Finding Number: 2024-003 Program: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) ALN #: 14.241 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of finding: Material weakness and material noncompliance Criteria The 2 CFR sections 200.332(d) through (f) provide the principles to be applied to monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals. According to 2 CFR 200.303, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The City does not have properly designed controls and documented procedures in place to ensure compliance with the following requirements: • Each subrecipients risk of noncompliance is appropriately evaluated. • Appropriate monitoring of the subrecipient based on their risk of noncompliance. • Verification that subrecipients are audited as required when they are expected to exceed the threshold for having a single audit. Cause The City does not have formal written policies, procedures, and internal controls in place to ensure that all required subrecipient monitoring procedures are performed. Proper perspective During our audit, we noted that four of the four subrecipients selected for testing did not have a completed risk assessment to determine their risk of noncompliance. As such, we were unable to determine that the proper level of monitoring was completed throughout the fiscal year over the contracted subrecipient. Additionally, we noted that the audited financial statements were obtained for the four subrecipients selected for testing, but there was no documentation to evidence the nature and extent of the City’s review of the reports obtained. Possible asserted effect Lack of effective controls and written policies and procedures over subrecipient monitoring could result in the City’s noncompliance with program requirements. Questioned costs None Statistical sampling The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat finding Yes, 2023-005 Recommendation We recommend the City establish a checklist or formal documentation requirements for both risk assessments and review of single audit report procedures. Employees can complete these checklists when obtaining and reviewing the documentation. The City should then conclude on and document the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance based on the checklist to ensure the proper level of monitoring occurs throughout the year. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City has addressed this recommendation. The City has updated policies and procedures in place. A standardized Subrecipient Audit Risk Assessment Checklist is in place and a Monitoring Risk Assessment Checklist has also been developed and implemented to guide and document the evaluation of subrecipient risk, review of single audit reports, monitoring. Federal Grants Division staff will complete this checklist during the initial subrecipient review and update it annually. This will ensure consistent documentation of each subrecipient's risk level and corresponding compliance requirements. The process will enable the City to make informed decisions regarding the appropriate level of monitoring for each subrecipient, based on the risk assessment outcomes. This systematic approach enhances accountability, supports audit readiness, and aligns with federal guidance under 2 CFR Part 200. All the agencies/subrecipients have been informed of the upcoming monitoring.
Finding Number: 2024-004 Program: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) ALN #: 14.241 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of finding: Material weakness and noncompliance Criteria Special Reporting for Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) (Pub. L. No.109-282), as amended by Section 6202 of Public Law 110-252, herein referred to as the “Transparency Act” that are codified in 2 CFR Part 170, recipients (i.e., direct recipients) of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). Aspects of the Transparency Act that relate to subaward reporting (1) under grants and cooperative agreements were implemented in OMB in 2 CFR Part 170 and (2) under contracts, by the regulatory agencies responsible for the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR at 5 FR 39414 et seq., July 8, 2010). The requirements pertain to recipients (i.e., direct recipients) of grants or cooperative agreements who make first-tier subawards and contractors (i.e., prime contractors) that award first-tier subcontracts. Title 2 US Code of Federal Regulations Part 200 (2 CFR 200), Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, section 200.1 defines subaward as an award provided by a pass-through entity to a subrecipient for the subrecipient to carry out part of a federal award received by the pass-through entity. It does not include payments to a contractor or payments to an individual that is a beneficiary of a federal program. A subaward may be provided through any form of legal agreement, including an agreement that the pass-through entity considers a contract. Further, 2 CFR 200.1 defines subrecipient as a nonfederal entity that receives a subaward from a passthrough entity to carry out part of a federal program but does not include an individual that is a beneficiary of such program. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other federal awards directly from a federal awarding agency. Lastly, 2 CFR 200.303(a) states, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The City’s Community Development Department did not report awards granted to subrecipients for the HOPWA program by the end of the month following the month in which the City awarded the subrecipient award. FFATA requires the City to report certain identifying information related to awards made to subrecipients in amounts greater than or equal to $30,000. Of the information to be reported, the following key data elements are required to be audited: 1. Subawardee name 2. Subawardee DUNS/UEI number 3. Amount of subaward 4. Subaward obligation/action date 5. Date of report submission 6. Subaward number 7. Subaward project description 8. Subawardee names and compensation of highly compensated officers During our testing, we noted that the City did not establish control procedures to submit FFATA reports for all subawards as required by federal regulations. Cause The condition found was due to the City not reporting amounts passed through to subrecipients for the period from July 2023 to June 2024, as the City typically reports these on a one-year lag due to the timing of when the contract starts and its final execution. Proper perspective During our testing of four selected subawards, we noted reporting exceptions as subawards were not reported within the one month following the month that the City awarded the subrecipient contract. Additionally, there was a control exception to ensure that the data submitted is complete and accurate. Possible asserted effect Failure to submit subaward amounts passed through to subrecipients and subcontractors under subawards as defined by 2 CFR 200.1 in the City’s FFATA reporting could result in the City reporting inaccurate and incomplete amounts to the federal government. Questioned costs None Statistical sampling The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat finding Yes, 2023-006 Recommendation We recommend that the City review and enhance its policies, procedures, and internal controls to ensure that all amounts passed through to subrecipients under subawards, as defined in 2 CFR 200.1 are reported in accordance with the FFATA federal regulations. In addition, we recommend that the City use obligation date for FFATA reporting. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City has taken several steps to strengthen its FFATA compliance. Historically, FFATA reporting posed challenges for many recipients, including the City, due to legacy reporting systems that did not fully align with the requirements of SAM.gov. As part of its compliance improvement efforts, the City has transitioned to directly reporting subaward data in SAM.gov. This shift necessitated a thorough review of internal processes, particularly because many of the City's subrecipient contracts are designed to begin on July 1 of each fiscal year but are not fully executed until months later, after the HUD-signed grant agreement is received, which generally occurs between late September and November. These timing discrepancies previously made it difficult to consistently identify and use the correct obligation date for FFATA reporting. The Federal Grants team initially used a manual Excel-based system to compile FFATA data from fully executed contracts. Each contract contains the essential elements required for FFATA reporting, including the Assistance Listing (CFDA) number, the City's and subrecipient's UEI numbers, agency name and address, award amount, and a brief program description. This spreadsheet served as the foundation for reporting subawards in SAM.gov. In response to this audit finding, the City has implemented the following corrective actions: 1.Standardized Data Collection: A subrecipient data collection form has been developed to ensure consistent and complete capture of all required FFATA elements prior to contract execution. 2.Formal Tracking System: The City created a FFATA Tracking Spreadsheet to systematically document and monitor all required reporting elements, including the correct obligation date, which is now tied to the legal execution date of the subaward.
Finding Number: 2024-005 Program: Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) ALN #: 14.241 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Performance Reporting Type of finding: Material weakness and material noncompliance Criteria Performance Reporting for the HOPWA Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report Per HUD, the Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) provides annual performance reporting on client outputs and outcomes that enables an assessment of grantee performance in achieving the housing stability outcome measure. The CAPER fulfills statutory and regulatory program reporting requirements and provides the grantee and HUD with the necessary information to assess the overall program performance and accomplishments against planned goals and objectives. Both HOPWA formula and competitive grantees submitting reports after January 1, 2023, must complete and submit the HUD-4155 “Consolidated APR/CAPER” (OMB number 2506-0133). HOPWA Formula Grantees that accept the supplemental funding authorized under the CARES Act should report on the use of supplemental grant funds in the same performance report as their use of entitlement funds. Both formula and competitive grantees are required to submit their completed HUD-4155 no later than 90 days after the close of their program or operating year. Competitive grantees have 120 days after the end of their grant’s last period of performance to submit the final HUD-4155. Grantees should be able to demonstrate that funds disbursed through federal financial systems are traceable in local accounts and accurately reported in Key Line Items in the HUD-4155. Lastly, 2 CFR 200.303(a) states, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The City does not have properly designed controls and documented procedures in place to ensure compliance with the following requirements: • CAPER report is submitted to HUD within 90 days of the end of the 12-month program year. • Review of subrecipient’s CAPER to ensure complete and accurate reporting over key line items. Cause Subrecipients are required to submit their individual CAPER reports to the City prior to the City submitting its report to HUD. The City has had difficulty in getting the subrecipients to comply with the CAPER reporting, which is primarily due to staffing issues at the subrecipients. As a result, the City did not submit its CAPER to HUD within the required time-frame. Proper perspective The City failed to submit the CAPER that covers the period from July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023 to HUD by the September 30, 2023 deadline. The City ultimately submitted the CAPER on May 3, 2024. Additionally, the City has been unable to provide documentation that the subrecipients’ CAPER has been reconciled to the Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS). Possible asserted effect Incomplete or inaccurate information from its subrecipients has resulted in the City’s inability to properly comply with HUD’s CAPER reporting requirements. Questioned costs Not determinable Statistical sampling The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat finding Yes, 2023-007 Recommendation We recommend that the City establish policies, procedures, and internal controls to ensure that all subrecipient CAPER reports are reconciled to the IDIS system and submitted to HUD within 90 days of year-end. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City will continue to work with all agencies receiving HOPWA to complete their annual CAPER correctly and in a timely manner. This emphasis will be reiterated throughout the awarding process and will be subject to regular status updates to ensure compliance and accuracy. Further, the City will work with HUD to establish a correct methodology in reporting consistency with IDIS, as the annual CAPER and HOPWA contracts do not operate open uniform timelines, nor do they involve consistent financial reporting structures. The City does not believe the simple and direct correlation to IDIS is a reasonable or useful metric for the CAPER, but acknowledges that there should be a consistent standard that can be reconciled to financial activity during the year covered by each CAPER.
Finding Number: 2024-006 Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN #: 21.027 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Allowability Type of finding: Material weakness and noncompliance Criteria Per the activities allowed or unallowed requirement within Part 4 of the Compliance Supplement, recipients may use payments from CSLFRF to: 1. Respond to the public health and negative economic impacts of the pandemic, by supporting the health of communities, and helping households, small businesses, impacted industries, and the public sector recover from economic impacts of the pandemic. 2. Replace lost public sector revenue to provide government services; recipients may use this funding to provide government services to the extent of the reduction in revenue experienced due to the pandemic. 3. Provide premium pay for essential workers, offering additional support to those who have borne and will bear the greatest health risks because of their service in critical infrastructure sectors; and 4. Invest in water, sewer, and broadband infrastructure, making necessary investments to improve access to clean drinking water, support, vital wastewater and storm water infrastructure, and to expand access to broadband internet. For beneficiary payments (expenditures), evaluate whether the entity's records identify the individual or group as eligible to receive beneficiary payments for the applicable period. Additionally, according to 2 CFR 200.303, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The City set specific requirements for small businesses to be eligible to receive beneficiary payments under the CSLFRF program. Businesses were required to submit an application to the City with supporting documentation to confirm they were eligible for the payment. One of the requirements to be eligible is that the business must show a loss between the years of 2019 and 2021. We noted during our testing that the City awarded beneficiary payments to businesses that did not meet this requirements set by the City. We noted 3 exceptions from a sample selection of 40. Cause Due to improper review and approval, the City approved three business applications to receive a beneficiary payment that were ineligible. Proper perspective During our testing, we noted that 3 of 40 selections did not meet the eligibility criteria to be awarded a beneficiary payment. One exception showed a business loss in 2022, which is outside the period of the program requirements to submit loss documentation (2019-2021). One additional exception relates to a businesses showing an increase in sales/revenue for the 2021-2022 years. The City was unable to provide documentation that this business had a loss in either 2019 or 2020. The last exception relates to an individual that was awarded a small business grant where the business nor the individual is domiciled in Cambridge. As such, the City should not have approved these businesses for payment when reviewing their applications. Possible asserted effect Approving businesses that are not eligible to receive a beneficiary payment could cause the City to be charging the grant unallowable costs. Questioned costs $13,500 Statistical sampling That same was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat finding A similar finding was not reported in the prior year. Recommendation We recommend the City review applications to ensure only eligible businesses are approved to receive beneficiary payments. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City has implemented additional controls over the review of all applicant information related to program funds being disbursed only to eligible applicants.
Finding Number: 2024-007 Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN #: 21.027 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Awar Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of finding: Material weakness and noncompliance Criteria Recipients may use awarded funds to enter into contracts to procure goods and services necessary to implement one or more of the eligible purposes outlined in 42 USC sections 802(c) and 803(c) and Treasury’s 2021 Interim Final Rule, and 2022 Final Rule, and 2023 Interim Final Rule. Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. According to 2 CFR 200.303, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition For three of seven selections, we noted that the City did not follow the proper procurement policies as outlined in the Massachusetts General Law Chapter 30B. One exception related to a vendor that had cumulative expenditures greater than $10,000 in FY24. This vendor did not have a related contract for these expenditures and therefore the City did not follow procurement policies. Two additional exceptions relate to sole-source procurements with contract values greater than $50,000. Per Chapter 30B, sole-source procurements of more the $50,000 cannot be completed unless the contract relates to software maintenance, library books, and educational materials. These contracts did not relate to any of the beforementioned categories. Additionally, the City did not have documentation to show that a reasonable services. As such, a sole-source procurement method was not in compliance with Chapter 30B of the Massachusetts General Law. Cause The nature and reason for the noncompliance is attributed to oversight error on the City's part for not entering into contracts/maintaining procurement documentation appropriately. The City enters into hundreds of contracts annually funded with the ARPA program, all of which are manually reviewed. Therefore, it is likely that human error caused the noncompliance. Proper perspective The City’s policy is to follow the Massachusetts General Law Chapter 30B when procuring goods and services. Out of a sample size of seven, we noted that three of the vendors were not properly procured, as described in the conditions found. Possible asserted effect Not following the proper procurement policies, as outlined in Chapter 30B, could cause the City to inappropriately award a contract to a vendor. Questioned costs None noted Statistical sampling The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat finding A similar finding was not reported in the prior year. Recommendation We recommend the City to review the procurement policies and ensure that expenditures for vendors that exceed $10,000 follow the correct procurement policies and procedures. Additionally, sole source bids require the City to follow certain policies and procedures. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City has updated its procurement process in FY2025 to ensure that expenditures for vendors that exceed $10,000 and sole source contracts follow the correct procurement policies and procedures in accordance with MGL 30B. investigation occurred that showed only one, or all vendors contracted with, could provide the required
Finding Number: 2024-008 Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN #: 21.027 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Suspension and Debarment Type of finding: Material weakness and noncompliance Criteria The 2 CFR sections 180.215 and 180.220 provide the principles to be applied to ensure nonfederal entities are not contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. Additionally, when a nonfederal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the nonfederal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. According to 2 CFR 200.303, the nonfederal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The City does not have formal policies and procedures for ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a contract. However, when establishing contracts for vendors under the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (CSLFRF), the City requires that standard contract language be included to address the applicable suspension and debarment requirements. Additionally, the City requires the program staff check the System of Award Management (SAM) to ensure the vendor is not suspended or debarred from working under a federal contract. If neither of the beforementioned methods are used, the City will require the vendor to submit a self-certification to ensure they are not suspended or debarred. Throughout our testing, we noted the required contract language was not included within all vendor contracts. Additionally, there was no evidence that city verified the vendor on SAM.gov, or that there was a self-certification included as part of the contracting process. Cause The City requires that standard contract language be included in all vendor contracts that addresses the suspension and debarment requirements. The City was unaware that the required language was excluded from vendor contracts entered into for the CSLFRF program. There was insufficient review of the contracts prior to execution to ensure all required elements were present. Additionally, the City did not retain any documentation that they checked SAM.gov prior to entering into a control with a vendor. Proper perspective During our audit, we noted five of nine vendors selected for testing did not contain language in the contract regarding suspension and debarment, as evidenced via review of the subrecipient contracts. Additionally, it was communicated to us that the City checked SAM.gov for each vendor’s status, however, they were not able to provide evidence that this occurred. During compliance testing, it was confirmed all subrecipients, except for two, were not suspended or debarred. The engagement team was unable to determine if Margaret Fuller Neighborhood House and Smartcat Platforms Inc. was suspended or debarred as they are not registered with SAM.gov. Possible asserted effect Lack of formal review of subrecipient contracts and review of entities on SAM.gov could result in the City entering into contracts with prohibited entities. Questions costs None noted Statistical sampling The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat finding Yes, 2023-008 Recommendation We recommend the City set formal policies and procedures around ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred. Documented policies and procedures would ensure that required language is included within all vendor contracts prior to execution and that SAM.gov is checked and documentation is retained. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City has taken actions to ensure that the “Suspension and Debarment” clause or vendor selfcertification confirmation statement has been added to the FY2025 contract and grant agreements. Additionally, City staff has adopted a new sign-off process to document the City's staff review of the vendors status in “SAM.gov”.
Finding Number: 2024-009 Program: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds ALN #: 21.027 Pass-through Entity: N/A- Direct Award Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Award Year: July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of finding: Material weakness and material noncompliance Criteria The 2 CFR sections 200.332(d) through (f) provide the principles to be applied to monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals. According to 2 CFR 200.303, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The City does not have properly designed controls and documented procedures in place to ensure compliance with the following requirements: • Each subrecipients risk of noncompliance is appropriately evaluated. • Verification that subrecipients are audited as required when they are expected to exceed the threshold for having a single audit. • All required elements of the subrecipient contracts are included during execution. Cause The City’s lack of effective internal controls and written policies and procedures have caused the following Proper perspective During the audit, we noted that eight of the nine subrecipient selections did not contain all the required elements of the contract. Additionally, nine of the nine selections completed a risk assessment questionnaire. However, there is no indication that the City reviewed the questionnaires and subsequently concluded on the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance. We also noted that audited financial statements were obtained for the three subrecipients that required a single audit, but there was no documentation to evidence the nature and extent of the City’s review of the audit reports obtained. Therefore, we were unable to determine if, based on the subrecipient’s risk assessment questionnaire and single audit report, if additional monitoring procedures were required Possible asserted effect Lack of effective controls and written policies and procedures over subrecipient monitoring could result in the City’s noncompliance with program requirements. Questioned costs None Statistical sampling The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding Yes, 2023-009 Recommendation We recommend the City establish a checklist or formal documentation requirements for both risk assessments and review of single audit report procedures. Employees can complete these checklists when obtaining and reviewing the documentation. The City should then conclude on and document the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance based on the checklist to ensure the proper level of monitoring occurs throughout the year. Views of responsible officials and corrective actions The City has implemented additional controls over subrecipient monitoring by establishing a formal policy to review and document subrecipient qualifications, risk assessments and financial reports and have created subsequent monitoring plans and checklists. noncompliance and control exceptions.
FA 2024-001 Internal Controls over Wage Rate Requirements Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Number and Title: COVID-19 – 84.425U – American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund Federal Award Number: S425U210012 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of construction-related expenditures charged to the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund program revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not operating to ensure that Wage Rate Requirements were followed appropriately. Background Information: On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act was designed to mitigate the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in a variety of ways, including providing additional funding for local educational agencies (LEAs) navigating the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak. Provisions included in Title VIII of the CARES Act created the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief Fund to provide financial resources to educational entities to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus. The CARES Act allocated $30.75 billion, the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act allocated an additional $81.9 billion, and the American Rescue Plan Act added $165.1 billion in funding to the Education Stabilization Fund. Multiple Education Stabilization Fund subprograms were created and allotted funding through the various COVID-19-related legislation. Of these programs, the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund was created to address the impact that COVID-19 has had, and continues to have, on elementary and secondary schools across the nation. ESSER funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to LEAs and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. ESSER funds totaling $4,308,075.07 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Additionally, the Uniform Guidance, Appendix II to Part 200 – Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards, Part D addresses Davis-Bacon Act requirements and states, in part, “When required by Federal program legislation, all prime construction contracts in excess of $2,000 awarded by non-Federal entities must include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141-3144, and 3146-3148) as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations (29 CFR Part 5, “Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Covering Federally Financed and Assisted Construction”). In accordance with the statute, contractors must be required to pay wages to laborers and mechanics at a rate not less than the prevailing wages specified in a wage determination made by the Secretary of Labor.” Specifically, 29 CFR, Section 5.5 – Contract Provisions and Related Matters requires that these construction contracts contain certain clauses, including minimum wage rate requirements and the submission of certified payrolls. Provisions included in 29 CFR, Section 5.5(a)(3)(ii) state, in part, that “(A) The contractor shall submit weekly for each week in which any contract work is performed a copy of all payrolls… (B) Each payroll submitted shall be accompanied by a “Statement of Compliance,” signed by the contractor or subcontractor.” Condition: Our review of expenditures charged to the ESSER program revealed that the School District entered into construction contracts in excess of $2,000; however, appropriate provisions were not included in the contracts to ensure that Wage Rate Requirements were met by the contractors. In addition, while it was later noted that the appropriate wage rate was paid to all laborers, the School District did not ensure that the contractor submitted the required certified payrolls, which includes a copy of payroll disbursements and a statement of compliance with Wage Rate Requirements, at least weekly during the construction period. Cause: The School District did not appropriately communicate the wage rate requirements to ensure certified payrolls were obtained weekly for each week in which work was performed. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance or ED guidance related to the ESSER program. Failure to ensure that appropriate provisions are included in contracts associated with construction financed in part or in whole with federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as ED or GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with these construction expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should develop policies and procedures to ensure that all construction contracts financed by federal financial assistance reflect appropriate provisions associated with Wage Rate Requirements and that certified payrolls are obtained from contractors as necessary. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding
FA 2024-002 Improve Internal Control Activities Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Period of Performance Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 84.027 – Special Education Grants to States 84.173 – Special Education Preschool Grants COVID-19 – 84.027 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Grants to States COVID-19 – 84.173 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Preschool Grants Federal Award Numbers: H027A220073 (Year: 2023), H027A230073 (Year: 2024), H173A220081 (Year: 2023), H173A230081 (Year: 2024), H027X210073 (Year: 2022), H173X210081 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of expenditures recorded in and related to the Special Education Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not designed appropriately to ensure that appropriate reviews and approvals occurred. Background Information: The Special Education Cluster (SEC), which is comprised of the Special Education Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) and Special Education Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) programs, was authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SEC funding is available to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living; ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected; assist states, localities, educational service agencies, and federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. SEC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. SEC funds totaling $993,921.19 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Condition: Internal controls over various compliance requirements associated with SEC were reviewed by the auditors. During our testing, it was determined the School District’s internal controls were not properly designed as it was discovered that the SEC Bookkeeper was using a stamp of the Program Director’s signature for approval of payment in the Director’s absence. Cause: The deficiency resulted from a lack of awareness that the existence of a stamp bearing the Director's signature could compromise separation of duties controls. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to adequately review expenditures for allowability exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to the SEC programs. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect appropriate evidence of review for associated compliance requirements. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. Appropriate review and approval procedures have been consistently followed throughout the expenditure approval process. The use of a signature stamp did not compromise the Director’s thorough review and authorization of expenditures. Under the established process, the Bookkeeper initiates approval by sending a detailed email to the Director. The signature stamp was applied only after the Director responded with explicit approval. Additionally, a printed copy of the Director’s email approval was attached to the corresponding invoice, which the Accounts Payable Clerk verified prior to processing payment. This procedure has been in place and closely monitored to ensure compliance. A sample of this process was provided as evidence to the reviewing auditor during the review. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: The use of a signature stamp constitutes a significant control weakness and raises concerns regarding the integrity and authenticity of transaction approvals. This practice does not provide an adequate audit trail related to the expenditure approval process and increases the risk of unauthorized approvals and fraudulent transactions. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
FA 2024-002 Improve Internal Control Activities Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Period of Performance Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 84.027 – Special Education Grants to States 84.173 – Special Education Preschool Grants COVID-19 – 84.027 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Grants to States COVID-19 – 84.173 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Preschool Grants Federal Award Numbers: H027A220073 (Year: 2023), H027A230073 (Year: 2024), H173A220081 (Year: 2023), H173A230081 (Year: 2024), H027X210073 (Year: 2022), H173X210081 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of expenditures recorded in and related to the Special Education Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not designed appropriately to ensure that appropriate reviews and approvals occurred. Background Information: The Special Education Cluster (SEC), which is comprised of the Special Education Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) and Special Education Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) programs, was authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SEC funding is available to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living; ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected; assist states, localities, educational service agencies, and federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. SEC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. SEC funds totaling $993,921.19 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Condition: Internal controls over various compliance requirements associated with SEC were reviewed by the auditors. During our testing, it was determined the School District’s internal controls were not properly designed as it was discovered that the SEC Bookkeeper was using a stamp of the Program Director’s signature for approval of payment in the Director’s absence. Cause: The deficiency resulted from a lack of awareness that the existence of a stamp bearing the Director's signature could compromise separation of duties controls. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to adequately review expenditures for allowability exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to the SEC programs. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect appropriate evidence of review for associated compliance requirements. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. Appropriate review and approval procedures have been consistently followed throughout the expenditure approval process. The use of a signature stamp did not compromise the Director’s thorough review and authorization of expenditures. Under the established process, the Bookkeeper initiates approval by sending a detailed email to the Director. The signature stamp was applied only after the Director responded with explicit approval. Additionally, a printed copy of the Director’s email approval was attached to the corresponding invoice, which the Accounts Payable Clerk verified prior to processing payment. This procedure has been in place and closely monitored to ensure compliance. A sample of this process was provided as evidence to the reviewing auditor during the review. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: The use of a signature stamp constitutes a significant control weakness and raises concerns regarding the integrity and authenticity of transaction approvals. This practice does not provide an adequate audit trail related to the expenditure approval process and increases the risk of unauthorized approvals and fraudulent transactions. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
FA 2024-002 Improve Internal Control Activities Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Period of Performance Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 84.027 – Special Education Grants to States 84.173 – Special Education Preschool Grants COVID-19 – 84.027 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Grants to States COVID-19 – 84.173 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Preschool Grants Federal Award Numbers: H027A220073 (Year: 2023), H027A230073 (Year: 2024), H173A220081 (Year: 2023), H173A230081 (Year: 2024), H027X210073 (Year: 2022), H173X210081 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of expenditures recorded in and related to the Special Education Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not designed appropriately to ensure that appropriate reviews and approvals occurred. Background Information: The Special Education Cluster (SEC), which is comprised of the Special Education Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) and Special Education Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) programs, was authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SEC funding is available to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living; ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected; assist states, localities, educational service agencies, and federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. SEC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. SEC funds totaling $993,921.19 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Condition: Internal controls over various compliance requirements associated with SEC were reviewed by the auditors. During our testing, it was determined the School District’s internal controls were not properly designed as it was discovered that the SEC Bookkeeper was using a stamp of the Program Director’s signature for approval of payment in the Director’s absence. Cause: The deficiency resulted from a lack of awareness that the existence of a stamp bearing the Director's signature could compromise separation of duties controls. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to adequately review expenditures for allowability exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to the SEC programs. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect appropriate evidence of review for associated compliance requirements. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. Appropriate review and approval procedures have been consistently followed throughout the expenditure approval process. The use of a signature stamp did not compromise the Director’s thorough review and authorization of expenditures. Under the established process, the Bookkeeper initiates approval by sending a detailed email to the Director. The signature stamp was applied only after the Director responded with explicit approval. Additionally, a printed copy of the Director’s email approval was attached to the corresponding invoice, which the Accounts Payable Clerk verified prior to processing payment. This procedure has been in place and closely monitored to ensure compliance. A sample of this process was provided as evidence to the reviewing auditor during the review. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: The use of a signature stamp constitutes a significant control weakness and raises concerns regarding the integrity and authenticity of transaction approvals. This practice does not provide an adequate audit trail related to the expenditure approval process and increases the risk of unauthorized approvals and fraudulent transactions. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
FA 2024-002 Improve Internal Control Activities Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Period of Performance Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 84.027 – Special Education Grants to States 84.173 – Special Education Preschool Grants COVID-19 – 84.027 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Grants to States COVID-19 – 84.173 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Preschool Grants Federal Award Numbers: H027A220073 (Year: 2023), H027A230073 (Year: 2024), H173A220081 (Year: 2023), H173A230081 (Year: 2024), H027X210073 (Year: 2022), H173X210081 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of expenditures recorded in and related to the Special Education Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not designed appropriately to ensure that appropriate reviews and approvals occurred. Background Information: The Special Education Cluster (SEC), which is comprised of the Special Education Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) and Special Education Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) programs, was authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SEC funding is available to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living; ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected; assist states, localities, educational service agencies, and federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. SEC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. SEC funds totaling $993,921.19 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Condition: Internal controls over various compliance requirements associated with SEC were reviewed by the auditors. During our testing, it was determined the School District’s internal controls were not properly designed as it was discovered that the SEC Bookkeeper was using a stamp of the Program Director’s signature for approval of payment in the Director’s absence. Cause: The deficiency resulted from a lack of awareness that the existence of a stamp bearing the Director's signature could compromise separation of duties controls. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to adequately review expenditures for allowability exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to the SEC programs. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect appropriate evidence of review for associated compliance requirements. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. Appropriate review and approval procedures have been consistently followed throughout the expenditure approval process. The use of a signature stamp did not compromise the Director’s thorough review and authorization of expenditures. Under the established process, the Bookkeeper initiates approval by sending a detailed email to the Director. The signature stamp was applied only after the Director responded with explicit approval. Additionally, a printed copy of the Director’s email approval was attached to the corresponding invoice, which the Accounts Payable Clerk verified prior to processing payment. This procedure has been in place and closely monitored to ensure compliance. A sample of this process was provided as evidence to the reviewing auditor during the review. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: The use of a signature stamp constitutes a significant control weakness and raises concerns regarding the integrity and authenticity of transaction approvals. This practice does not provide an adequate audit trail related to the expenditure approval process and increases the risk of unauthorized approvals and fraudulent transactions. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
FA 2024-002 Improve Internal Control Activities Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Period of Performance Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 84.027 – Special Education Grants to States 84.173 – Special Education Preschool Grants COVID-19 – 84.027 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Grants to States COVID-19 – 84.173 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Preschool Grants Federal Award Numbers: H027A220073 (Year: 2023), H027A230073 (Year: 2024), H173A220081 (Year: 2023), H173A230081 (Year: 2024), H027X210073 (Year: 2022), H173X210081 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of expenditures recorded in and related to the Special Education Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not designed appropriately to ensure that appropriate reviews and approvals occurred. Background Information: The Special Education Cluster (SEC), which is comprised of the Special Education Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) and Special Education Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) programs, was authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SEC funding is available to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living; ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected; assist states, localities, educational service agencies, and federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. SEC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. SEC funds totaling $993,921.19 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Condition: Internal controls over various compliance requirements associated with SEC were reviewed by the auditors. During our testing, it was determined the School District’s internal controls were not properly designed as it was discovered that the SEC Bookkeeper was using a stamp of the Program Director’s signature for approval of payment in the Director’s absence. Cause: The deficiency resulted from a lack of awareness that the existence of a stamp bearing the Director's signature could compromise separation of duties controls. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to adequately review expenditures for allowability exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to the SEC programs. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect appropriate evidence of review for associated compliance requirements. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. Appropriate review and approval procedures have been consistently followed throughout the expenditure approval process. The use of a signature stamp did not compromise the Director’s thorough review and authorization of expenditures. Under the established process, the Bookkeeper initiates approval by sending a detailed email to the Director. The signature stamp was applied only after the Director responded with explicit approval. Additionally, a printed copy of the Director’s email approval was attached to the corresponding invoice, which the Accounts Payable Clerk verified prior to processing payment. This procedure has been in place and closely monitored to ensure compliance. A sample of this process was provided as evidence to the reviewing auditor during the review. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: The use of a signature stamp constitutes a significant control weakness and raises concerns regarding the integrity and authenticity of transaction approvals. This practice does not provide an adequate audit trail related to the expenditure approval process and increases the risk of unauthorized approvals and fraudulent transactions. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
FA 2024-002 Improve Internal Control Activities Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Period of Performance Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 84.027 – Special Education Grants to States 84.173 – Special Education Preschool Grants COVID-19 – 84.027 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Grants to States COVID-19 – 84.173 – American Rescue Plan – Special Education Preschool Grants Federal Award Numbers: H027A220073 (Year: 2023), H027A230073 (Year: 2024), H173A220081 (Year: 2023), H173A230081 (Year: 2024), H027X210073 (Year: 2022), H173X210081 (Year: 2022) Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: A review of expenditures recorded in and related to the Special Education Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not designed appropriately to ensure that appropriate reviews and approvals occurred. Background Information: The Special Education Cluster (SEC), which is comprised of the Special Education Grants to States (IDEA, Part B) and Special Education Preschool Grants (IDEA Preschool) programs, was authorized under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). SEC funding is available to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepares them for further education, employment, and independent living; ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected; assist states, localities, educational service agencies, and federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities. SEC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Education (ED). GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the expenditure of funds by LEAs. SEC funds totaling $993,921.19 were expended and reported on the Meriwether County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Condition: Internal controls over various compliance requirements associated with SEC were reviewed by the auditors. During our testing, it was determined the School District’s internal controls were not properly designed as it was discovered that the SEC Bookkeeper was using a stamp of the Program Director’s signature for approval of payment in the Director’s absence. Cause: The deficiency resulted from a lack of awareness that the existence of a stamp bearing the Director's signature could compromise separation of duties controls. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to adequately review expenditures for allowability exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to the SEC programs. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect appropriate evidence of review for associated compliance requirements. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding. Appropriate review and approval procedures have been consistently followed throughout the expenditure approval process. The use of a signature stamp did not compromise the Director’s thorough review and authorization of expenditures. Under the established process, the Bookkeeper initiates approval by sending a detailed email to the Director. The signature stamp was applied only after the Director responded with explicit approval. Additionally, a printed copy of the Director’s email approval was attached to the corresponding invoice, which the Accounts Payable Clerk verified prior to processing payment. This procedure has been in place and closely monitored to ensure compliance. A sample of this process was provided as evidence to the reviewing auditor during the review. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: The use of a signature stamp constitutes a significant control weakness and raises concerns regarding the integrity and authenticity of transaction approvals. This practice does not provide an adequate audit trail related to the expenditure approval process and increases the risk of unauthorized approvals and fraudulent transactions. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP4374, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: Iowa Economic Development Authority Pass-Through Number: 23-INIA-023 Award Period: September 14, 2022 – September 30, 2026 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award Section 200.303 requires entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal Awards. Condition: During our testing we noted internal controls over expenditures were not properly followed. Questioned Costs: None Context: 2 of the 25 expenditures selected for testing did not have documented review. Cause: Project Manager was not in place from July 2023 – August 2023 to properly review pay applications. Effect: The auditor noted no instances of noncompliance with the allowability of costs or support for costs; the lack of internal controls over expenditures provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization ensure proper review and approval over expenditures. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP4374, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: Iowa Economic Development Authority Pass-Through Number: 23-INIA-023 Award Period: September 14, 2022 – September 30, 2026 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award Section 200.303 requires entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal Awards. Condition: During our testing we noted internal controls over expenditures were not properly followed. Questioned Costs: None Context: 2 of the 25 expenditures selected for testing did not have documented review. Cause: Project Manager was not in place from July 2023 – August 2023 to properly review pay applications. Effect: The auditor noted no instances of noncompliance with the allowability of costs or support for costs; the lack of internal controls over expenditures provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization ensure proper review and approval over expenditures. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP4374, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: Iowa Economic Development Authority Pass-Through Number: 23-INIA-023 Award Period: September 14, 2022 – September 30, 2026 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Award Section 200.303 requires entities to establish and maintain effective internal controls over Federal Awards. Condition: During our testing we noted internal controls over expenditures were not properly followed. Questioned Costs: None Context: 2 of the 25 expenditures selected for testing did not have documented review. Cause: Project Manager was not in place from July 2023 – August 2023 to properly review pay applications. Effect: The auditor noted no instances of noncompliance with the allowability of costs or support for costs; the lack of internal controls over expenditures provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization ensure proper review and approval over expenditures. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.
Criteria: According to Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.303, the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal controls over compliance for federal awards to provide reasonable assurance of compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards. Condition: As allowed under program requirements, the City determined its’ eligible actual revenue for the calendar year December 31, 2023. The calendar year approach has been consistently used since calendar year 2020. The amount of actual revenue for the calendar year ended December 31, 2023, was $900,087,916; however, when completing the Project & Expenditure Report for the calendar year ended December 31, 2023, the City only reported actual revenue of $795,459,017. The difference in calculation did not impact amounts claimed as lost revenue. Cause: The deficiency was a result of a misinterpretation of program requirements when reporting the amount of actual revenue on the Project & Expenditure report. The City should have reported the actual revenue used in the revenue loss calculation but only reported the General Fund portion of the actual revenue. Effect: Incorrect reporting can effect the administration of the program by the grantor. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The program instruction were misinterpreted. The revenues spanned multiple funds rather than just the general fund which led to the inaccurate reporting regarding this specific award. Recommendation: We recommend that the City enhance their internal controls over the requirements of this program to ensure those preparing and reviewing the reports have the appropriate understanding and information needed to ensure completeness and accuracy of information being reported.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers 14.871 – IA125V08001 for FY24 Housing Voucher Cluster Reporting Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance and Material Noncompliance Criteria – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the preparer and approver of required reports. Condition – We identified three (3) instances in which the City did not use accurate financial information or retain evidence to document the individual who reviewed the Voucher Management System (VMS) reports prior to submission. Cause – The City’s internal controls did not include separate management review of the VMS reports prior to submission. Effect – Ineffective controls over this area of compliance could result in reports that are inaccurate or incomplete being submitted to the granting agency. Questioned Costs – None reported. Context – The population consists of twelve (12) monthly VMS reports. The sample consisted of three (3) monthly VMS reports. Repeat Finding From Prior Years – No. Recommendation – We recommend that the City revise its procedures to include evidence to document the individual who reviewed required reports prior to submission. Views of Responsible Officials – We agree with the auditor’s recommendation.
2024 – 007 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Department of Interior Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning ALN: 21.027 15.916 Pass-Through Agency: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning Arizona State Park Trails Pass-Through Number(s): Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04-007-652304 Award Number and Period: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) 1505-0271 3/3/2021 – 12/31/2024 Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04/18/2022-12/31/24 Statistically Valid Sample: No, and not intended to be a statistically valid sample Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the City of Nogales must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR 200.324, the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220). All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non- Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by: (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov | Home (click on Search Record, then click on Advanced Search-Exclusions) (Note: The OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 180 and agency implementing regulations still refer to the SAM Exclusions as the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)), (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: The following is a summary results for each audited program. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) - Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. Three out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide support for the procurement method used, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. One out of five vendors tested did not have a valid contract on file. Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning – Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. • Five out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide sample support requested to test procurement method selected, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. • Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Questioned costs: Unknown Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The City’s written procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures are in compliance with Uniform Grant Guidance but were not properly adhered to. Effect: The City is not in compliance with uniform grant guidance requirements related to procurement, suspension, and debarment. Repeat Finding: Yes. See 2024-005. Recommendation: The City of Nogales should enhance and/or modify existing controls over procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures to ensure adherence to all uniform grant guidance requirements. This could include implementing a more robust checklist that should be completed, signed off by management and included with each procurement which has all required items noted such as cost/price analysis and verification of suspension and debarment of vendors. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan. Corrective action plan: See corrective action plan.
2024 – 009 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Federal Agency: Department of Interior Federal Program Title: Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning ALN: 15.916 Pass-Through Agency: Arizona State Park Trails Pass-Through Number(s): 04-007-652304 Award Number and Period: 04/18/2022-12/31/24 Statistically Valid Sample: No, and not intended to be a statistically valid sample Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the City of Nogales (City) must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL). Per 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction: Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations. This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Condition: There was no support provided for the three out of three contractor vendors with construction work noted on their purchase orders. Questioned costs: None. Context: See “Condition.” Cause: Current process and controls are not at the correct precision level to ensure special provisions regarding the Wage Rate compliances are being met. Effect: Ineffective internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant award. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: The City of Nogales should refine its current process and associated controls surrounding the requirements in 40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 to ensure they are met. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan. Corrective action plan: See corrective action plan.
2024 – 007 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Department of Interior Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning ALN: 21.027 15.916 Pass-Through Agency: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning Arizona State Park Trails Pass-Through Number(s): Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04-007-652304 Award Number and Period: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) 1505-0271 3/3/2021 – 12/31/2024 Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04/18/2022-12/31/24 Statistically Valid Sample: No, and not intended to be a statistically valid sample Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the City of Nogales must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR 200.324, the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220). All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non- Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by: (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov | Home (click on Search Record, then click on Advanced Search-Exclusions) (Note: The OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 180 and agency implementing regulations still refer to the SAM Exclusions as the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)), (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: The following is a summary results for each audited program. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) - Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. Three out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide support for the procurement method used, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. One out of five vendors tested did not have a valid contract on file. Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning – Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. • Five out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide sample support requested to test procurement method selected, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. • Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Questioned costs: Unknown Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The City’s written procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures are in compliance with Uniform Grant Guidance but were not properly adhered to. Effect: The City is not in compliance with uniform grant guidance requirements related to procurement, suspension, and debarment. Repeat Finding: Yes. See 2024-005. Recommendation: The City of Nogales should enhance and/or modify existing controls over procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures to ensure adherence to all uniform grant guidance requirements. This could include implementing a more robust checklist that should be completed, signed off by management and included with each procurement which has all required items noted such as cost/price analysis and verification of suspension and debarment of vendors. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan. Corrective action plan: See corrective action plan.
Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal program title: Block Grants for Community Mental Health Services Assistance Listing Number: 93.958 Pass-Through Agency: Illinois Department of Human Services Pass-Through Number: 45CCB03514; 45CCB04278; 45CCB00648 Award Period: 07/01/2023 – 06/30/2024 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: § 200.303(a) indicates non-federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Organization requested reimbursement for duplicate pay periods in a single month. Questioned Costs: None Context: In July 2023, the Organization requested reimbursement for pay date July 7, 2023 twice rather than pay dates July 7, 2023 and July 21, 2023. The net effect resulted in Trilogy requesting reimbursement for $118 less in payroll costs than what it could have requested. Cause: Oversight. Effect: Inaccurate payroll costs charged. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the Organization review the pay periods supporting the personnel costs that are charged to the grant. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Condition: During the process of documenting the County’s internal controls regarding federal disbursements, we noted that Rogers County has not established procedures to ensure compliance with the following compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment; Reporting; and Subrecipient Monitoring. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure federal expenditures are made in accordance with federal compliance requirements. Effect of Condition: This condition could result in noncompliance with grant requirements and could lead to a loss of federal funds to the County. Recommendation: OSAI recommends that the County gain an understanding of requirements for this program and implement a system of internal control procedures to ensure compliance with grant requirements. Management Response: Board of County Commissioners: The Board of County Commissioners is responsible for the overall fiscal concerns of the county. See OKLA. STAT. Title 19, § 345. The Board of County Commissioners, with the cooperation and participation of all elected officials, reviews, develops and implements policies and procedures to create a strong internal control environment. The Board of County Commissioners will work with all elected officials, the third-party administrator, and federal, state and local partners to develop policies, procedures, and internal controls designed to accurately track grants, including the application process, verification, oversight, and reporting of grant requirements. These policies and procedures will be designed to identify requirements for recipients and sub-recipients of grants, ensure accurate equipment and real property management, procurement, recipient and subrecipient monitoring and reporting. Further, policies will ensure a proper understanding of all grant requirements and compliance of the same. To assist in this process, the Board of County Commissioners engaged a third-party administrator to oversee the grant process, including application, eligibility, review, requirements, contracting, recipient tracking and oversight, and documentation and reporting. The Board of County Commissioners will work with the third-party administrator to ensure proper grant administration. Criteria: OMB 2 CFR 200, Subpart D. 200.303(a) reads as follows: Subpart D-Post Federal Award Requirements § 200.303 Internal Controls The non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Further, accountability and stewardship should be overall goals in management’s accounting of federal funds. Internal controls should be designed to monitor compliance with laws and regulations pertaining to grant contracts.
Condition: During the test of 100 % of projects, sixteen (16) projects, for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, the following noncompliance with the Reporting compliance requirement was noted: • The third quarter report was not submitted. • The fourth quarter report was not timely submitted. • Four (4) projects were coded as revenue loss and should have been coded to an administrative expense code. • Four (4) projects were coded as revenue loss and should have been coded as a subrecipient. • Two (2) projects were coded as a subrecipient and were not a subrecipient relationship. After the review of the quarterly reports, the following exceptions were noted: • The second quarter report was understated by $257,160. • Health Department reported cumulative total of $1,090,483 in expenditures; however, disbursements totaled $1,089,725. • Emergency Management reported cumulative total of $276,279 in expenditures; however, disbursements totaled $333,169. • Rogers County Sheriff reported cumulative total of $300,000 in expenditures; however, disbursements totaled $233,344. • The consultant hired by the county to administer the grant reported cumulative total of $251,427 in expenditures; however, disbursements totaled was $287,346. Jail Remodel had expenditures of $231,765; however, it was no expenditures were listed on the report. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure federal expenditures are properly reported in accordance with federal compliance requirements. Effect of Condition: This condition resulted in noncompliance with federal grant guidelines. Recommendation: OSAI recommends the County gain an understanding of the requirements for this program and implement internal controls to ensure compliance with these requirements Management Response: Board of County Commissioners: The Board of County Commissioners is responsible for the overall fiscal concerns of the county. See OKLA. STAT. Title 19, § 345. The Board of County Commissioners, with the cooperation and participation of all elected officials, reviews, develops and implements policies and procedures to create a strong internal control environment. The Board of County Commissioners will work with all elected officials, the third-party administrator, and federal, state and local partners to develop policies, procedures, and internal controls designed to accurately track grants, including the application process, verification, oversight, and reporting of grant requirements. These policies and procedures will be designed to identify requirements for recipients and sub-recipients of grants, ensure accurate equipment and real property management, procurement, recipient and subrecipient monitoring and reporting. Further, policies will ensure a proper understanding of all grant requirements and compliance of the same. To assist in this process, the Board of County Commissioners engaged a third-party administrator to oversee the grant process, including application, eligibility, review, requirements, contracting, recipient tracking and oversight, and documentation and reporting. The Board of County Commissioners will work with the third-party administrator to ensure proper grant administration. Criteria: Accountability and stewardship should be overall goals in management’s accounting of federal funds. Internal controls should be designed to monitor compliance with laws and regulations pertaining to grant contracts. Title 2 CFR § 200.303(a) Internal Controls, reads as follows: The non-federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework, “issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance and Reporting Guidance, State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (10. Reporting) reads as follows: All recipients of federal funds must complete financial, performance, and compliance reporting as required and outlines in Part 2 of this guidance. Expenditures may be reported on a cash of accrual basis, as long as the methodology is disclosed and consistently applied. Reporting must be consistent with the definition of expenditures pursuant to 2 CFR 200.1. Your organization should appropriately maintain accounting records for compiling and reporting accurate, compliant financial data, in accordance with appropriate accounting standards and principles. In addition, where appropriate, your organization needs to establish internal controls to ensure completion and timely submission of all mandatory performance and/or compliance reporting. Further, 2 CFR 200.329-Monitoring and reporting Program Performance (c)(1) reads as follows: (c)(1) The non-Federal entity must submit performance reports at the interval required by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity to best inform improvements in program outcomes and productivity. Intervals must be no less frequent than annually nor more frequent than quarterly except in unusual circumstances, for example where more frequent reporting is necessary for the effective monitoring of the Federal award or could significantly affect program outcomes. Reports submitted annually by the non-Federal entity and/or pass-through entity 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. Alternatively, the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may require annual reports before the anniversary dates of multiple year Federal awards. The final performance report submitted by the non-Federal entity and/or pass-through entity must be due no later than 120 calendar gays after the period of performance end date. A subrecipient must submit to the pass-through entity, no later than 90 calendar days after the period of performance end date, all final performance reports as required by the terms and conditions of the Federal award. See also §200.344. If a justified request is submitted by a non-Federal entity, the Federal agency may extend the due date for any performance report.
2024-002 – Suspension and Debarment – Material Weakness and Material Noncompliance Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury FALN: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Numbers: GA-0010655 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Award Year: 2023-2024 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non-federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the Organization is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR part 180, the Organization is required to verify suspension or debarment from the excluded parties list system regarding compliance. Condition: The Organization does not have approved policies and procedures over suspension and debarment that meet the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Under 2 CFR part 180, the Organization is required to verify suspension or debarment from the excluded parties list system regarding compliance. Effect: Not following suspension and debarment policies and procedures may result in funds to be returned back to grantor and/or impact future funding. Cause: Supporting suspension and debarment documentation was not properly maintained in part due to not having adequate policies and procedures in place. Known Questioned Costs: None Perspective: The finding represents a systematic problem due to not having adequeate policies and procedures in place. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its policies and procedures to ensure suspension and debarment is adequately documented for goods and services purchased in accordance with Uniform Guidance and other federal guidelines. In addition, the Organization should verify that all vendors under covered transactions are not listed on the excluded parties list system by performing a search on sam.gov and maintaining the results of such search in the vendor’s file.
Finding 2024-012 – Lack of Internal Controls Over Major Federal Programs – Highway Planning and Construction Cluster (Federal-Aid Highway Program) PASS-THROUGH GRANTOR: Bureau of Indian Affairs FEDERAL AGENCY: U.S. Department of Transportation ASSISTANCE LISTING: 20.205 FEDERAL PROGRAM NAME: Highway Planning and Construction Cluster (Federal-Aid Highway Program) FEDERAL AWARD YEAR: 2019 CONTROL CATEGORY: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Matching; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment; Special Tests and Provisions QUESTIONED COSTS: $-0- Condition: During the process of documenting the County’s internal controls regarding federal disbursements, we noted that the County has not established procedures to ensure compliance with the following compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Matching; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment; Special Tests and Provisions. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure federal expenditures are made in accordance with federal compliance requirements. Effect of Condition: This condition could result in noncompliance with grant requirements and could result in a loss of federal funds to the County. Recommendation: OSAI recommends the County gain an understanding of requirements for this program and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with requirements. Management Response: Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners: The Board of County Commissioners will work with all County Officials to go over all grants and federal monies that the County receives to ensure that proper internal controls are implemented. Criteria: OMB 2 CFR 200, Subpart D. 200.303(a) reads as follows: Subpart D-Post Federal Award Requirements §200.303 Internal Controls The non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Further, accountability and stewardship should be overall goals in management's accounting of federal funds. Internal controls should be designed to monitor compliance with laws and regulations pertaining to grant contracts.
Finding 2024-014 – Lack of Internal Controls Over Major Federal Programs – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds PASS-THROUGH GRANTOR: Direct Grant FEDERAL AGENCY: U.S. Department of Treasury ASSISTANCE LISTING: 21.027 FEDERAL PROGRAM NAME: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds FEDERAL AWARD YEAR: 2021 CONTROL CATEGORY: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment; Reporting; Subrecipient Monitoring QUESTIONED COSTS: $-0- Condition: During the process of documenting the County’s internal controls regarding federal disbursements, we noted that the County has not established procedures to ensure compliance with the following compliance requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment; Reporting; Subrecipient Monitoring. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure federal expenditures are made in accordance with federal compliance requirements. Effect of Condition: This condition could result in noncompliance with grant requirements and loss of federal funds to the County. Recommendation: OSAI recommends the County gain an understanding of requirements for this program and implement internal control procedures to ensure compliance with requirements. Management Response: Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners: The Board of County Commissioners will work with all County Officials to go over all grants and federal monies that the County receives to ensure that proper internal controls are implemented. Criteria: OMB 2 CFR 200, Subpart D. 200.303(a) reads as follows: Subpart D-Post Federal Award Requirements §200.303 Internal Controls The non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Further, accountability and stewardship should be overall goals in management's accounting of federal funds. Internal controls should be designed to monitor compliance with laws and regulations pertaining to grant contracts.
2024-002 Improve Internal Controls Over Reporting Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Award Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 2 CFR 200.303 requires the City to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Per U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds: Compliance and Reporting Guidance, recipients are required to accurately report project-level information, including the breakdown of expenditures by individual project, and to avoid duplicative or misclassified reporting of expenditures across reporting periods. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (CONTINUED) Condition and Context During our audit, it was determined that the City prepared and submitted its annual performance and evaluation report to Treasury within the required timeline. However, the City did not break out expenditures by individual project, as required. Instead, the City created a new project each year and classified all expenditures for that year under the new project, rather than reporting them by individual project. As a result, the City continued to report prior period expenditures as current period expenditures, resulting in $2,203,825 reported as current period expenditures that were not actually incurred during the current period. Cause The City’s internal controls over federal award reporting did not ensure expenditures were accurately reported by project or presented in accordance with Treasury guidelines. Effect or Potential Effect Inaccurate reporting of project-level and current period expenditure information increases the risk of noncompliance with federal reporting requirements and impairs the transparency and oversight expected by the Treasury. No questioned costs are reported as the requirement is procedural in nature and costs reported were ultimately deemed allowable. Recommendation The City should strengthen its internal controls over federal award reporting. This should include procedures to ensure project-level expenditures are correctly identified, reported under the appropriate projects, and only current period expenditures are included as such in the performance and evaluation report. Views of Responsible Official Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
2024-002 Improve Internal Controls Over Reporting Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Award Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 2 CFR 200.303 requires the City to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Per U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds: Compliance and Reporting Guidance, recipients are required to accurately report project-level information, including the breakdown of expenditures by individual project, and to avoid duplicative or misclassified reporting of expenditures across reporting periods. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (CONTINUED) Condition and Context During our audit, it was determined that the City prepared and submitted its annual performance and evaluation report to Treasury within the required timeline. However, the City did not break out expenditures by individual project, as required. Instead, the City created a new project each year and classified all expenditures for that year under the new project, rather than reporting them by individual project. As a result, the City continued to report prior period expenditures as current period expenditures, resulting in $2,203,825 reported as current period expenditures that were not actually incurred during the current period. Cause The City’s internal controls over federal award reporting did not ensure expenditures were accurately reported by project or presented in accordance with Treasury guidelines. Effect or Potential Effect Inaccurate reporting of project-level and current period expenditure information increases the risk of noncompliance with federal reporting requirements and impairs the transparency and oversight expected by the Treasury. No questioned costs are reported as the requirement is procedural in nature and costs reported were ultimately deemed allowable. Recommendation The City should strengthen its internal controls over federal award reporting. This should include procedures to ensure project-level expenditures are correctly identified, reported under the appropriate projects, and only current period expenditures are included as such in the performance and evaluation report. Views of Responsible Official Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
2024-002 Improve Internal Controls Over Reporting Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Award Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 2 CFR 200.303 requires the City to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Per U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds: Compliance and Reporting Guidance, recipients are required to accurately report project-level information, including the breakdown of expenditures by individual project, and to avoid duplicative or misclassified reporting of expenditures across reporting periods. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (CONTINUED) Condition and Context During our audit, it was determined that the City prepared and submitted its annual performance and evaluation report to Treasury within the required timeline. However, the City did not break out expenditures by individual project, as required. Instead, the City created a new project each year and classified all expenditures for that year under the new project, rather than reporting them by individual project. As a result, the City continued to report prior period expenditures as current period expenditures, resulting in $2,203,825 reported as current period expenditures that were not actually incurred during the current period. Cause The City’s internal controls over federal award reporting did not ensure expenditures were accurately reported by project or presented in accordance with Treasury guidelines. Effect or Potential Effect Inaccurate reporting of project-level and current period expenditure information increases the risk of noncompliance with federal reporting requirements and impairs the transparency and oversight expected by the Treasury. No questioned costs are reported as the requirement is procedural in nature and costs reported were ultimately deemed allowable. Recommendation The City should strengthen its internal controls over federal award reporting. This should include procedures to ensure project-level expenditures are correctly identified, reported under the appropriate projects, and only current period expenditures are included as such in the performance and evaluation report. Views of Responsible Official Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
2024-002 Improve Internal Controls Over Reporting Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Award Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 2 CFR 200.303 requires the City to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Per U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds: Compliance and Reporting Guidance, recipients are required to accurately report project-level information, including the breakdown of expenditures by individual project, and to avoid duplicative or misclassified reporting of expenditures across reporting periods. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (CONTINUED) Condition and Context During our audit, it was determined that the City prepared and submitted its annual performance and evaluation report to Treasury within the required timeline. However, the City did not break out expenditures by individual project, as required. Instead, the City created a new project each year and classified all expenditures for that year under the new project, rather than reporting them by individual project. As a result, the City continued to report prior period expenditures as current period expenditures, resulting in $2,203,825 reported as current period expenditures that were not actually incurred during the current period. Cause The City’s internal controls over federal award reporting did not ensure expenditures were accurately reported by project or presented in accordance with Treasury guidelines. Effect or Potential Effect Inaccurate reporting of project-level and current period expenditure information increases the risk of noncompliance with federal reporting requirements and impairs the transparency and oversight expected by the Treasury. No questioned costs are reported as the requirement is procedural in nature and costs reported were ultimately deemed allowable. Recommendation The City should strengthen its internal controls over federal award reporting. This should include procedures to ensure project-level expenditures are correctly identified, reported under the appropriate projects, and only current period expenditures are included as such in the performance and evaluation report. Views of Responsible Official Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
2024-002 Improve Internal Controls Over Reporting Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Award Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Reporting Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 2 CFR 200.303 requires the City to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Per U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds: Compliance and Reporting Guidance, recipients are required to accurately report project-level information, including the breakdown of expenditures by individual project, and to avoid duplicative or misclassified reporting of expenditures across reporting periods. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (CONTINUED) Condition and Context During our audit, it was determined that the City prepared and submitted its annual performance and evaluation report to Treasury within the required timeline. However, the City did not break out expenditures by individual project, as required. Instead, the City created a new project each year and classified all expenditures for that year under the new project, rather than reporting them by individual project. As a result, the City continued to report prior period expenditures as current period expenditures, resulting in $2,203,825 reported as current period expenditures that were not actually incurred during the current period. Cause The City’s internal controls over federal award reporting did not ensure expenditures were accurately reported by project or presented in accordance with Treasury guidelines. Effect or Potential Effect Inaccurate reporting of project-level and current period expenditure information increases the risk of noncompliance with federal reporting requirements and impairs the transparency and oversight expected by the Treasury. No questioned costs are reported as the requirement is procedural in nature and costs reported were ultimately deemed allowable. Recommendation The City should strengthen its internal controls over federal award reporting. This should include procedures to ensure project-level expenditures are correctly identified, reported under the appropriate projects, and only current period expenditures are included as such in the performance and evaluation report. Views of Responsible Official Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal awards that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statues, regulation and conditions of the federal awards. Condition and Context: Accounting tasks such as review and approval of cost reimbursements play a key role in proving the accuracy of accounting data and information included in SEFA. During the audit, we noted various incidences in which required second approvals for cost reimbursements were not completed in accordance with the Organization’s approval procedures. Questioned Costs: None noted Effect: Costs could be charged to federal programs which are unallowed due to lack of review. Cause: The Organization experienced significant turnover in the accounting department during 2024. As a result, well-defined accounting policies and procedures have not been established and many review and approval policies and procedures have not been consistently or continuously maintained. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement enhanced internal controls over the review and approval of cost reimbursement forms prior to submission, in order to prevent errors and ensure accuracy. The responsibility for reviewing and approving these forms should be clearly segregated from the individual responsible for recording the related journal entries, to maintain proper separation of duties and strengthen the overall control environment.
Prior Year Finding: 2023-005 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program: COVID 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Relief Fund Assistance Listing: 21.027 Pass-Through Entity: Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Pass-Through Award Number and Period: (7/1/2023 - 6/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria or Specific Requirement: Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should comply with 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). Compliance: Per 2 CFR section 200.214 Suspension and Debarment restricts awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. Per 2 CFR section 180.300 states that an entity may determine suspension and debarment status by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusion; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition/Context: The suspension and debarment status of five out of five vendors with expenditures exceeding $25,000 was not verified as required by federal regulation. Questioned Costs: There are no questioned costs related to this finding as the vendors were not federally suspended or debarred. Cause: The Towns internal controls were not sufficient to ensure federal suspension and debarment regulations were followed for purchases made for the program. Effect: Failure to adhere to suspension and debarment requirements may result in the Town entering into a contract or purchase with a vendor that is suspended or debarred and not authorized to provide goods and services to the program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Town enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it verifies vendors are not suspended or debarred from business prior to all goods and services charged to the program. The Town should retain documentation of procurement suspension/debarment status verifications for its vendors audit purposes. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Prior Year Finding: 2023-004 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program: COVID 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Relief Fund Assistance Listing: 21.027 Pass-Through Entity: Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Pass-Through Award Number and Period: (7/1/2023 6/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria or Specific Requirement: Control: Per 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control Integrated Framework", issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance: Per 2 CFR section 200.318, a non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. Per 2 CFR section 200.319, all procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of this section and § 200.320. Per the Towns purchasing policy, goods or services costing $10,000 or more must be purchased from the lowest responsive bidder meeting specifications after advertising for bids. Condition/Context: The Town failed to provide documentation supporting compliance with required procurement processes for goods or services exceeding $10,000 for five out of five vendors tested. This includes a lack of evidence on how these vendors were selected and whether the procurement process ensured full and open competition. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Cause: The Town's internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that procurement policies were followed for purchases made for the program. Effect: Failure to adhere to procurement policies and procedures may result in obtaining goods or services under terms that are not in the best interest of the federal program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Town enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it verifies vendors are not suspended or debarred from business prior to all goods and services charged to the program. The Town should retain documentation of procurement suspension/debarment status verifications for its vendors audit purposes. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program: COVID 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Relief Fund Assistance Listing: 21.027 Pass-Through Entity: Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Pass-Through Award Number and Period: (7/1/2023 - 6/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Allowable Activities/Costs Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria or Specific Requirement: Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal GovernmenT" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control Integrated Framework", issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance: The 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E is applicable to expenditures under SLFRF unless stated otherwise. Given the purpose and very broad scope of eligible uses of the revenue replacement funds, only a subset of the requirements in 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E apply to recipients use of such funds, as follows: 2 CFR 200.400(a) - (c), and (e) Policy guide; 200.403(a), (c), (d), (g), and (h) Factors affecting allowability of costs; and 200.404(e) Reasonable costs. Condition: The Town didnt maintain adequate documentation (i.e. invoices) to support the existence, allowability and approval of CSLFRF funds used to support programmatic costs. Context: The Town failed to provide supporting documentation to auditors for 16 out of 60 expenditures tested. Therefore, we could not determine if costs were allowable under the program. In addition, the town failed to provide supporting documentation for the review and approval of 24 out of 60 expenditures tested. Questioned Costs: $102,612. Cause: The Town transferred the funds to the grant in the accounting system but failed to maintain an audit trail to document the allowability and approval for the use of federal funds. Effect: Auditors were unable to verify the Towns compliance with program requirements. Recommendation: The Town should evaluate its current policies, implement proper controls, and perform additional training to ensure that, prior to charging costs to the program adequate documentation exists and maintained to support those costs, they are reviewed by a supervisor who is knowledgeable of the regulations regarding allowable program costs and that documentation of review is maintained. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR Section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Finding 2024.003: Cash Management - Significant Deficiency Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Names: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Projects of Regional and National Significance Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic Expansion Grants Federal Assistance Listing Number: 93.243 and 93.696 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: H79SM087223 - 2024, H79SM086969 - 2024 Criteria In accordance with §200.305, federal payment, grantees and subgrantees that receive grant funds are responsible for maintaining controls regarding the management of federal program funds under the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR 200.302 and 200.303. Condition The Center's drawdowns did not illustrate review and approval by management. Cause The Center did not have adequate controls to ensure drawdowns were properly approved and such approval is documented. Effect The condition may lead to inaccurate or improper drawdowns. Questioned Costs None Context We selected seven drawdowns for testing of cash management relating to these major programs. We noted there was no formal approval or evidence of review for these drawdowns Identification of Repeat Finding Not a repeat finding. Recommendation The Center should develop written procedures to review all drawdowns that occur in order to ensure accuracy. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions Management and the Board of Directors agree with the finding and will implement additional controls to ensure there is formal evidence of review being performed.
Finding 2024.003: Cash Management - Significant Deficiency Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Names: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Projects of Regional and National Significance Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic Expansion Grants Federal Assistance Listing Number: 93.243 and 93.696 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: H79SM087223 - 2024, H79SM086969 - 2024 Criteria In accordance with §200.305, federal payment, grantees and subgrantees that receive grant funds are responsible for maintaining controls regarding the management of federal program funds under the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR 200.302 and 200.303. Condition The Center's drawdowns did not illustrate review and approval by management. Cause The Center did not have adequate controls to ensure drawdowns were properly approved and such approval is documented. Effect The condition may lead to inaccurate or improper drawdowns. Questioned Costs None Context We selected seven drawdowns for testing of cash management relating to these major programs. We noted there was no formal approval or evidence of review for these drawdowns Identification of Repeat Finding Not a repeat finding. Recommendation The Center should develop written procedures to review all drawdowns that occur in order to ensure accuracy. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions Management and the Board of Directors agree with the finding and will implement additional controls to ensure there is formal evidence of review being performed.
Finding 2024.003: Cash Management - Significant Deficiency Grantor: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Names: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Projects of Regional and National Significance Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic Expansion Grants Federal Assistance Listing Number: 93.243 and 93.696 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: H79SM087223 - 2024, H79SM086969 - 2024 Criteria In accordance with §200.305, federal payment, grantees and subgrantees that receive grant funds are responsible for maintaining controls regarding the management of federal program funds under the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR 200.302 and 200.303. Condition The Center's drawdowns did not illustrate review and approval by management. Cause The Center did not have adequate controls to ensure drawdowns were properly approved and such approval is documented. Effect The condition may lead to inaccurate or improper drawdowns. Questioned Costs None Context We selected seven drawdowns for testing of cash management relating to these major programs. We noted there was no formal approval or evidence of review for these drawdowns Identification of Repeat Finding Not a repeat finding. Recommendation The Center should develop written procedures to review all drawdowns that occur in order to ensure accuracy. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions Management and the Board of Directors agree with the finding and will implement additional controls to ensure there is formal evidence of review being performed.