Cluster name: CDBG – Entitlement/Special Purpose Grants Cluster Assistance Listings number and name: 14.218 Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Award numbers and years: B-20-UW-04-0501, July 1, 2023 through September 1, 2027; B-23-UC-04-0501, July 1, 2023 through September 1, 2030 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Compliance requirement: Reporting Questioned costs: Not applicable Condition—Contrary to federal laws and regulations and County policies, the Maricopa County Human Services Department (Department) failed to report certain information on the federal government’s reporting system for $953,103 in subawards it made to 4 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024 for the program. Specifically, for 4 of 9 subawards tested, the Department did not report any required information about the subawards, including subaward organizations’ names and subaward amounts and terms. During fiscal year 2024, the Department spent $953,103 of federal monies related to these subawards, or 30.5 percent of the Department’s total $3.13 million expended, for this program. Effect—The County’s stakeholders and the public did not have access to transparent and timely information about the Department’s federal award spending decisions on USAspending.gov as required by federal laws and regulations. Additionally, the Department is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s contract specialist did not include these 4 subawards on the tracking list used to monitor grants and report information to the federal government’s reporting system as required, because 3 of the subawards were contracted by the Office of Procurement Services rather than directly through the Department and 1 subaward amendment was not included due to error. Criteria—The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) and federal Uniform Guidance regulations require the Department, as a direct recipient of federal awards, to report certain information about each subaward action equaling or exceeding $30,000 in federal monies on the FFATA Subaward Reporting System no later than month-end of the month following the subaward action so that the information can be displayed to the public on the website, USAspending.gov.1 Specifically, the federal Uniform Guidance requires the Department to report the subrecipient organization’s name, award amount, award term, and other information about the subaward, if applicable, for each subaward action equaling or exceeding the $30,000 threshold (2 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], §170.320 and Appendix A to part 170). Additionally, the County’s grant policies and procedures require the Department to perform this reporting for federal awards (Maricopa County Grants Manual [2023], Section K, page 31). Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the federal program is being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The Department should: 1. Immediately report on the FFATA Subaward Reporting System the required information for its subawards for this program, including the 4 that were not previously reported. 2. Follow the County’s grant policies and procedures for reporting subaward actions equaling or exceeding $30,000 no later than month-end of the month following the subaward action, as required by the FFATA and federal Uniform Guidance, which may require providing training to Department staff responsible for reporting the Department’s subaward actions to the federal government’s reporting system. 3. Review and update the tracking list used to monitor grants and report information to the federal government’s reporting system, ensuring all grants contracted through other departments and amendments are included. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 The FFATA of 2006 (Public Law 109-282), as amended by section 6202 of Public Law 110-252, was enacted to provide the public with transparency on federal award spending to hold the recipient government accountable for each spending decision and to help reduce wasteful spending of federal monies. As such, federal Uniform Guidance requires reporting on the FFATA Subaward Reporting System at https://www.fsrs.gov.
Cluster name: CDBG – Entitlement/Special Purpose Grants Cluster Assistance Listings number and name: 14.218 Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Award numbers and years: B-20-UW-04-0501, July 1, 2023 through September 1, 2027; B-23-UC-04-0501, July 1, 2023 through September 1, 2030 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Compliance requirement: Reporting Questioned costs: Not applicable Condition—Contrary to federal laws and regulations and County policies, the Maricopa County Human Services Department (Department) failed to report certain information on the federal government’s reporting system for $953,103 in subawards it made to 4 subrecipients during fiscal year 2024 for the program. Specifically, for 4 of 9 subawards tested, the Department did not report any required information about the subawards, including subaward organizations’ names and subaward amounts and terms. During fiscal year 2024, the Department spent $953,103 of federal monies related to these subawards, or 30.5 percent of the Department’s total $3.13 million expended, for this program. Effect—The County’s stakeholders and the public did not have access to transparent and timely information about the Department’s federal award spending decisions on USAspending.gov as required by federal laws and regulations. Additionally, the Department is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s contract specialist did not include these 4 subawards on the tracking list used to monitor grants and report information to the federal government’s reporting system as required, because 3 of the subawards were contracted by the Office of Procurement Services rather than directly through the Department and 1 subaward amendment was not included due to error. Criteria—The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) and federal Uniform Guidance regulations require the Department, as a direct recipient of federal awards, to report certain information about each subaward action equaling or exceeding $30,000 in federal monies on the FFATA Subaward Reporting System no later than month-end of the month following the subaward action so that the information can be displayed to the public on the website, USAspending.gov.1 Specifically, the federal Uniform Guidance requires the Department to report the subrecipient organization’s name, award amount, award term, and other information about the subaward, if applicable, for each subaward action equaling or exceeding the $30,000 threshold (2 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR], §170.320 and Appendix A to part 170). Additionally, the County’s grant policies and procedures require the Department to perform this reporting for federal awards (Maricopa County Grants Manual [2023], Section K, page 31). Further, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the federal program is being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The Department should: 1. Immediately report on the FFATA Subaward Reporting System the required information for its subawards for this program, including the 4 that were not previously reported. 2. Follow the County’s grant policies and procedures for reporting subaward actions equaling or exceeding $30,000 no later than month-end of the month following the subaward action, as required by the FFATA and federal Uniform Guidance, which may require providing training to Department staff responsible for reporting the Department’s subaward actions to the federal government’s reporting system. 3. Review and update the tracking list used to monitor grants and report information to the federal government’s reporting system, ensuring all grants contracted through other departments and amendments are included. The County’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 The FFATA of 2006 (Public Law 109-282), as amended by section 6202 of Public Law 110-252, was enacted to provide the public with transparency on federal award spending to hold the recipient government accountable for each spending decision and to help reduce wasteful spending of federal monies. As such, federal Uniform Guidance requires reporting on the FFATA Subaward Reporting System at https://www.fsrs.gov.
Finding 2024-001 Reporting – Internal Control and Compliance over Reporting (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number: 14.218 Federal Program Name: CDBG‐Entitlement Grants Cluster Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Award Year: B-20-MW-06-0053 – FY20-21 B-21-MC-06-0053 – FY21-22 B-22-MC-06-0053 – FY22-23 B-23-MC-06-0053 – FY23-24 Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 2 – Federal Financial Assistance, Subtitle A – Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance, Chapter II – Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart D – Post Federal Award Requirements: Performance and Financial Monitoring and Reporting Section § 200.328 Financial reporting. (a) The Federal agency must require only OMB-approved government-wide data elements on recipient financial reports. At the time of publication, this consists of the Federal Financial Report (SF-425); however, this also applies to any future OMB-approved government-wide data elements available from the OMB-designated standards lead. (b) The Federal agency or pass-through entity must collect financial reports no less than annually. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may not collect financial reports more frequently than quarterly unless a specific condition has been implemented in accordance with § 200.208. To the extent practicable, the Federal agency or pass-through entity should collect financial reports in coordination with performance reports. (c) 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. (d) The final financial report submitted by the recipient must be due no later than 120 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. A subrecipient must submit a final financial report to a pass-through entity no later than 90 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. See also § 200.344. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may extend the due date for any financial report with justification from the recipient or subrecipient. Section § 200.303 Internal Controls The recipient and subrecipient must: (a) 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. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition and Context: For the Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Cluster, the City did not submit the reports within the required deadline: Report Type Award Number Period Date Due Date Submitted SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 7/1/2023 - 9/30/2023 10/30/2023 1/16/2024 SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 1/1/2024 - 3/31/2024 3/30/2024 7/24/2024 Four (4) quarterly financial reports were tested, and two (2) reports were not submitted by the required deadline. Cause: During the audit period, the City did not possess the operational processes/procedures necessary to guarantee timely submission of the SF-425 report. Effect: Failure to submit the SF-425 reports timely results in noncompliance with the reporting requirements in the grant agreement. Questioned Costs: None noted. Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen their report submission process and procedures to ensure all required reports are properly reviewed and approved and submitted timely. When a report cannot be submitted by the due date, the City should request an extension from the funding agency and maintain a record of the approval. Management’s View and Corrective Action Plan: The City agrees with this finding. The City has already taken steps to improve its processes/procedures to insure timely submission of all required SF-425 reports.
Finding 2024-001 Reporting – Internal Control and Compliance over Reporting (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number: 14.218 Federal Program Name: CDBG‐Entitlement Grants Cluster Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Award Year: B-20-MW-06-0053 – FY20-21 B-21-MC-06-0053 – FY21-22 B-22-MC-06-0053 – FY22-23 B-23-MC-06-0053 – FY23-24 Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 2 – Federal Financial Assistance, Subtitle A – Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance, Chapter II – Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart D – Post Federal Award Requirements: Performance and Financial Monitoring and Reporting Section § 200.328 Financial reporting. (a) The Federal agency must require only OMB-approved government-wide data elements on recipient financial reports. At the time of publication, this consists of the Federal Financial Report (SF-425); however, this also applies to any future OMB-approved government-wide data elements available from the OMB-designated standards lead. (b) The Federal agency or pass-through entity must collect financial reports no less than annually. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may not collect financial reports more frequently than quarterly unless a specific condition has been implemented in accordance with § 200.208. To the extent practicable, the Federal agency or pass-through entity should collect financial reports in coordination with performance reports. (c) 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. (d) The final financial report submitted by the recipient must be due no later than 120 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. A subrecipient must submit a final financial report to a pass-through entity no later than 90 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. See also § 200.344. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may extend the due date for any financial report with justification from the recipient or subrecipient. Section § 200.303 Internal Controls The recipient and subrecipient must: (a) 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. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition and Context: For the Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Cluster, the City did not submit the reports within the required deadline: Report Type Award Number Period Date Due Date Submitted SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 7/1/2023 - 9/30/2023 10/30/2023 1/16/2024 SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 1/1/2024 - 3/31/2024 3/30/2024 7/24/2024 Four (4) quarterly financial reports were tested, and two (2) reports were not submitted by the required deadline. Cause: During the audit period, the City did not possess the operational processes/procedures necessary to guarantee timely submission of the SF-425 report. Effect: Failure to submit the SF-425 reports timely results in noncompliance with the reporting requirements in the grant agreement. Questioned Costs: None noted. Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen their report submission process and procedures to ensure all required reports are properly reviewed and approved and submitted timely. When a report cannot be submitted by the due date, the City should request an extension from the funding agency and maintain a record of the approval. Management’s View and Corrective Action Plan: The City agrees with this finding. The City has already taken steps to improve its processes/procedures to insure timely submission of all required SF-425 reports.
Finding 2024-001 Reporting – Internal Control and Compliance over Reporting (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number: 14.218 Federal Program Name: CDBG‐Entitlement Grants Cluster Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Award Year: B-20-MW-06-0053 – FY20-21 B-21-MC-06-0053 – FY21-22 B-22-MC-06-0053 – FY22-23 B-23-MC-06-0053 – FY23-24 Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 2 – Federal Financial Assistance, Subtitle A – Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance, Chapter II – Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart D – Post Federal Award Requirements: Performance and Financial Monitoring and Reporting Section § 200.328 Financial reporting. (a) The Federal agency must require only OMB-approved government-wide data elements on recipient financial reports. At the time of publication, this consists of the Federal Financial Report (SF-425); however, this also applies to any future OMB-approved government-wide data elements available from the OMB-designated standards lead. (b) The Federal agency or pass-through entity must collect financial reports no less than annually. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may not collect financial reports more frequently than quarterly unless a specific condition has been implemented in accordance with § 200.208. To the extent practicable, the Federal agency or pass-through entity should collect financial reports in coordination with performance reports. (c) 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. (d) The final financial report submitted by the recipient must be due no later than 120 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. A subrecipient must submit a final financial report to a pass-through entity no later than 90 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. See also § 200.344. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may extend the due date for any financial report with justification from the recipient or subrecipient. Section § 200.303 Internal Controls The recipient and subrecipient must: (a) 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. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition and Context: For the Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Cluster, the City did not submit the reports within the required deadline: Report Type Award Number Period Date Due Date Submitted SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 7/1/2023 - 9/30/2023 10/30/2023 1/16/2024 SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 1/1/2024 - 3/31/2024 3/30/2024 7/24/2024 Four (4) quarterly financial reports were tested, and two (2) reports were not submitted by the required deadline. Cause: During the audit period, the City did not possess the operational processes/procedures necessary to guarantee timely submission of the SF-425 report. Effect: Failure to submit the SF-425 reports timely results in noncompliance with the reporting requirements in the grant agreement. Questioned Costs: None noted. Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen their report submission process and procedures to ensure all required reports are properly reviewed and approved and submitted timely. When a report cannot be submitted by the due date, the City should request an extension from the funding agency and maintain a record of the approval. Management’s View and Corrective Action Plan: The City agrees with this finding. The City has already taken steps to improve its processes/procedures to insure timely submission of all required SF-425 reports.
Finding 2024-001 Reporting – Internal Control and Compliance over Reporting (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number: 14.218 Federal Program Name: CDBG‐Entitlement Grants Cluster Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Award Year: B-20-MW-06-0053 – FY20-21 B-21-MC-06-0053 – FY21-22 B-22-MC-06-0053 – FY22-23 B-23-MC-06-0053 – FY23-24 Criteria: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 2 – Federal Financial Assistance, Subtitle A – Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance, Chapter II – Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart D – Post Federal Award Requirements: Performance and Financial Monitoring and Reporting Section § 200.328 Financial reporting. (a) The Federal agency must require only OMB-approved government-wide data elements on recipient financial reports. At the time of publication, this consists of the Federal Financial Report (SF-425); however, this also applies to any future OMB-approved government-wide data elements available from the OMB-designated standards lead. (b) The Federal agency or pass-through entity must collect financial reports no less than annually. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may not collect financial reports more frequently than quarterly unless a specific condition has been implemented in accordance with § 200.208. To the extent practicable, the Federal agency or pass-through entity should collect financial reports in coordination with performance reports. (c) 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. (d) The final financial report submitted by the recipient must be due no later than 120 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. A subrecipient must submit a final financial report to a pass-through entity no later than 90 calendar days after the conclusion of the period of performance. See also § 200.344. The Federal agency or pass-through entity may extend the due date for any financial report with justification from the recipient or subrecipient. Section § 200.303 Internal Controls The recipient and subrecipient must: (a) 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. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). (b) Comply with the U.S. Constitution, Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Condition and Context: For the Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Cluster, the City did not submit the reports within the required deadline: Report Type Award Number Period Date Due Date Submitted SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 7/1/2023 - 9/30/2023 10/30/2023 1/16/2024 SF-425 Financial Program-wide reporting 1/1/2024 - 3/31/2024 3/30/2024 7/24/2024 Four (4) quarterly financial reports were tested, and two (2) reports were not submitted by the required deadline. Cause: During the audit period, the City did not possess the operational processes/procedures necessary to guarantee timely submission of the SF-425 report. Effect: Failure to submit the SF-425 reports timely results in noncompliance with the reporting requirements in the grant agreement. Questioned Costs: None noted. Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen their report submission process and procedures to ensure all required reports are properly reviewed and approved and submitted timely. When a report cannot be submitted by the due date, the City should request an extension from the funding agency and maintain a record of the approval. Management’s View and Corrective Action Plan: The City agrees with this finding. The City has already taken steps to improve its processes/procedures to insure timely submission of all required SF-425 reports.
Assistance Listings number and name: 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States Award numbers and years: 24FABASC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIELCC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIETCO-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FPRLEC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIECTC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Questioned costs: $52,754 Assistance Listings number and name: 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Award numbers and years: P031S160090, October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2023; P031S190167, October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2024; P031S200096, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031S200281, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031C210057, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031C210077, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031S220015, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031S220179, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031A230147, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028; P031S230158, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028 Compliance requirements: Activities allowed or unallowed Questioned costs: $20,411 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Total questioned costs: $73,165 Condition—Contrary to federal regulations, State law, and District policies, the District did not always retain documentation supporting the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs’ payroll costs or approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for these programs. Specifically, the District could not provide documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for these programs, such as offer letters, contracts, and personnel action forms, or did not approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for 22 of 54 payroll transactions we tested totaling $73,165. See finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance for a similar finding related to the District not reviewing or approving employee timesheets.1 Also, see Table 1 on the next page for further information. Table 1 Summary of the $73,165 of payroll costs the District did not properly support or approve Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total for both programs Total employees tested 35 19 54 Total employees with unsupported pay rates and lack of authorization to perform work for the programs 7 1 8 Total unsupported payroll costs $52,366 $9,636 $62,002 Total employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed2 2 12 14 Total unapproved payroll costs $388 $10,775 $11,163 Total number of employees with unsupported or unapproved payroll costs 9 13 22 Total salaries not supported $52,754 $20,411 $73,165 Effect—The District’s failure to retain documentation supporting payroll costs and approve time sheets increased the risk that the $52,754 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and $20,411 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs may not have been spent in accordance with their award terms and conditions. Consequently, the District may be required to return these monies to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.3 Further, see Table 2 for information on the overall payroll costs per program during fiscal year 2024 that are at an increased risk of not being spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Table 2 Calculation of percent of payroll costs to total program expenditures Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total number of employees 279 214 Total payroll costs $3,613,133 $1,984,462 Total program costs $5,026,228 $6,696,263 % of payroll costs to total program costs 72% 30% Cause—The District’s management reported that it did not retain documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for the federal programs for employees hired prior to 2018 as they were archived and support was no longer available, and some offers for temporary employees were made verbally over the phone and never documented. The District’s policies and procedures lack requirements to document all employment offers, including temporary employment offers. Additionally, as discussed in finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance, some supervisors did not follow District policies and procedures requiring employees’ time sheets to be reviewed and approved either before processing payroll or within 3 business days after receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needed approval.1 Finally, District management did not sufficiently monitor whether each college’s Human Resources Department was enforcing these policies and procedures or verifying that supervisors reviewed and approved employees’ time sheets, as required. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the District to maintain records for salaries and wages charged to federal awards that accurately reflect the work performed to ensure they are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated (2 CFR §200.430[g][1][i]). Also, federal regulation, similar to State law and the District’s record retention policies, requires the District to retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor (2 CFR §200.334).4,5 Further, the District’s written procedures require each employee’s time sheet to be reviewed and approved by the employee’s supervisor either before processing payroll or within 3 business days from receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needs approval. Additionally, each college’s Human Resources Department is responsible for verifying that supervisors review and approve time sheets timely.6 Finally, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Retain documentation for all payroll costs, such as employment agreements or acceptance letters, to demonstrate employees’ salaries and wages are authorized to be charged to federal programs and spent in accordance with the programs’ award terms and conditions. 2. Review the fiscal year 2024 payroll costs for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs to ensure they were properly supported and spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions and coordinate with the U.S. Department of Education, as necessary, to adjust future federal reimbursement requests or repay any unallowable costs the District charged to the programs. 3. Enforce and train employees on District written procedures and requirements to: a. Retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor. b. Ensure supervisors review and approve employees’ time sheets, either before payroll is processed or within 3 business days from receiving the payroll email notification that a time sheet needs approval, to verify employees accurately reported their time worked. This review should be performed after the employee performed the work to ensure the payroll costs charged to the programs accurately reflect the work performed and are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. 4. Update District written procedures to require documentation of all employment offers, including offers for temporary employees. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 Arizona Auditor General. (2024). Report on Internal Control and Compliance, June 30, 2024. Phoenix, AZ. https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/MaricopaCountyCommunityCollegeDistrictJune30_2024ReportOnInternalControlAndCompliance.pdf 2 The 14 employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed includes 5 time sheets totaling $6,917 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were never approved by a supervisor and 2 time sheets totaling $388 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States program and 7 time sheets totaling $3,858 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were approved by a supervisor between 1 and 7 days prior to the work being performed by the employee. 3 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the District, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 4 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). (2023). Staff Policy Manual. 5 Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. (2023) General Retention Schedule Created for All Public Bodies. Retrieved 3/12/25 from https://apps.azlibrary.gov/files/docs/all_general_schedules_searchable.pdf 6 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). Version 1.1 (2019). Monitoring Time Approvals: Monitoring Procedures.
Assistance Listings number and name: 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States Award numbers and years: 24FABASC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIELCC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIETCO-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FPRLEC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; 24FIECTC-412421-01A, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs / Cost Principles Questioned costs: $52,754 Assistance Listings number and name: 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Award numbers and years: P031S160090, October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2023; P031S190167, October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2024; P031S200096, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031S200281, October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2025; P031C210057, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031C210077, October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2026; P031S220015, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031S220179, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027; P031A230147, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028; P031S230158, October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2028 Compliance requirements: Activities allowed or unallowed Questioned costs: $20,411 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Education Total questioned costs: $73,165 Condition—Contrary to federal regulations, State law, and District policies, the District did not always retain documentation supporting the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs’ payroll costs or approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for these programs. Specifically, the District could not provide documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for these programs, such as offer letters, contracts, and personnel action forms, or did not approve employee time sheets after the work was performed for 22 of 54 payroll transactions we tested totaling $73,165. See finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance for a similar finding related to the District not reviewing or approving employee timesheets.1 Also, see Table 1 on the next page for further information. Table 1 Summary of the $73,165 of payroll costs the District did not properly support or approve Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total for both programs Total employees tested 35 19 54 Total employees with unsupported pay rates and lack of authorization to perform work for the programs 7 1 8 Total unsupported payroll costs $52,366 $9,636 $62,002 Total employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed2 2 12 14 Total unapproved payroll costs $388 $10,775 $11,163 Total number of employees with unsupported or unapproved payroll costs 9 13 22 Total salaries not supported $52,754 $20,411 $73,165 Effect—The District’s failure to retain documentation supporting payroll costs and approve time sheets increased the risk that the $52,754 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and $20,411 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs may not have been spent in accordance with their award terms and conditions. Consequently, the District may be required to return these monies to the federal agency in accordance with federal requirements.3 Further, see Table 2 for information on the overall payroll costs per program during fiscal year 2024 that are at an increased risk of not being spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Table 2 Calculation of percent of payroll costs to total program expenditures Fiscal year 2024 84.002 Adult Education—Basic Grants to States 84.031 Higher Education—Institutional Aid Total number of employees 279 214 Total payroll costs $3,613,133 $1,984,462 Total program costs $5,026,228 $6,696,263 % of payroll costs to total program costs 72% 30% Cause—The District’s management reported that it did not retain documentation to support employees’ pay rates and authorization to perform work for the federal programs for employees hired prior to 2018 as they were archived and support was no longer available, and some offers for temporary employees were made verbally over the phone and never documented. The District’s policies and procedures lack requirements to document all employment offers, including temporary employment offers. Additionally, as discussed in finding 2024-01 in our Report on Internal Controls and Compliance, some supervisors did not follow District policies and procedures requiring employees’ time sheets to be reviewed and approved either before processing payroll or within 3 business days after receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needed approval.1 Finally, District management did not sufficiently monitor whether each college’s Human Resources Department was enforcing these policies and procedures or verifying that supervisors reviewed and approved employees’ time sheets, as required. Criteria—Federal regulation requires the District to maintain records for salaries and wages charged to federal awards that accurately reflect the work performed to ensure they are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated (2 CFR §200.430[g][1][i]). Also, federal regulation, similar to State law and the District’s record retention policies, requires the District to retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor (2 CFR §200.334).4,5 Further, the District’s written procedures require each employee’s time sheet to be reviewed and approved by the employee’s supervisor either before processing payroll or within 3 business days from receiving a payroll email notification that the employee’s time sheet needs approval. Additionally, each college’s Human Resources Department is responsible for verifying that supervisors review and approve time sheets timely.6 Finally, federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendations—The District should: 1. Retain documentation for all payroll costs, such as employment agreements or acceptance letters, to demonstrate employees’ salaries and wages are authorized to be charged to federal programs and spent in accordance with the programs’ award terms and conditions. 2. Review the fiscal year 2024 payroll costs for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States and Higher Education—Institutional Aid programs to ensure they were properly supported and spent in accordance with the award terms and conditions and coordinate with the U.S. Department of Education, as necessary, to adjust future federal reimbursement requests or repay any unallowable costs the District charged to the programs. 3. Enforce and train employees on District written procedures and requirements to: a. Retain all public records, including those contained in personnel files, related to a federal program for a period of 3 years from the date the program’s final report was submitted to the federal awarding agency or pass-through grantor. b. Ensure supervisors review and approve employees’ time sheets, either before payroll is processed or within 3 business days from receiving the payroll email notification that a time sheet needs approval, to verify employees accurately reported their time worked. This review should be performed after the employee performed the work to ensure the payroll costs charged to the programs accurately reflect the work performed and are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. 4. Update District written procedures to require documentation of all employment offers, including offers for temporary employees. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy. 1 Arizona Auditor General. (2024). Report on Internal Control and Compliance, June 30, 2024. Phoenix, AZ. https://www.azauditor.gov/sites/default/files/2025-02/MaricopaCountyCommunityCollegeDistrictJune30_2024ReportOnInternalControlAndCompliance.pdf 2 The 14 employee time sheets lacking approval after the work was performed includes 5 time sheets totaling $6,917 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were never approved by a supervisor and 2 time sheets totaling $388 for the Adult Education—Basic Grants to States program and 7 time sheets totaling $3,858 for the Higher Education—Institutional Aid program that were approved by a supervisor between 1 and 7 days prior to the work being performed by the employee. 3 Federal Uniform Guidance requires federal awarding agencies to follow up on audit findings and issue a management decision to ensure the recipient, the District, takes appropriate and timely corrective action (2 CFR §200.513[c]). Further, it requires that federal awarding agencies’ management decisions clearly state whether or not the audit finding is sustained, the reasons for the decision, and the expected auditee action to repay disallowed costs, make financial adjustments, or take other action, as directed by the federal awarding agencies (2 CFR §200.521). 4 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). (2023). Staff Policy Manual. 5 Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records. (2023) General Retention Schedule Created for All Public Bodies. Retrieved 3/12/25 from https://apps.azlibrary.gov/files/docs/all_general_schedules_searchable.pdf 6 Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD). Version 1.1 (2019). Monitoring Time Approvals: Monitoring Procedures.
Assistance Listings number and name: 93.575 Child Care and Development Block Grant Award numbers and years: DI22-002326, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; P00003796, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024; P0001273602, July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Pass-through grantor: Arizona Department of Economic Security Compliance requirements: Reporting Questioned costs: Not applicable Condition—Contrary to federal regulation, the District’s Student Affairs Department (Department) did not develop, document, or implement internal control procedures to monitor compliance with the program’s reporting requirements. Specifically, for all 4 federal program reports we tested, the Department did not retain documentation that it had reviewed and approved reports prior to submitting them to the pass-through grantor to ensure the reported expenditures were accurate and agreed to the District’s records, and contained only allowable expenses. Despite lacking internal control procedures, we did not identify any inaccurate program information reported to the pass-through grantor. Effect—Without effective internal control procedures in place, there is an increased risk that the Department may not prevent or detect and correct errors on reports it submits to the pass-through grantor, which relies on them to effectively monitor the program administration, including its compliance with program requirements and ability to prevent and detect fraud, and to evaluate the program's success. Finally, the District is at risk that this finding applies to other federal programs it administers. Cause—The Department’s management reported that it had performed independent reviews and approvals of the reports but did not maintain documentation because the District did not have a formal policy requiring a documented review and approval of its reports. Criteria—Federal regulation requires establishing and maintaining effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that federal programs are being managed in compliance with all applicable laws, regulations, and award terms (2 CFR §200.303). Recommendation—The Department should develop, document, and implement policies and procedures, and train responsible employees, to monitor compliance with the program’s reporting requirements, including processes to perform and document an independent review and approval of all federal program reports before submitting them to the pass-through grantor to ensure reports are accurate, agree to District records, and contain only allowable expenditures. The District’s corrective action plan at the end of this report includes the views and planned corrective action of its responsible officials. We are not required to audit and have not audited these responses and planned corrective actions and therefore provide no assurances as to their accuracy.
2024-002: Documentation of Internal Controls over Compliance Requirements for Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number: 10.568 Federal Program Name: Emergency Food Assistance Program (Administrative Costs) Pass-through Entity: Washington State Department of Agriculture Pass-through Award Number: K4747 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Pass-through Entities: Washington State Department of Agriculture; Hopelink Pass-through Award Numbers: K4778; K2602, K4820 Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards. Condition: During the year ended June 30, 2024, Food Lifeline did not sufficiently document internal controls over compliance with requirements for activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles. Cause: Food Lifeline did not maintain proper internal controls or have staff members with the appropriate experience to accurately track grant expenditures using the correct project codes. Effect: Although there were no such instances identified during the audit, inadequate internal control over activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles could lead to potential waste or abuse of federal award funds, whether due to fraud or error, and future disallowed costs. Context: Due to turnover among both upper- and lower-level Finance Department personnel during the year ended June 30, 2024, as well as the shuffling of responsibilities among staff, project codes were not properly used to accurately track grant expenditures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that management implements formal procedures to document internal controls over the allowability of expenditures incurred with federal program funds. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
2024-002: Documentation of Internal Controls over Compliance Requirements for Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number: 10.568 Federal Program Name: Emergency Food Assistance Program (Administrative Costs) Pass-through Entity: Washington State Department of Agriculture Pass-through Award Number: K4747 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Pass-through Entities: Washington State Department of Agriculture; Hopelink Pass-through Award Numbers: K4778; K2602, K4820 Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards. Condition: During the year ended June 30, 2024, Food Lifeline did not sufficiently document internal controls over compliance with requirements for activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles. Cause: Food Lifeline did not maintain proper internal controls or have staff members with the appropriate experience to accurately track grant expenditures using the correct project codes. Effect: Although there were no such instances identified during the audit, inadequate internal control over activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles could lead to potential waste or abuse of federal award funds, whether due to fraud or error, and future disallowed costs. Context: Due to turnover among both upper- and lower-level Finance Department personnel during the year ended June 30, 2024, as well as the shuffling of responsibilities among staff, project codes were not properly used to accurately track grant expenditures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that management implements formal procedures to document internal controls over the allowability of expenditures incurred with federal program funds. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
2024-002: Documentation of Internal Controls over Compliance Requirements for Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number: 10.568 Federal Program Name: Emergency Food Assistance Program (Administrative Costs) Pass-through Entity: Washington State Department of Agriculture Pass-through Award Number: K4747 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Pass-through Entities: Washington State Department of Agriculture; Hopelink Pass-through Award Numbers: K4778; K2602, K4820 Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards. Condition: During the year ended June 30, 2024, Food Lifeline did not sufficiently document internal controls over compliance with requirements for activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles. Cause: Food Lifeline did not maintain proper internal controls or have staff members with the appropriate experience to accurately track grant expenditures using the correct project codes. Effect: Although there were no such instances identified during the audit, inadequate internal control over activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles could lead to potential waste or abuse of federal award funds, whether due to fraud or error, and future disallowed costs. Context: Due to turnover among both upper- and lower-level Finance Department personnel during the year ended June 30, 2024, as well as the shuffling of responsibilities among staff, project codes were not properly used to accurately track grant expenditures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that management implements formal procedures to document internal controls over the allowability of expenditures incurred with federal program funds. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
2024-002: Documentation of Internal Controls over Compliance Requirements for Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number: 10.568 Federal Program Name: Emergency Food Assistance Program (Administrative Costs) Pass-through Entity: Washington State Department of Agriculture Pass-through Award Number: K4747 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Pass-through Entities: Washington State Department of Agriculture; Hopelink Pass-through Award Numbers: K4778; K2602, K4820 Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards. Condition: During the year ended June 30, 2024, Food Lifeline did not sufficiently document internal controls over compliance with requirements for activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles. Cause: Food Lifeline did not maintain proper internal controls or have staff members with the appropriate experience to accurately track grant expenditures using the correct project codes. Effect: Although there were no such instances identified during the audit, inadequate internal control over activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles could lead to potential waste or abuse of federal award funds, whether due to fraud or error, and future disallowed costs. Context: Due to turnover among both upper- and lower-level Finance Department personnel during the year ended June 30, 2024, as well as the shuffling of responsibilities among staff, project codes were not properly used to accurately track grant expenditures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that management implements formal procedures to document internal controls over the allowability of expenditures incurred with federal program funds. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
2024-002: Documentation of Internal Controls over Compliance Requirements for Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number: 10.568 Federal Program Name: Emergency Food Assistance Program (Administrative Costs) Pass-through Entity: Washington State Department of Agriculture Pass-through Award Number: K4747 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Pass-through Entities: Washington State Department of Agriculture; Hopelink Pass-through Award Numbers: K4778; K2602, K4820 Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance. Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards. Condition: During the year ended June 30, 2024, Food Lifeline did not sufficiently document internal controls over compliance with requirements for activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles. Cause: Food Lifeline did not maintain proper internal controls or have staff members with the appropriate experience to accurately track grant expenditures using the correct project codes. Effect: Although there were no such instances identified during the audit, inadequate internal control over activities allowed or unallowed and allowable costs/cost principles could lead to potential waste or abuse of federal award funds, whether due to fraud or error, and future disallowed costs. Context: Due to turnover among both upper- and lower-level Finance Department personnel during the year ended June 30, 2024, as well as the shuffling of responsibilities among staff, project codes were not properly used to accurately track grant expenditures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: We recommend that management implements formal procedures to document internal controls over the allowability of expenditures incurred with federal program funds. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
2024-006. TANF ACF-204 Report Does Not Match Supporting Documentation (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: 93.558 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: N/A Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A Data elements for the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program submitted by DWS did not match the supporting documentation. The Annual Report (ACF-204) for the year ended September 30, 2023, had the following errors: These errors were caused by comparing the TANF data to incorrect supporting information in the preparation and not following the report instructions to prepare the report. The report review did not detect these errors. Federal regulations (2 CFR 200.303) require entities to “establish and maintain effective internal controls [procedures]…that provide reasonable assurance that the… entity is managing [federal program] in compliance with… terms and conditions of the federal award.” By not ensuring Reports match supporting information or not following report instructions, DWS is at risk of submitting inaccurate reports and failing to meet federal funding requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that DWS prepare and review all report lines to correct supporting documentation to ensure accuracy prior to submitting the reports. DWS’s Response: DWS agrees with the finding.
2024-009. Unallowable Cash Medical Assistance Benefit Issuances (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: 93.566 Refugee and Entrant Assistance Federal Award Number: Questioned Costs: $3,583 Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A In our review of 40 cash medical assistance (CMA) benefit payments for the Refugee and Entrant Assistance Program, we noted the following errors: These errors occurred due to a lack of effective internal control over the case management and its iterative eligibility determinations, and Eligibility Workers incorrectly evaluating and entering updated case information into the eREP System. 2 CFR 200.303 requires 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 award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” If new information is discovered for a case but not properly evaluated, it could lead to further overpayments and underpayments and the misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: We recommend that DWS strengthen their internal control environment and continue to provide training and support to their Eligibility Workers to ensure that case information is properly evaluated and correctly entered into the eREP System. DWS’s Response: DWS agrees with the finding.
2024-015. Reported Number of Homeowners Overstated (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number and Title: 21.026 COVID-19 Homeowner Assistance Fund Federal Award Number: HAFP-0100 Questioned Costs: N/A Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The number of unique homeowners classified at or below 100% area median income (AMI) was overreported for all Homeowner Assistance Fund (HAF) quarterly reports submitted to the Treasury. For the two reports that we looked at, the errors were as follows: This error occurred as a result of misinterpreting information received from third parties used to fill out the report and a misunderstanding by both the preparer and reviewer of report requirements and thresholds. To be compliant with federal standards (2CFR 200.303), DWS “must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the award.” Compliance cannot be established without a thorough understanding of the requirements and how the data from third parties is aggregated. Without that understanding and proper reviews to detect and correct errors, DWS may continue to report incorrect data and may risk not meeting the targeted earmark for homeowners assisted with income less than 100% AMI. Recommendation: We recommend that internal control be strengthened so that compliance requirements and data received from others are properly understood before completing and submitting federal reports. DWS’s Response: DWS agrees with the finding.
2024-010. HTF Project Does Not Meet Eligible Income Requirements (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Assistance Listing Number and Title: 14.275 Housing Trust Fund Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: N/A Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A During eligibility reviews, DWS did not detect that a tenant in a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) assisted unit did not meet the income requirements to occupy the HTF-assisted unit. This error occurred because the tenant’s income was entered as $17,115 instead of $18,115 actual reported income, which exceeds the income limitation for this location of $17,400. The review by DWS also did not identify that this apartment complex did not have the specified one, two, and three-bedroom units available for HTF-assisted occupancy as outlined by the deed restrictions for this HTF-constructed apartment complex. Borrowers that are not in compliance with these deed restrictions could face DWS opting to call and make payable in full the HTF loan. 2 CFR 200.303 requires 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 award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Without effective internal controls, ineligible tenants may be allowed to occupy HTF-assisted housing, thus limiting the availability of units for eligible extremely low-income families. Recommendation: We recommend that DWS strengthen its internal control to better determine that all HTF assisted housing units contain only income eligible tenants. DWS’s Response: DWS agrees with the finding.
2024-010. HTF Project Does Not Meet Eligible Income Requirements (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Reportable Noncompliance) Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Assistance Listing Number and Title: 14.275 Housing Trust Fund Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: N/A Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A During eligibility reviews, DWS did not detect that a tenant in a Housing Trust Fund (HTF) assisted unit did not meet the income requirements to occupy the HTF-assisted unit. This error occurred because the tenant’s income was entered as $17,115 instead of $18,115 actual reported income, which exceeds the income limitation for this location of $17,400. The review by DWS also did not identify that this apartment complex did not have the specified one, two, and three-bedroom units available for HTF-assisted occupancy as outlined by the deed restrictions for this HTF-constructed apartment complex. Borrowers that are not in compliance with these deed restrictions could face DWS opting to call and make payable in full the HTF loan. 2 CFR 200.303 requires 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 award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” Without effective internal controls, ineligible tenants may be allowed to occupy HTF-assisted housing, thus limiting the availability of units for eligible extremely low-income families. Recommendation: We recommend that DWS strengthen its internal control to better determine that all HTF assisted housing units contain only income eligible tenants. DWS’s Response: DWS agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.
2024-008. Non-Payroll Expenditures Did Not Receive Adequate Reviews (Finding Type: Significant Deficiency, Other) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Number and Title: Research and Development Cluster (Various ALNs) Federal Award Number: Various Questioned Costs: None Pass-through Entity: N/A Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: N/A The University of Utah (University) did not perform adequate reviews on three of 40 non-payroll expenditures transactions selected for review from the Research and Development (R&D) Cluster projects. According to the University’s policies, non-payroll expenditures are required to have one or both of the following controls procedures to be performed: • Review and approval of individual expenditures by the R&D project’s Principal Investigator (PI), or other appropriate personnel, at the time of purchase. • Timely review and approval of monthly Management Reports by the R&D project’s PI, Account Executive (AE), or a designated alternate. Pursuant to University Policy 3-003, this “Evidence of Review should ordinarily be completed within one month of receipt of the management reports.” In addition, 2 CFR 200.303 requires non-federal entities to establish, document, and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that it manages the federal awards in compliance with federal requirements. Due to a lack of understanding of the importance of reviewing expenditures, as well as travel or technological issues, two expenditures were not reviewed in accordance with the University’s policy. Additionally, a clerical accounting error caused the third expenditure to be recorded in the wrong accounting period and it was not effectively reviewed to prevent the error. Without implementing proper controls, expenditures for unallowable activities or costs are more likely to be charged to federally funded projects without being detected and corrected. Recommendations: We recommend that the R&D project’s PIs perform the following as required by the University’s policy: • Review management reports and complete the evidence of review (EOR) process within the allotted time frame; and • Effectively perform review and approval of individual transactions. University’s Response: The University agrees with the finding.