been corrected, the control deficiency increases the risk that future federal awards could be incorrectly reported on the SEFA, potentially resulting in noncompliance with federal reporting requirements and incomplete or inaccurate identification of major programs subject to audit. Questioned Costs: $0 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.510(b) requires that the auditee prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the auditee's financial statements which must include the total Federal awards expended as determined in accordance with 2 CFR 200.502. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 requires that non-federal entities establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the related awards. Recommendation: We recommend the Cooperative implement written procedures for SEFA preparation that include: (1) obtaining and reviewing all award agreements to identify federal funding sources; (2) maintaining a master listing of all awards that identifies the funding source (federal/state/local) and applicable Assistance Listing Numbers; (3) implementing cutoff procedures to ensure federal expenditures are reported in the correct period based on when eligible costs are incurred, not when funds are received from federal systems; and (4) requiring independent review of the SEFA by someone knowledgeable about federal compliance requirements who verifies completeness against award documentation and proper period reporting. We note that the Cooperative's finance office maintains good communication practices with auditors regarding federal funding when they are aware of such awards; therefore, strengthening the internal identification and cutoff processes will enhance the Cooperative's ability to provide complete, accurate, and timely information to auditors about all federal funding sources. Views of responsible personnel and planned corrective actions: Management concurs with this finding. The Cooperative will implement the following corrective actions prior to December 31, 2025: • The CFO will document written procedures for SEFA preparation that specifically address proper period cutoff based on when costs are incurred versus when funds are received. • All current grant agreements will be reviewed to identify federal funding sources and ensure compliance with the single audit threshold. • The CFO will perform quarterly and annual reviews of federal expenditure reporting for completeness, accuracy, and proper period reporting. • Prior to year-end, the CFO will independently review all award documentation to the draft SEFA against all grant documentation to verify completeness and proper period reporting.
2024-001 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – ALN No. 21.027 - Distribution of Compensation – Internal Controls over Allowable Costs and Activities (Significant Deficiency) Grant No. X50-8-018 Passed through Office of the Governor, Criminal Justice Coordinating Council Grant Period: October 1, 2023-September 30, 2025 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR Section 200.430(i) compensation records must support the distribution of the employee’s compensation among specific activities or costs objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award and compensation of employees used in meeting cost sharing or matching requirements on Federal awards must be supported in the same manner. Condition: For specific payroll costs selected, the compensation records supporting the distribution of employees’ compensation to the federal award did not equal the amounts charged to the federal grant. Effect: The lack of controls to ensure the correct amounts are charged to the federal program based on the time and effort of the personnel could result in charging unallowable costs to the federal program. Cause: The Foundation calculated the amounts charged to the federal grant based on the budgeted percentage of time for each employee rather than the actual hours per the compensation records. Known Questioned Costs: $273 Likely Questioned Costs: $3,122 Perspective: This finding represents a systematic problem. Of the twenty-five transactions tested, five had errors. The sample was not statistically valid. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the Association establish policies and procedures to ensure that compensation is properly documented and distributed between Federal awards and properly approved.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.331(a) states that all pass-through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes, federal award identification, subrecipient name, subrecipient’s DUNS number, federal award identification number (FAIN), federal award date, subaward start and end date, amount of federal funds obligated, total amount of federal award, federal award project description, name of federal awarding agency, Assistance Listing (ALN) number and name, identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for federal award. Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal control should include procedures to ensure required information is communicated prior to the issuance of the subaward. Per 2 CFR 200.331(a)(1), pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring of the subrecipient. Per 2 CFR 200.332(d) through (f), pass-through entities must monitor the activities of the subrecipient, which includes reviewing financial reports required by the pass-through entity. Condition: During our testing, we noted subrecipients tested had required information omitted from the sub agreements to the subrecipients including Assistance Listing (CFDA) title and number, subrecipient’s DUNS number, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is research and development, and indirect cost rate for federal award. Subrecipients tested did not have evidence of the County’s evaluation of the risk of noncompliance by the subrecipients, nor was there evidence of monitoring of annual audits for the subrecipients. Internal checklists that aid in compliance were missing for certain subrecipients. Reporting requirements from the subrecipients to the County were also not met. Per 2 CFR 200.331(a)(1), pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring of the subrecipient. Questioned costs: None. Context: Five out of the five subrecipients did not include required information in subaward agreements issued to subrecipients and lacked evidence of both the evaluation of risk of noncompliance of the subrecipient and monitoring of annual audits for the subrecipients. Five of the five subrecipients were missing an internal checklist that is signed by the County Manager. Cause: Lack of sufficient controls in place to ensure that subrecipient agreements contain all required information and are monitored appropriately. Effect: Failure to communicate required information and to adequately monitor the subrecipients could result in subrecipients not properly administering the federal programs in accordance with federal regulations. Repeat Finding: Yes, repeat of prior year finding 2023-004. Recommendation: CLA recommends that the County review its procedures for communicating information to subrecipients and implement the procedures necessary to ensure information is included in the subrecipient award documents at time of funding and that appropriate monitoring is performed for each subrecipient. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303, requires that non-federal entities receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Effective internal controls should include procedures in place to ensure the required certifications for covered contracts and subawards are received, documented, and contracts are not made with a debarred or suspended party. Condition: During our testing of five covered transactions, we noted the County did not have proper suspension and debarment documentation for the vendors and subawards selected for testing. Questioned costs: None. Context: All five covered transaction tested did not have proper supporting documentation for suspension and debarment procedures. Cause: Lack of sufficient controls in place to ensure that suspension and debarment checks were performed prior to entering into contracts. Effect: Failure to obtain the required certifications or perform verification procedures with the SAM could result in the payment of federal funds to vendors that are suspended or debarred from participation in federal assistance programs. Repeat Finding: Yes, repeat of prior year finding 2023-005. Recommendation: CLA recommends the County obtain certifications from vendors stating their organization is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs or document the procedures performed to verify the vendor is not identified as suspended or debarred on SAM. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Finding 2024-003 Information on the federal program: Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities – Equipment and Real Property Management Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number: 10.760 Federal Award Number: N/A Pass-Through Entity: N/A Compliance Requirements: Equipment and Real Property Management Audit Finding: Material Weakness, Noncompliance, Qualified Opinion Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO)...." 2 CFR 200.313(d)(1) states in part: "Property records must be maintained that include a description of the property, a serial number or other identification number, the source of funding for the property (including the federal award identification number), who holds title, the acquisition date, cost of the property, percentage of federal participation in the project costs for the federal award under which the property was acquired, the location, use and condition of the property, and any ultimate disposition data including the date of disposal and sales price of the property" Condition: An effective internal control system was not in place at the District to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Equipment and Real Property Management compliance requirement. Cause: Management had not established a system of internal control that would have ensured proper procedures are followed to comply with the Equipment and Real Property Management compliance requirements. Effect: The failure to establish an effective internal control system enabled noncompliance to go undetected and the proper tracking of assets acquired with federal funds was not taking place. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the Equipment and Real Property Management compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the District. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: The District did not maintain an updated asset listing that reflects the construction in process balance related to the project funded with federal funds. There was approximately $25.0 million of disbursements from federal funds related to the project as of December 31, 2024. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-003. Recommendation: We recommend that the District’s management establish controls related to the grant agreement and the Equipment and Real Property compliance requirement to ensure that assets being purchased with federal funds are added to the capital asset listing and all required information is maintained on the capital asset listing. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Finding 2024.004: Allowable Costs/Activities Allowed or Unallowed - Significant Deficiency Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Names: Health Center Program Cluster: Health Center Program (Community Health Centers, Migrant Health Centers, Health Care for the Homeless, and Public Housing Primary Care), COVID-19 - Health Center Program Cluster: Health Center Program (Community Health Centers, Migrant Health Centers, Health Care for the Homeless, and Public Housing Primary Care) Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 93.224 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: H80CS00053 - 2023 and 2024, H8FCS41422 - 2023 Criteria In accordance with 2CFR 200.303(a), Internal Controls, a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. The specific allowability requirements are unique to each federal program, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the federal award pertaining to the program. Condition Charges to federal awards for cash disbursements were not supported by illustration of proper approval. Cause The Center’s internal controls over cash disbursements were not consistently followed to ensure invoices were properly approved. Effect or Potential Effect Failure to ensure cash disbursements across programs have proper approval could result in noncompliance with the grant requirements or unallowable costs being charged. Questioned Costs None Context A test of 25 cash disbursement transactions was performed and resulted in four instances where the Center was unable to provide approved documentation. Our sample was a statistically valid sample. Identification of Repeat Finding This finding is a repeat finding (see prior year finding number: 2023.004) Recommendation The Center should establish a system of internal controls to ensure that all cash disbursements are properly approved. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the audit finding and will strengthen internal controls and accountability to correct the deficiency. Management has prepared a Corrective Action Plan that outlines the additional controls implemented.
FINDING 2024-001 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Number or Year (or Other Identifying Number): Interim Financing Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The City did not have an effective system of internal controls over federal award requirements, including procurement and suspension and debarment. The City failed to properly design and implement internal controls, such as appropriate segregation of duties, to ensure compliance and detect or correct noncompliance in a timely manner. Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-federal entity. As Indiana Code has set a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Procurement - Small Purchases During the audit period, the City had six vendors with purchases under the $150,000 threshold that were considered simplified acquisition procurements and over the $10,000 threshold that was considered micro-purchase procurements. All six vendors were selected for testing, and for five of those vendors, the City could not provide the procurement history or the rationale for the method of procurement, the selection of vendor, or the basis for price. The total dollar amount spent with these five vendors during 2024 was $246,055. Procurement - Simplified Acquisitions During the audit period, the City had three vendors with purchases over the $150,000 threshold that were considered simplified acquisition procurements. All three vendors were selected for testing, and for two of those vendors, the City could not provide the procurement history or the rationale for the method of procurement, the selection of vendor, or the basis for price. The total dollar amount spent with these two vendors during 2024 was $2,654,999. Procurement - Policy Per Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR 200.318(a), a non-federal entity that receives federal funds must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Additionally, state law, such as Indiana Code 5-22, prescribes specific procedures for purchasing supplies and services based on various dollar thresholds. The City did not provide a purchasing policy for review that included the applicable federal regulation, such as procedures to avoid the acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items and procedures to ensure that all solicitations incorporate a clear and accurate description of the technical requirements for the material, product, or services to be procured. Additionally, the City did not maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions, recipients are required to verify that such contracts 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 (ELPS), collecting a certification from that person, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. The City failed to verify that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into covered transactions exceeding $25,000. Of the eight vendors tested, no documentation was provided to show that a check was performed against the EPLS or through other acceptable verification methods. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was determined to be a systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320(b) states in part: "Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance awards exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM.gov Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The City's management was not aware of federal compliance requirements related to procurement and suspension and debarment. The City had not established or implemented the necessary internal controls and written policies to ensure purchases and contracts were administered in accordance with federal and state regulations. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the City cannot ensure that the services obtained provided full and open competition or the basis of the price. In addition, the City cannot ensure the vendors paid were eligible to participate in federal programs. Any program funds the City used to pay vendors that have been suspended or debarred would be unallowable, and the funding agency could potentially recover them. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the City's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure expenditures made from federal awards use the appropriate procurement method and retain the documentation to support the procurement methods used in order to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the federal award. We recommended that management of the City 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 contracts or subawards. We also recommended strengthening its policies and procedures to ensure appropriate supporting documentation for federal programs is retained to be presented for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Criteria: 2 CFR 200.319 states that all procurement transactions under the Federal award must be conducted in a manner that provides full and open competition and is consistent with Federal procurement standards. 2 CFR 200.214 states in part that recipients and subrecipients are subject to the suspension and debarment regulations. In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 in part states that a recipient of a Federal award must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award. Condition: We have selected and tested one vendor for suspension and debarment with expenditures in excess of $25,000 for the construction of a new shelter and office space for compliance with suspension and debarment. We identified the one vendor were not properly verified for suspension and debarment prior to the contract execution date. It appears that the vendor was not suspended or debarred by the federal government. Cause: Internal controls over suspension and debarment were not properly designed to verify that all vendors are in compliance with suspension and debarment. Effect: Our testing identified that the Organization’s internal controls over compliance with suspension and debarment are not in place to comply with the suspension and debarment requirements. Based on our testing, the vendor was in compliance with suspension and debarment. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization re-evaluate the design of internal controls over compliance with suspension and debarment compliance requirements based on 2 CFR 200.214 and establish policies and procedures to comply with these requirements as they relate to requirements related to federal grants. Corrective Action Plan: Reported on page 20.
Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance ALN 21.019: Coronavirus Relief Fund Criteria: A recipient of federal funds must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal Award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the Federal Award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal Award. (2 CFR 200.303). Condition: The District incurred project costs that were not formally approved for payment by the Board of Directors. Formal approval of payments is an important internal control over the use of federally awarded funds. However, no documentation was provided to demonstrate such approval, and there was no evidence of formal authorization in the Board meeting minutes. Context: The project started in calendar year 2024, and costs were paid throughout the year for water and sewer system upgrades. Effect: Without adequate oversight, there could be unallowable costs and costs incurred outside of the grant period. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: The District discussed invoices during their monthly meetings and reviewed reports supplied by the engineer, but no formal documentation of approval was recorded in the meeting minutes or on the invoices and supporting documentation. Auditor Recommendation: We recommend that the District record in the meeting minutes or on the invoices and supporting documents, board approval for payment of invoices prior to payment. District Response: The Water District Secretary will bring before the board every invoice from Central, WET, Shumaker, and payroll for a separate vote for approval. This will be completed at the November 2025 meeting.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Program Title: Formula Grants for Rural Area and Tribal Transit Program AL Number: 20.509 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: MN-2023-045-00 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Department of Transportation Pass-Through Number(s): 1054531 Award Period: 1/1/2024-12/31/2024 Type of Finding: • Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: Under 2 CFR section 200.303, a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal awards 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). Timely review and approval should be maintained to ensure accurate amounts are being drawn down prior to submission. Condition: The Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place for the full fiscal year to ensure cash drawdowns are approved by the appropriate personnel before being submitted. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: Three of the three selections did not have a documented review process in place on the drawdown prior to submission to the state. This was not a statistically valid sample. Cause: Management did not have a separate individual assigned to review the cash drawdown for the request for funds. Effect: Potential for inaccurate amounts of funds to be requested. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: A separate individual with supervisory authority over the preparer should be assigned to review and approve the cash drawdown prior to submission. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: There are no disagreements with the audit finding. The Organization will ensure there are proper segregation of duties regarding the cash drawdown process.
Finding 2024-002: Information on the Federal Program: Compliance Requirements: Other—Schedule of Expenditure of Federal Awards Preparation Type of Finding: Material Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.510 indicates that the auditee must prepare a Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for the period covered by the auditee’s financial statements which must include the total federal awards expended as determined in accordance with 200.502 Basis for Determining Federal Awards Expended. Per 2 CFR 200.502, the determination of when a federal award is expended should be based on when the activity related to the federal award occurs. Generally, the activity pertains to events that require the non-Federal entity to comply with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards, such as: expenditure/expense transactions associated with awards. In addition, 2 CFR Part 200.303 requires the program establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards that provide reasonable assurance of compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. Condition: The Organization failed to prepare a complete and accurate SEFA for the year ended December 31, 2024. The SEFA is a required supplementary schedule that provides detailed information on all federal awards received and expended during the fiscal year, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.510. Cause: The noncompliance resulted from a deficiency in the Organization’s internal controls. The Organization does not have established policies and procedures to ensure all federal awards are properly identified, tracked, and included in the SEFA preparation process. Effect or Potential Effect: Due to the control deficiencies described above, if not for auditor assistance, inaccurate expenditures result in a high risk that material noncompliance with federal regulations could occur and not be detected and corrected in a timely manner; inaccurate reporting to federal agencies on the Organization’s federal expenditures; and persistent noncompliance can lead to potential loss of funding. Questioned costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of this compliance finding. Context: The Organization mistakenly omitted to report expenditures of federal award expenditures on an accrual basis under the Sexual Risk Avoidance, ALN 93.060, and Title V Sexual Risk Avoidance Education Program (Discretionary Grants), ALN 93.787. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization establish formal procedures to ensure SEFA preparation along with all federally funded contracts included in the SEFA as expenditures; implement a robust process to track all federal awards under government auditing standards, provide training on Uniform Grant Guidance, including SEFA preparation; perform management review to ensure the SEFA is accurate, complete, and prepared in a timely manner. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management acknowledges the omission of the auditee’s prepared SEFA. Management is committed to properly preparing the SEFA, and to address this oversight, management will identify trainings for accounting personnel related to SEFA reporting and for those reviewing the schedule, to ensure its accuracy.
Criteria or specific requirement: CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, §200.303 specifies that a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The Organization did not have policies and procedures in place to ensure all the requirements of subrecipient monitoring were being performed. Questioned costs: None. Context: Of the 5 subrecipients selected for testing (there were 11 in the population), we noted that none of them had proper monitoring in place. Cause: Policies and procedures were not in place to provide adequate subrecipient monitoring. Effect: The Organization could pass through federal funding to subrecipients who are not responsible or capable recipients of the funds. Funding could be used by the subrecipients in ways that are incompatible with program goals and compliance requirements. Repeat Finding: Yes. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implements policies and procedures to perform subrecipient monitoring and that monitoring is formally documented and approved. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Finding 2024-001: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Mortgage Insurance for the Purchase or Refinancing of Existing Multifamily Housing Projects (Section 223(f)/207) Statement of Condition: Internal control processes over financial reporting did not ensure that all transactions were properly recorded. Criteria: The HUD Handbook 4370.2, Chapter 2 requires the books and accounts to be complete and accurate. Additionally, 2 CFR Part 200 Section 200.302 Financial Management states that the financial management system of each non-federal entity must provide accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award in accordance with the reporting requirements. Additionally, 2 CFR Part 200 Section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, requires that non-federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions. Effect: Noncompliance with HUD and Uniform Guidance regulations. Cause: Management oversight. Context: A review of journal entries made during the year revealed journal entries made in the incorrect period and erroneous journal entries. Additionally, the review process of the Corporation's financial information did not discover these errors. Recommendation: We recommend management review/enhance its accounting and internal control procedures to ensure that all key accounts are reconciled and reviewed with supporting evidence of such review. Questioned Costs: N/A Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Management agrees with the finding and will review the accounting and financial procedures, system of internal controls and policies.
2024-003 - IMMUNIZATION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS- INTERNAL CONTROLS - LACK OF SUPPORT FOR PAYROLL APPROVALS - ALN #93.268 – SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY FINDING TYPE: SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY Finding 2024-003 Federal Program: FAIN: IMMUNIZATION COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT NH23IP922623 ALN: 93.268 Year(s): 2024 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass Through Agency: North Dakota Department of Health Questioned Cost: $0 Condition Upper Missouri District Health Unit does not have documented approval of the payroll transactions to ensure that the expenditures are allowable to the Immunization Cooperative Agreements program and are coded to the proper grant. Effect There is an increased risk that Upper Missouri District Health Unit charged unallowable expenditures to the grant. Cause Upper Missouri District Health Unit does not have consistent procedures in place to approve payroll. Criteria "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" (Green Book) requires management to design, implement, and operate internal controls to achieve its objectives related to operations, reporting, and compliance. Management is to design appropriate types of control activities for the entity's internal control system. Control activities help management fulfill responsibilities and address identified risk responses in the internal control system. Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.303(a) states “The non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 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). Context The majority of the expenses charged to the grant during the audit period were relating to payroll expenses. During the audit, it was discovered that the district does not have documented procedures relating to the approval of payroll transactions to ensure the expenditures are allowable and coded to the proper grant. 100% of reimbursement requests that were reviewed were found to be lacking payroll approval. In total, there were 19 reimbursement requests totaling $246,778 of expenses that were paid during the audit period. This appears to be a systematic problem as no proper controls are in place. Where sampling was performed, the audit used a non-statistical sampling method. Repeat Finding No. Recommendation We recommend Upper Missouri District Health Unit establish and maintain internal controls over its payroll approval process and procedures in compliance with the Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.303(a) and the Green Book. Upper Missouri District Health Unit’s Response See corrective action plan.
2024-007 – CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS – IMPROPER REPORTING OF EXPENDITURES – ALN 21.027 – SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY & OTHER NONCOMPLIANCE FINDING TYPE: OTHER NONCOMPLIANCE Finding 2024-007 Federal Program: FAIN: CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS SLFRP5522 ALN: 21.027 Year(s): 2024 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Questioned Cost: $0 Condition Pembina County did not properly report expenditures and obligations on the March 31, 2024, Project and Expenditure Report for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program. The total cumulative and current expenditures and cumulative and current obligations reported were understated by $17,797.40. Effect The amounts reported as cumulative and current expenditures and current obligations on the March 31, 2024, Project and Expenditure Report were inaccurate. Cause Pembina County did not ensure that all expenditures and obligations were included when completing reporting for the March 31, 2024 Project and Expenditure Report. Criteria Page 19 of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds: Project and Expenditure Report User Guide Version 12 (September 30, 2024) states: • An expenditure is the amount that has been incurred as a liability of the entity (the service has been rendered or the good has been delivered to the entity). • An obligation is an order placed for property and services, contracts and subawards made, and similar transactions that require payment. An obligation also means a requirement under federal law or regulation or provision of the award terms and conditions to which a recipient becomes subject as a result of receiving or expending funds. • 2 CFR 200.303 states that the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Context As stated in the SLFRF Compliance and Reporting Guidance for counties allocated less than $10 million with a population below 250,000 residents such as Pembina, "the initial Project and Expenditure Report covered the period from March 3, 2021 to March 31, 2022 and was required to be submitted to Treasury by April 30, 2022. The subsequent annual reports will cover one calendar year and must be submitted to Treasury by April 30 each year." Therefore, each year after March 31, 2022, the Pembina County must then submit an annual P&E report for the period covering April 1 202X - March 31, 202Y. Pembina County did submit the 2024 (period covering April 1, 2023-March 31, 2024) report by April 30, 2024, but did not properly include 3 expenses/obligations that were incurred between January 2024 - March 2024, totaling $17,797.40 on the 2024 P&E report. Repeat Finding No. Recommendation We recommend Pembina County review and comply with all reporting requirements of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program by properly reporting all expenditures and obligations in the Project and Expenditure Reports. Pembina County’s Response See Corrective Action Plan.
2024-003 Federal Highway Project Sponsor Prior Year Finding Number: N/A Year of Finding Origination: 2024 Type of Finding: Internal Control Over Compliance Severity of Deficiency: Significant Deficiency Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Program: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Award Number and Year: 1052200, 2024 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Department of Transportation Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.303 states that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the auditee is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. The Minnesota Department of Transportation State Aid Manual provides guidance and responsibilities for project sponsors. In addition to acting as the fiscal agent, the sponsor takes responsibility that the project will be completed in accordance with federal and state rules and regulations that apply. Condition: Murray County acted as the sponsor for a highway construction project for a local city and the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The County did not develop controls over the sponsored project to ensure compliance. This included: • The County did not have documented approval of disbursements by the appropriate County staff with knowledge of the project and the sponsorship relationship. • The County did not maintain documentation to demonstrate the expenditures were for allowable costs. • The County did not verify the correct percentage was used for the local matching requirements or that the source of the funds used for matching requirements were from an allowable source. • The County did not have evidence of internal controls over the contracting process, including approval of the construction contract by the County Board. • The County did not maintain documentation that the requirements for suspension or debarment were met by (a) checking SAM.gov exclusions, (b) collecting a certification from the vendor, or (c) verifying a clause or condition was included in the contract. • The County did not maintain evidence that the prevailing wage rate clause was included in the contract. • The County did not maintain evidence that the Build America Buy America clause was included in the contract. • The County did not maintain evidence of review of certified payrolls submitted by contractors and subcontractors. Questioned Costs: None. Context: In December 2019, the County approved a resolution to act as a sponsoring agent for a city project. The resolution indicates the sponsorship includes a willingness to secure and guarantee the local share of costs associated with this project and responsibility for seeing this project through to its completion, with compliance of all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Total project expenditures were $241,256 with payments made to the city to reimburse for contractor payments. The city contracted with one prime contractor who used five subcontractors. Effect: Without controls in place over the sponsored project, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Cause: The County was unaware of the responsibilities of a project sponsor. Recommendation: We recommend the County implement controls to ensure projects the County sponsors are completed in accordance with all the federal and state rules and regulations that apply. View of Responsible Official: Acknowledge
2024-004 Special Tests and Provisions – Davis-Bacon Act Prior Year Finding Number: 2023-003 Year of Finding Origination: 2023 Type of Finding: Internal Control Over Compliance and Compliance Severity of Deficiency: Significant Deficiency and Other Matter Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Program: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Award Number and Year: 1052200; 2024 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Department of Transportation Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.303 states that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the auditee is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. The Davis-Bacon Act (23 U.S.C. § 113) and Title 29 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 5 require that contractors and subcontractors performing work on federal contracts in excess of $2,000 pay their laborers and mechanics not less than the prevailing wage rates and fringe benefits listed in the contract’s wage determination class. Each contractor and subcontractor must, on a weekly basis, provide a copy of the payrolls providing the information listed under payrolls and basic records of Title 29 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 5.5 (a)(3)(i) for the preceding weekly payroll period. Condition: Murray County did not obtain or review all required certified payroll reports for contracts that received federal funding in 2024. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The County did not obtain one of nine certified payrolls selected for testing from the two contracts that received federal funding. Total federal expenditures related to the contracts were $2,421,256. The work was performed by two prime contractors and 24 subcontractors between May and July 2024, with a total of 83 payroll periods. The sample size was based on guidance from Chapter 11 of the AICPA Audit Guide, Government Auditing Standards and Single Audits. Effect: The County is not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act and Title 29 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 5. Cause: Murray County indicated they did not have procedures in place to ensure all weekly certified payroll reports were received and reviewed. Recommendation: We recommend County staff obtain and properly review the certified payrolls received from all contractors and subcontractors for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act and Title 29 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 5 and ensure documentation exists to support monitoring of and compliance with this requirement. View of Responsible Official: Acknowledge
Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: 2 CFR 200.213 Suspension and Debarment restricts awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. 2 CFR 180.300 states that an entity may determine suspension and debarment status by: (a) Checking SAM (System for Award Management) Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person (7) Distribution of work to individuals and firms or economic considerations. Control: Per 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Township could not provide supporting documentation that suspension and debarment status was determined prior to award. Context: The suspension and debarment status for all of the vendors tested were not documented on the 40 transactions tested. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs related to this finding as the vendors were not federally suspended or debarred. Cause: The Township relied on State policies and procedures for suspension and debarment for State piggyback contracts, rather than applying their own established controls to these contracts Effect: The Township is not in compliance with federal suspension and debarment regulations. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: The Township should ensure that established policies and procedures related to suspension and debarment are applied to all contracts, even for piggyback agreements adopted from the State. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The Township has created a procedure to regularly check Sam.gov for suspension and debarment prior to issuing purchases orders or contracts and have it reviewed.
Section III – Major Federal Awards Programs – Findings and Questioned Costs (Cont.) Finding 2024-009: Eligibility - Lack of Segregation of Duties in Expenditure Determination and Approval (Material Weakness) Federal Program : Grants for Transportation of Veterans in Highly Rural Areas Assistance Listing Number : 64.035 Criteria: As per 2 CFR 200.303(a), entities must maintain effective internal controls, including segregation of duties, to prevent unauthorized or inaccurate transactions. Condition: The same individual was responsible for determining expenditure allowability and approving expenditures for reimbursement. Cause: Staffing limitations and the absence of written policies resulting in inadequate role separation. Effect: Insufficient segregation of duties increases the risk of errors or inappropriate expenditures. Recommendation: Management should reassign roles so that expenditure allowability reviews and expenditure approvals are performed by separate individuals. If staffing is limited, implement compensating management review controls. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding.
2024-003 Internal Controls and Compliance over Allowable Costs and Activities - Payroll (Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance) Legal Services Corporation 09.744060 Basic Field Grant Grant Period: 1/1/2024 – 12/31/2024 Contract Number: 744060 U.S Department of Justice 16.575 Victims of Crime Act Grant Periods: 10/1/23-9/30/24 and 10/1/24 – 9/30/25 Contract Number: 4055104; 4055105 Supreme Court of Texas Basic Civil Legal Services Program Grant Period: 9/1/2023 – 8/31/2025 Contract Number: 26030 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a) a non-Federal entity is required to establish and maintain internal controls over compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal grant. In addition, under 2 CFR Section 200.430 – Compensation – personal services, charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. Budget estimates may be used for interim accounting purposes, but budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards. The entity’s system of internal controls must include a process to review after-the-fact interim charges made to a Federal award to budget estimates and make any necessary adjustments such that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable and properly allocated. Texas Grant Management Standards also contains provisions for selected items of cost for Compensation – personal services which mirrors the requirements of 2 CFR Section 200.430. Condition: The Organization’s internal control process to compare actual time charged on the employee’s time sheet to the budget allocation charged to the grant to determine if budget estimates reflect reasonable approximations of the activities performed, did not consistently occur. For 16 of 75 payroll disbursements selected for testing, the allocation on the time sheet provided did not agree to the allocation of the employee’s wages to the program. In addition, of 9 of 75 payroll transactions selected for testing, the Organization was unable to provide a time sheet to substantiate the application of the employee’s time for that period. The finding appears to be a systemic issue. The sample was not statistically valid. Cause: Time sheets were not consistently compared against budget estimates by the Director of Finance. Time sheets could not be located for employees no longer employed by the Organization. Effect: Failure to review time sheets or maintain time sheets to support compensation allocations could result in an over/under statement of compensation charged to the Federal or State grants. Questioned Costs: (See chart) Perspective: There is not observable evidence of the Organization’s review and reconciliation of time sheets to budget estimates which affects both the allowable activities and allowable costs requirements. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the Organization review its timekeeping policies and procedures and provide additional training to employees to ensure time sheets are retained for all payroll transactions to support the allocation of compensation. We also recommend the Organization review and refine its policies to reconcile the percentage of hours charged on the time sheets to the budget estimates used to bill Federal and State grantors. This should be done in conjunction with monthly or quarterly billings (or other determined regular interval), at fiscal year end, and at the end of the grant year (if different from the Organization’s fiscal year). Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with the recommendation, please see Corrective Action Plan.
Incorrect equipment hours used on the project worksheet submission Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Condition/Criteria: The recipient and subrecipient must: Establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. (2 CFR section 200.303(a)). Cause: The Cooperative personnel did not match the labor hours from employee timesheets to the project worksheet. Effect: Incorrect hours were recorded on the project worksheet. The errors noted did not result in material known or likely questioned costs required to be reported. Recommendation: Review timesheets to ensure they agree to the hours reported on the project worksheet. Implement a second level of review by another employee so the individual tasked with preparing the project worksheet is not performing the review.