Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal program title: Family Violence Prevention and Services/Domestic Violence Shelter and Supportive Services Assistance Listing Number: 93.671 Pass-Through Agency: State of Missouri Department of Social Services Pass-Through Number(s): PG941900027 Award Period: 7/1/2024-6/30/2025; 7/1/2025-6/30/2026 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: Under 2 CFR §200.306, all cost‑sharing or matching contributions must be verifiable from the non‑Federal entity’s records, necessary and reasonable for achieving program objectives, allowable under Subpart E—Cost Principles and not financed by the Federal Government under another award unless specifically permitted by statute. Matching contributions must not be used for any other Federal award, must be included in the approved budget when required by the awarding agency, and must be properly valued and supported with adequate documentation consistent with the valuation requirements prescribed in §200.306. These provisions ensure that matching contributions are managed in full compliance with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and award terms. Condition: Payroll costs were improperly allocated, resulting in an overstatement of allowable payroll expenses reported as matching contributions. Questioned costs: $57.91 Context: For 1 of the 20 expenses tested there was an overstatement of the payroll cost allocation. Cause: The misallocation resulted from management oversight during the review of payroll cost allocations. Effect: Without proper review and approval of payroll cost allocations, inaccurate costs may be charged to Federal awards, potentially leading to noncompliance with matching requirements and misstated program financial activity. Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organization enhance its internal controls over the review of the payroll allocation to ensure matching contributions are accurately calculated and supported. Views of responsible officials: The Senior Accountant or Director of Grants and Compliance will conduct the initial review to ensure that match costs are allowable, properly supported, and accurately calculated. The Chief Financial Officer will perform a secondary review and approval to validate completion of the initial review and confirm that reported match amounts reconcile to supporting documentation. Evidence of review will be documented through dated signatures or electronic approval within the grant billing file.
Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Special Programs for the Aging-Title III, Part C-Nutrition Services Assistance Listing Number: 93.045 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 316-24-00C1-042, 316-24-00C2-043, 316-25-00C1-042, 316-25-00C2-043 and 316-25-00C3-042 Pass-Through Agency: MN River Agency on Aging Pass-Through Number(s): 316-24-00C1-042, 316-24-00C2-043, 316-25-00C1-042, 316-25-00C2-043 and 316-25-00C3-042 Award Period: January 1, 2024 – December 31, 2024 & January 1, 2025 – December 31, 2025 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR 200.306 requires that any amounts used for required cost sharing must be verifiable in the subrecipient’s records and allowable under subpart E. 2 CFR 200.303 requires that 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. Condition: During our audit testing, we observed discrepancies between the hours reported by volunteers and the hours submitted for the grant at two sites. There were also 3 volunteer logs that could not be located related to two sites. Additionally, there was not documentation of the signoff on the volunteer logs by the site coordinator for two sites. Context: We reviewed 40 volunteer logs for reported hours. Differences in the hours reported were between 0.25 and 0.75 hours. Cause: In 2024, funding cuts led to temporary disruptions, resulting in staff reductions and affecting documentation practices in a particular timeframe. Regarding the hours reported that did not align with the volunteer log, the site coordinator believed the volunteer had underreported their hours and adjusted them accordingly, but there was not documentation of the change. Additionally, there was one instance where a data entry error contributed to the discrepancies. Effect: Hours reported for volunteer time could be incorrect. This grant requires a cost share of 15% be provided and the required cost share of 15% was exceeded so there was not an effect of meeting the required cost share. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend additional training to ensure documentation is kept for the volunteer logs and the review. We also recommend documentation for any discrepancies between hours reported vs. the volunteer log. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Justice/Passed-Through Texas Office of the Governor Crime Victim Assistance Federal Assistance Listing Number: 16.575 – Common Thread - Texas Award Number: 3853406 Award Year: September 1, 2024 – October 31, 2025 Criteria or Specific Requirement: Matching – Under 2 CFR § 200.306, cost sharing/matching must be allowable, verifiable, properly valued, within the period of performance, and adequately documented. 2 CFR § 200.302 requires accurate, current, complete financial records. 2 CFR § 200.430 requires records that support compensation and time worked. Texas Office of the Governor's (OOG) program guidance further requires set rates, timekeeping, and preconditions when employee on‑call is used as in‑kind (not the same or similar duties; voluntary participation). Condition: BCFS HHS did not comply with matching requirements. Reported match included (1) unpaid employee on‑call hours without required timekeeping and (2) over‑valued volunteer/intern hours, including some ineligible activities. Subsequent discussions with OOG indicate approximately $850,000 of match is unallowable and will require correction through repayments and/or budget reductions. Cause: The prior program executive director deviated from using the in-kind match plan that had been previously approved by the public safety officer (PSO) – utilizing exempt personnel; taking “on-call” (answering phones) after hours, performing duties different from their normal work duties, could be considered as volunteer hours and count towards in-kind match. During 2022 (COVID-19 pandemic), PSO waived match requirements, the program executive director hired overnight on-call workers, believed to be due to increase in call volume. Following the pandemic, the PSO discontinued the match wavier in October 2024. The program executive director failed to reassign the on-call workers, resulting in a compromise of the in-kind match plan. BCFS HHS’ documentation and valuation practices in place during the period were not fully aligned with the specific documentation, rate‑setting, and classification requirements outlined in Office of the Governor’s (OOG) monitoring guidance. Effect or Potential Effect: Reported match was overstated, requiring budget and reporting corrections in the E-grants system, and may result in repayment or additional local match to cure the deficit. Questioned Costs: $853,982. Calculated from OOG’s identification of disallowed/questioned match related to on‑call, volunteer, and intern match; and BCFS HHS’ internal calculation of anticipated corrections, including indirect cost adjustments and the expected reclassification of mileage and training amounts. Context: Match claimed on FSRs for period 10/1/2024–8/31/2025 under Grant 3853406; OOG review covered 10/1/2024–2/28/2025 with extrapolation through August for cash match. Repeat Finding: None. Recommendation: We recommend BCFS HHS 1) Implement a board‑approved on‑call policy that complies with OOG and Uniform Guidance; 2) Re‑value all in‑kind hours using approved rates; 3) Remove or reclassify any unallowable match; 4) Obtain pass‑through approval for unrecovered indirect used as match; and 5) Strengthen internal controls over timekeeping, valuation, and reporting. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action: Management concurs with the finding and is working with the OOG on an approved remediation plan that includes application of unrecovered indirect, and reduction of other allowable costs to cure the match deficit. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
Criteria 2 CFR section 200.403, Factors affecting allowability of costs. Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following criteria to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities of the recipient or subrecipient. (d) Be accorded consistent treatment. For example, a cost must not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. (e) Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for State and local governments and Indian Tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. (f) Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. See § 200.306(b). (g) Be adequately documented. See §§ 200.300 through 200.309. (h) Administrative closeout costs may be incurred until the due date of the final report(s). If incurred, these costs must be liquidated prior to the due date of the final report(s) and charged to the final budget period of the award unless otherwise specified by the Federal agency. All other costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. At its discretion, the Federal agency is authorized to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods. See § 200.308(g)(3). 10th Edition Procurement Manual issued by the District in September 2023, Chapter 8 – What to Do When Item or Services Are Received A. Online Goods Receipts Prior to entering an online Goods Receipt (GR), schools and offices must have a copy of the vendor invoice and Purchase Order (PO). They are responsible for verifying the accuracy of the order and entering the “online receiver” into SAP immediately after delivery of materials. Partial receiving is acceptable to account only for materials actually received. Payments are processed based on materials that have been received online. F.1. Payment for Materials Accounts Payable will process payment when the following three items are matched in SAP: (1) Purchase Order, (2) Goods Receipt, and (3) vendor invoice. F.2.c. Contracted Professional Services Accounts Payable will process payments for contracted professional services when the following four items are matched: executed contract/amendment, Purchase Order, vendor invoice, and approved authorization for payment. F.3. Contract Close-Out Upon contract expiration or termination, the District must ensure all deliverables have been received, final invoices paid, indirect costs settled, and any unspent funds unencumbered and transferred to the appropriate District account. Condition As part of our review of cash disbursement expenditures, we selected a statistically valid sample of forty (40) cash disbursement transactions from each of the following programs: Title I, Title IV, and Perkins. We reviewed the supporting documentation for these transactions to determine whether the expenditures were allowable under program regulations, accurately charged to the programs, and appropriately supported in accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.403 and the District Procurement Manual. Title I: From the $3,265,728 sample tested (out of $48,286,535 total disbursements), we identified one (1) purchase order with a variance between the Goods Receipt (GR) and vendor invoice (IR) amounts. This discrepancy resulted in an overstatement of reported expenditures by $21,394. The District subsequently corrected this by reversing the amount to the expenditure accounts in FY 2026. Title IV: From the $560,572 sample tested (out of $9,999,536 total disbursements), we identified one (1) purchase order with a variance between the GR and IR amounts, resulting in an overstatement of reported expenditures by $94,500. The District subsequently corrected this by reversing the amount to the expenditure accounts in FY 2026. Perkins: Additionally, from a $329,432 sample (out of $5,738,606 total disbursements), we identified seven (7) disbursements totaling $868 that lacked adequate proof of delivery of materials. Supporting documentation, such as signed delivery receipts or equivalent evidence of goods received, was not available for these transactions. Cause and Effect These conditions occurred because adjustments were not made to the GR amounts to reflect changes in goods or services received after the initial recording. The unadjusted GR balances led to variances between the GR and IR amounts, resulting in overstatements of reported expenditures for the affected programs. In addition, the lack of adequate proof of delivery of materials occurred because GR were entered without supporting documentation to substantiate that the materials were received. This increased the risk of payment for goods not received, misstatement of expenditures, and noncompliance with federal cost documentation requirements under 2 CFR section 200.403(g). Questioned Costs • Title I (AL No. 84.010): $21,394 overstated due to GR-IR variance. • Title IV (AL No. 84.424A): $94,500 overstated due to GR-IR variance. • Perkins (AL No. 84.048): $868 lacked sufficient supporting documentation that the goods were received. Recommendation We recommend that the District: 1. Strengthen review and reconciliation procedures to ensure that adjustments to the Goods Receipt (GR) are made promptly to reflect actual goods or services received. 2. Enforce documentation controls to require that all Goods Receipts are supported by adequate proof of delivery (e.g., signed delivery receipts, receiving reports, or equivalent evidence) before processing payments. 3. Provide staff training on documentation and reconciliation requirements to ensure compliance with federal cost principles and the District Procurement Manual.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Name: Continuum of Care Assistance Listing Number: 14.267 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: NM0014L6B002316 NM0015L6B002316 NM0017L6B002215 NM0101L6B002308 NM0156L6B002200 Award Period:7/1/24-6/30/25 7/1/24-6/30/25 10/1/23-9/3/24 7/1/24-6/30/25 10/1/23-9/3/24 Type of Finding: • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.303 Internal controls of 2 CFR Part 200, the recipient and subrecipient must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. According to §200.306 The fair market value of third-party in-kind contributions must be documented and, to the extent feasible, supported by the same methods used internally by the recipient or subrecipient. Condition: During our testing, we noted the City lacked sufficient internal controls to ensure subrecipients complied with cost‑sharing and matching requirements. We also noted that the City did not maintain documentation to substantiate the fair market value of in‑kind contributions. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, we noted the following: • For one of 5 samples tested, we noted the City did not have sufficient documentation for the values placed on in-kind contributions. • For 5 of 5 samples tested, the City only performed one monitoring review of subrecipient related match expenditures, resulting in partial coverage of the award period. Additionally, there was a lack of documentation of the City's process for selecting match samples to review. Finally, there was no review performed at the close out of the grant to ensure the subrecipient met the match requirement. • For 5 of 5 grant awards tested, we noted the amount of match reported on the HUD Annual Performance Report (APR) did not agree to underlying City records. Cause: Management oversight. The City did not have adequate controls in place to ensure proper monitoring of matching expenditures for subrecipients. 2025 – 007 Matching/Cost Sharing (continued) Effect: The auditor noted instances of noncompliance. Recommendation: We recommend the City design controls to ensure monitoring occurs related to subrecipient's adherence to the Continuum of Care program's Match requirements and the eligibility of the program's match expenditures. Additionally, we recommend implementing a tracking mechanism to ensure match expenditures are accurately reported to HUD. Management Response: The City concurs with the finding. The City will update Continuum of Care procedures related to subrecipient monitoring, in-kind contribution documentation, match tracking and reporting, and grant closeout review to strengthen compliance and oversight. Additionally, the City will provide additional grants training and a list of subject matter experts within each department that can work with auditors during the single audit. Timeline and Responsible Position: June 2026 – Department of Health, Housing and Homelessness Deputy Director of Social Services and Connections and Department of Finance & Administrative Services Grant Administrator
U.S. Department of Commerce Direct and Pass-through Nevadaworks as listed in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Economic Development Cluster, 11.307 Matching, Level of Effort, and Earmarking Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Material Noncompliance Grant Award Number: Affects grant award 077907854 included under assistance listing 11.307 as a direct award for UNLV on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) section 200.306 requires, in part, that: Cost sharing funds must: • Be verifiable in the recipient's records • Be necessary and reasonable for achieving objectives of the Federal award • Be allowable under subpart E, which requires costs to be: o Consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to federally financed and other activities o Adequately documented o For personnel expenses, documentation must support the distribution of the employee’s salary or wages Condition: Certain costs claimed under cost sharing were not adequately documented or verifiable. Cause: The University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) did not have adequate internal controls to ensure costs claimed for cost share were adequately documented and verifiable. Effect: Unallowable costs may be used to meet cost sharing requirements. Questioned Costs: $133,988 (cost-sharing) Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of eight ($23,751) cost-share expenditure transactions out of a population of 48 ($144,572) cost-share expenditures were selected for testing at UNLV. Five of the eight transactions consisted of payroll costs that were used for cost share. There was no time and effort documentation to support the actual time spent on the activities to ensure the payroll allocated to cost share was appropriate. We received a summary in the aggregate, noting $110,143 in total payroll was used as cost share. For one transaction, a shared facility in-kind cost at the subrecipient was used for cost sharing, but support to determine the appropriateness of the in-kind valuation was not maintained. We received a summary in the aggregate, noting $23,845 in total for this in-kind valuation was used as cost share. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No Recommendation: We recommend that UNLV enhance internal controls to ensure costs claimed for cost share are adequately documented and verifiable. Views of Responsible Officials: The University of Nevada, Las Vegas agrees with this finding.
U.S. Department of Education Direct and pass through State of Nevada as listed in the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, 84.334 Matching, Level of Effort, and Earmarking Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Grant Award Number: Potentially affects all grant awards included under assistance listing 84.334 for CSN, GBC, SA, UNLV, UNR, and WNC on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards. Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) section 200.306 requires, in part, that: Cost sharing funds must: • Be verifiable in the recipient's records • Be necessary and reasonable for achieving objectives of the Federal award • Be allowable under subpart E, which requires costs to be: o Consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to federally financed and other activities o Adequately documented o For personnel expenses, documentation must support the distribution of the employee’s salary or wages Condition: Certain costs claimed under cost sharing were not adequately documented or verifiable. Cause: The following institutions did not have adequate internal controls to ensure costs claimed for cost share were adequately documented and verifiable: • College of Southern Nevada (CSN) • Great Basin College (GBC) • System Administration (SA) • University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) • University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) • Western Nevada College (WNC) Effect: Unallowable costs may be used to meet cost sharing requirements. Questioned Costs: None, several individual institutions did not meet cost sharing requirements; however, the Nevada System of Higher Education met cost share as a whole. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 40 ($64,311) cost-share expenditure transactions out of a population of 939 ($1,124,401) cost-share expenditures across the Nevada System of Higher Education were selected for testing. Errors identified by institution are summarized below: College of Southern Nevada Four out of the 40 transactions sampled were for CSN. For 2 of the 4 samples tested, office space usage and facility‑related expenses were included both in the total direct expenses and again recovered through the unrecovered F&A rate. This resulted in unallowable cost share expenses of $5,365. Great Basin College Two out of the 40 transactions sampled were for GBC. For one of the two samples tested, an incorrect annual salary amount was used in the calculation, resulting in unallowable cost share expenses of $60. System Administration Ten out of the 40 transactions sampled were for SA. For three of the ten samples, an incorrect fringe rate was used, resulting in unallowable cost share expenses of $824. University of Nevada, Las Vegas 11 out of the 40 transactions sampled were for UNLV. There was no time and effort documentation to support the actual time spent on the grant activities to ensure the payroll allocated to cost share was appropriate (except for one transaction tested where budgeted hours were utilized when actual time spent was available). In addition, for two of the transactions, the incorrect salary was used. We reviewed the aggregate payroll expenditures claimed noting unallowable cost share of $196,288. University of Nevada, Reno Nine out of 40 transactions sampled were for UNR. For one of the 9 samples, time and effort documentation to support the actual time spent on the grant activities to ensure the payroll allocated to cost share was appropriate was not available. We noted this time and effort was not available for the employee’s allocated annual amount. This resulted in unallowable cost share of $63,300. Western Nevada College One out of the 40 transactions sampled were for WNC. For the one transaction tested, an incorrect fringe rate was used, resulting in unallowable cost share expenses of $188. In the aggregate, we noted $266,025 in questioned costs related to cost share for a lack of supporting documentation. However, the Nevada System of Higher Education as a whole had other allowable expenditures that, in the aggregate, exceeded the overall cost share requirement. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No Recommendation: We recommend the Nevada System of Higher Education institutions listed above enhance internal controls to ensure amounts used for cost share are adequately documented and verifiable. Views of Responsible Officials: The College of Southern Nevada agrees with this finding. The Great Basin College agrees with this finding. The System Administration agrees with this finding. The University of Nevada, Las Vegas agrees with this finding. The University of Nevada, Reno agrees with this finding. The Western Nevada College agrees with this finding.
Finding 2025-003 Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and instance of noncompliance related to matching requirements. Identification of the Federal Program Federal Agency: The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Program Title: Continuum of Care Program Assistance Listing Number: 14.267 Award Numbers: All Award Periods: All Criteria Internal controls should ensure that the Organization’s population of allowable matching costs only include amounts from allowable sources in accordance with 2 CFR 200.306. Condition During testing of the matching compliance requirement we received an unsubmitted excel workbook identifying the matching costs eligible to be claimed during the period under audit. During testing of the aggregated charges it was identified five out of our 25 matching charges identified were improperly included as eligible in the excel workbook aggregating the matching cost pool as they were from an unallowable source. The error was due to a clerical allocation error within the spreadsheet identifying the matching charges. After correcting for the clerical error the unallowable costs were removed from the cost pool and the Organization determined it still had sufficient allowable and allocable charges to meet the awards matching requirements. Cause The primary cause of this issue is associated with inadequate internal controls relating to the spreadsheet design and review. Effect The effect of ineligible costs were included in the preliminary matching cost pool, there is a risk that reported match amounts could have been inaccurate and that reported cost sharing or matching would not meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200.306. Questioned Costs Not applicable. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization strengthen controls over the preparation and review of the matching cost pool by modifying the Excel workbook or other tools used to identify matching costs to ensure that only specifically designated matching expenses are included, implementing a formal review of the matching cost pool.
2025 – 009. Matching Federal Agency: Department of Defense Federal Program Title: National Guard Military Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Projects Assistance Listing: 12.401 Federal Grant ID Number: Various Pass-Through Entity: Not applicable Award Period: Various Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance, other matters Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.306 requires that matching contributions be allowable, properly allocated, and used in accordance with the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR § 200.303 requires that the recipient and subrecipient establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Condition: The Office did not apply required matching contributions to federal expenditures by the applicable expenditure categories as required by the federal award. Cause: Office controls failed to ensure that matching costs were tracked and applied to federal expenditures at the expenditure-category level. Effect: Matching requirements were not met in accordance with federal regulations and award terms, and federal expenditures were not consistently supported by properly applied matching contributions. Questioned Costs: Questioned costs are undetermined because matching compliance was evaluated in total by category across multiple transactions, and the specific unsupported portion could not be reasonably isolated. Context: For all three grants that closed during the fiscal year, federal expenditures were not matched to the required amounts by expenditure category; testing identified one grant where the required match total was not met, one grant where the matching total was met, but was misapplied to multiple expenditure categories, and one grant where the required match total was not met and the requirement was misapplied to multiple expenditure categories. Prior Year Single Audit Report Finding Number: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that the Office strengthen controls to ensure matching contributions are properly tracked, documented, and applied to federal expenditures as required by the federal award. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: See management’s response on page 184.
Subrecipient Monitoring Program Name: Crime Victim Assistance (Assistance Listing 16.575) Federal Award Agency: Department of Justice Award Years: Federal Fiscal Years 2021, 2022, and 2023 Federal Award Numbers: 15POVC-21-GG-00615-ASSI, 15POVC-22-GG-00715-ASSI, and 15 POVC-23-GG-00433-ASSI Background The Crime Victim Assistance program provides financial support and various services and resources to crime victims, including crisis counseling, criminal justice support and advocacy, shelter, and therapy. The Judicial Branch provides grants to subrecipients to provide these services. Title 28 U.S Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 94.118 provides that subrecipients shall contribute not less than 20% of the total cost of each project. Subrecipients shall derive these contributions from non-federal sources. Each subrecipient shall maintain records that clearly show the source and amount of the matching contributions.Criteria Title 2 CFR Part 200.303 requires the non-federal entity to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards 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. Title 2 CFR Part 200.332(e) provides that the pass-through entity shall monitor subrecipient activities as necessary to ensure that they comply with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Title 28 CFR Part 94.106 provides that the state administering agency shall conduct regular desk monitoring of all subrecipients as well as on-site monitoring of all subrecipients at least once every two years during the award period. The state shall maintain a copy of site visit results and other documents related to compliance. Title 2 CFR Part 200.306(b) provides that the pass-through entity must accept any cost sharing funds as part of the subrecipient’s contributions to a program when the funds are verifiable in the subrecipient’s records. Condition The Judicial Branch did not perform regular subrecipient desk reviews or site visits at least once every two years during the award period as required by federal regulations. The branch does not complete reviews until the award period ends. As a result, it did not promptly examine subrecipients’ underlying documentation such as invoices, timesheets, or support for expenditures or matching contributions. The branch’s monitoring process was limited to monthly reviews of budget-to-actual summaries. Context During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, the branch made $8,759,482 in reimbursements to 40 subrecipients.Questioned Costs $0Effect The Judicial Branch has limited assurance that subrecipients used federal funds for allowable activities and met the mandatory matching requirements. This could potentially lead to future disallowed costs and federal repayment obligations.Cause Due to a lack of adequate staffing, the Judicial Branch prioritized reviewing supporting documentation for prior award periods rather than the current period. Prior Audit Finding We have not previously reported this finding.Recommendation The Judicial Branch should strengthen internal controls to ensure it complies with federal subrecipient monitoring requirements for the Crime Victim Assistance program. Views of Responsible Officials “The Judicial Branch Office of Victim Services (OVS) agrees to strengthen its internal controls as described below to comply with federal subrecipient monitoring requirements for the Victims of Crime Act Assistance (VOCA) Program. In 2025, OVS performed site visits for four VOCA-funded programs and completed financial-desk reviews of monthly or quarterly financial reports for all programs. That year, OVS experienced personnel turnover in its three-employee Fiscal Services Unit, notably the separation from state service of a Program Manager and a Court Planner, who together performed OVS’ programmatic site visits of VOCA-funded programs. Also, there was a significant increase in workload resulting from OVS’ contributions to the 2024-2025 VOCA request-for-proposal process. In response, staff outside the unit contributed while managing other assigned duties, a Program Manager and Grants and Contract Specialist were hired to restore the unit to its three-employee configuration, the new employees received training on subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures, and a revised subrecipient site visit plan was developed and has begun being implemented. To strengthen internal controls, OVS has developed a revised site visit plan for the remaining VOCA-funded programs scheduled to receive site visits in 2025. April 15, 2026, is the anticipated date for OVS to complete the site visits. OVS has completed sending letters to the subrecipients operating the VOCA-funded programs. The letters request supporting documentation, which is programmatic and financial in nature, in accordance with OVS administrative policy and procedure. Also, the letters inform subrecipients that site visits will commence in accordance with a revised site visit plan.”
FINDING 2025-005 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.425D, 84.425U Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D210013, S425U210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-005. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) grant was established by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act to respond to the Coronavirus outbreak and assist schools in creating healthy learning environments, return students to classrooms, and address local needs. The ESF grant was further funded by the Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations (CRRSA) Act and the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act. The School Corporation did not have effective internal controls in place over the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirement. A sample of 13 payroll claims paid from the School Corporation's ESF grant were selected for testing. Of the sample, 6 employee pay rates could not be verified to a School Board-approved, allowable hourly pay rate for a high dosage tutor position. High dosage tutors were paid anywhere from $20 to $77 an hour. The School Corporation was unable to provide documentation that the School Board approved a pay rate for the high dosage tutor positions during the audit period. The total amount paid to high dosage tutors during the audit period was $472,354, which were considered questioned costs. In addition, the School Corporation paid a consulting firm to provide general support to the finance department. The expenditures were deemed unallowable as there was no documentation available that the consultants were assisting the School Corporation in preventing, preparing for, and responding to COVID-19. The total amount expended to the consultant during the audit period was $514,156, which were considered questioned costs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the costs noted above for the ESSER II and ESSER III grants. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.334 states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for the Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annual, from the date of submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities of the recipient or subrecipient. (d) Be accorded consistent treatment. For example, a cost must not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. (e) Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for State and local governments and Indian Tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. (f) Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. See § 200.306(b). (g) Be adequately documented. See §§ 200.300 through 200.309. (h) Administrative closeout costs may be incurred until the due date of the final report(s). If incurred, these costs must be liquidated prior to the due date of the final report(s) and charged to the final budget period of the award unless otherwise specified by the Federal agency. All other costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. At its discretion, the Federal agency is authorized to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods. See § 200.308(g)(3). 2 CFR 200.430(i)(1) states in part: "Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities (for IHE, this per the IHE's definition of IBS); . . . (vii) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 24 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.404 states: "A cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non- Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm's-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award. (c) Market prices for comparable goods or services for the geographic area. (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award's cost." 34 CFR 76.731 states: "A State and a subgrantee shall keep records to show its compliance with program requirements." Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. No. 116-260, 134 Stat. 1924 (2020) states in part: "For an additional amount for "Education Stabilization Fund".to remain available through September 30, 2022, to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus, domestically, or internationally . . ." Cause Payroll records were incomplete as the School Corporation was unable to provide documentation that all rates of pay were approved by the School Board. The School Corporation did not include the consultants above in the budget submitted as part of the grant application, and so the School Corporation did not get the required prior approval for the purchases. Effect Without proper documentation, the allowability of the ESF grant expenditures cannot be substantiated, creating a risk that unallowable costs may be charged to the federal grant. Additionally, we could not determine how the expenditures met the purpose of the program. Questioned Costs We identified $986,510 in known questioned costs as described above in the Condition and Context. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 25 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Recommendation We recommend that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure rates of pay are approved by the School Board and adequately documented and that costs are allowable. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance related to matching compliance requirements. Federal Agency: US Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: State of Colorado Department of Local Affairs - Division of Housing Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Number: H4HRG23147 Criteria Nonfederal entities must follow the standards for documentation of personnel expenses set out at 2 CFR section 200.306(a). Under this guidance, the entity that accepts any cost share funds (including cash and third-party in-kind contributions, and also including funds committed by the recipient, subrecipient, or third parties) as part of the recipient's or subrecipient's contributions to a program when the funds among others: 1) are verifiable in the recipient's or subrecipient’s records. Section III - Reportable Findings and Questioned Costs for Federal Awards Condition/Context/Cause The Organization entered into an agreement with match requirements to qualify for a federal match. The agreement stipulates the Organization has until September 2026 to expend the necessary matching funds. During our testing of matching for this award we noted that the Organization did not have controls in place to track and monitor compliance with the matching requirement. Effect The effect is that the Organization was not tracking spending to date that qualifies to meet the matching requirement for this award in compliance with the requirements of 2 CFR section 200.306. Questioned Costs None. Repeat Finding This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation We recommend management update its internal control process for a tracking system of matching funds to ensure compliance with 2 CFR 200.306 is met. This includes maintaining detailed records and documentation of all matching contributions. Views of Responsible Official and Corrective Action Plan Management agrees with the finding and has provided the accompanying corrective action plan.
Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance related to matching compliance requirements. Federal Agency: US Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: State of Colorado Department of Local Affairs - Division of Housing Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Number: H4HRG23147 Criteria Nonfederal entities must follow the standards for documentation of personnel expenses set out at 2 CFR section 200.306(a). Under this guidance, the entity that accepts any cost share funds (including cash and third-party in-kind contributions, and also including funds committed by the recipient, subrecipient, or third parties) as part of the recipient's or subrecipient's contributions to a program when the funds among others: 1) are verifiable in the recipient's or subrecipient’s records. Section III - Reportable Findings and Questioned Costs for Federal Awards Condition/Context/Cause The Organization entered into an agreement with match requirements to qualify for a federal match. The agreement stipulates the Organization has until September 2026 to expend the necessary matching funds. During our testing of matching for this award we noted that the Organization did not have controls in place to track and monitor compliance with the matching requirement. Effect The effect is that the Organization was not tracking spending to date that qualifies to meet the matching requirement for this award in compliance with the requirements of 2 CFR section 200.306. Questioned Costs None. Repeat Finding This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation We recommend management update its internal control process for a tracking system of matching funds to ensure compliance with 2 CFR 200.306 is met. This includes maintaining detailed records and documentation of all matching contributions. Views of Responsible Official and Corrective Action Plan Management agrees with the finding and has provided the accompanying corrective action plan.
2024-001 Use of Unallowable Funds to Meet Matching Requirement (Material Weakness) Federal Agency: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Pass-through Agency: N/A Cluster/Program: Congressionally Mandated Projects Assistance Listing Number: 66.202 Passed-through Identification: N/A Compliance Requirement: Matching Type of Finding: Internal Control over Compliance – Material Weakness Material Noncompliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.306, matching contributions must be (1) verifiable from the Town’s records, (2) not be paid by the Federal Government under another federal award except where authorized by statute, and (3) be allowable under the terms and conditions of the federal award. In addition, the EPA award terms and implementation guidance, it specifically states that “American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds cannot be used to meet the non-federal cost share requirement.” However, the use of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) funds is allowable. Condition: During testing of reimbursement requests and supporting documentation, we noted that the Town reported ARPA funds as the source for the required 20% non-federal match on certain project costs. Documentation did not show that CWSRF funds were applied to the match during those reimbursement periods. Cause: The Town used ARPA funds for the 20% non-federal match because personnel did not realize these funds were ineligible under the grant terms. Although eligible CWSRF funds were available, they were not applied or documented as the match. Effect: The Town did not comply with the EPA grant’s matching requirements. As a result, the expenditures reported as match in the amount of $262,500 were not allowable under the award terms. This creates a risk that the EPA may disallow the federal share of costs if sufficient eligible match cannot be documented. Questioned Costs: $262,500 – which represents the portion of match applied to an unallowable source. Identification as Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding from the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the Town reclassify the match to eligible CWSRF funds for all affected reimbursement requests and provide updated documentation to the EPA. In addition, the Town should strengthen internal controls to ensure that only allowable funding sources are applied toward matching requirements and implement review procedures to verify compliance before submitting reimbursement requests. Finally, staff responsible for grant administration should receive training on grant terms and allowable match sources to prevent similar errors in the future. Views of Responsible Officials: Management’s views and corrective action plan is included at the end of this report.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Assistance Listing Number(s): 93.575 Name of Federal Program or Cluster: CCDF Cluster Name of Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Name of Pass-through Entities: Iowa County Department of Social Services, Jefferson County Human Services Department, Waukesha County Department of Health and Human Services, Dane County Department of Human Services, Supporting Families Together Association, Inc., and 4C-for Children, Inc. Pass-through Entities Identifying Numbers: 2024-04, 87242, 437002-G16-0000756-R05-02, and 437002- G16-0000756-R06-02 Award Periods: July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025, and January 1, 2024 through December 31, 2024 Criteria or Specific Requirement: In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D (§200.306) non-federal entities must meet matching, level of effort, and earmarking requirements, including proper documentation and monitoring to demonstrate compliance. The Uniform Guidance requires that controls be in place to ensure that these compliance requirements are consistently met per §200.303. Condition: The entity did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that non-federal match contributions and earmarking calculations were properly tracked, documented, and verified. Cause: There are an absence of formal policies and procedures, insufficient training of staff responsible for compliance, and a lack of segregation of duties related to review and approval of match contributions and earmarking calculations. Effect or Potential Effect: There is an increased risk that the entity may not be in compliance with applicable matching and earmarking requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that the entity implement formal written policies and procedures for tracking and documenting matching contributions and earmarking calculations. These procedures should include regular reconciliations, management review, and appropriate documentation retention. Additionally, staff should be trained on federal compliance requirements, and responsibilities should be clearly assigned to ensure adequate segregation of duties. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and is considering options to implement the recommendations.
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Federal Agencies: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Assistance Listing Numbers: 14.267 Program: Continuum of Care Program Award/Pass-Through Entity Identifying Numbers: CA0802L9D012214, CA0802L9D012315, CA1348L9D012208, CA1348L9D012309, CA1510L9D012207, CA1510L9D012308, CA1883L9D012203, CA1883L9D012304, HHI-24-09, SIHI-25-07, HHI-24-04, SIHI-25-18 Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. Per 24 CFR §578.73(b): “Notwithstanding 2 CFR 200.306(b)(5), a recipient or subrecipient may use funds from any source, including any other federal sources (excluding Continuum of Care program funds), as well as State, local, and private sources, provided that funds from the source are not statutorily prohibited to be used as a match. The recipient must ensure that any funds used to satisfy the matching requirements of this section are eligible under the laws governing the funds in order to be used as matching funds for a grant awarded under this program.” Condition: We noted that the Village’s controls did not identify certain costs within the matching pool that were unallowable under the matching cost principles. However, the matching pool exceeded the required match, and management was able to fulfil the match without the unallowable costs in the pool. Cause: The Village did not have adequate policies and procedures in place to ensure that only allowable costs were included in the matching pool used to satisfy matching requirements. Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place, the Village could utilize costs for matching requirements that are not in compliance with §578.73. This may impact the Village’s ability to meet the required matching threshold, result in repayment of funds, and could affect future funding. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The Village incurred total costs that exceeded the required match. As a result, they were able to offset any unallowable costs, while still meeting the required match and remaining in compliance at year end. Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend Village enhance their policies and procedures to ensure that only allowable costs are utilized to satisfy matching requirements. Views of Responsible Officials:
Criteria or Specific Requirement: Per 2 CFR §200.302, nonfederal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards to provide reasonable assurance of compliance with applicable federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. • Cash Management requirements under 2 CFR §200.305 require that drawdowns be based on allowable costs incurred, supported by documentation, and reviewed for accuracy prior to submission. • Matching requirements under 2 CFR §200.306 require that cost sharing or matching contributions be verifiable from the entity’s records and documented in accordance with the cost principles. Entities must retain written documentation of the review and approval process before submission of reimbursement requests to ensure accuracy and compliance. Condition: The Organization maintained a written cash management policy; however, the policy did not specify that documentation of review and approval of reimbursement requests must be retained. As a result, the Organization was unable to provide written evidence of review and approval prior to submission of certain reimbursement requests. In addition, the Organization did not have a formal written policy addressing the review, approval, and documentation of matching contributions to ensure they are allowable, verifiable, and in compliance with federal requirements. While management indicated that a review process occurs, the lack of documented approval reduces the audit trail and does not provide adequate evidence that costs included in the requests were reviewed for accuracy, allowability, and compliance with both cash management and matching requirements. Cause: The lack of specificity in the cash management policy regarding retention of documented approvals, combined with the absence of a written matching policy, resulted in a lack of written documentation of the review and approval process that could be verified. Effect or Potential Effect: Without documented approval for reimbursement requests or a formal policy over matching, there is an increased risk that unallowable or unsupported costs could be included in reimbursement requests or that matching contributions could be inaccurately reported, potentially resulting in noncompliance with federal requirements. Questioned Costs: Not applicable as there were no questioned costs related to noncompliance. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its internal controls over cash management and matching by implementing the following: 1. Update the cash management policy to require documented review and approval of reimbursement requests, with such documentation retained as part of the grant record. 2. Develop and implement a formal written matching policy that includes procedures for review, approval, and documentation of matching contributions to ensure compliance with 2 CFR §200.306. Repeat finding from prior year: No – this is the Organization’s first single audit. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
2024-002 Procedures for Match Requirements – Significant Deficiency Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.306, recipients must provide required cost sharing or matching as stipulated in the award. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.302(b)(7) requires nonfederal entities to have written procedures to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of federal awards, including matching requirements. Condition: During our audit, we noted that Mountain Home does not have written policies and procedures in place to ensure compliance with the federal grant’s matching requirement. While management tracks matching expenditures, there is no documented process describing how matching costs are identified, recorded, reviewed, or monitored for compliance. Cause: Undetermined. Effect: Without documented policies and procedures, there is an increased risk that matching requirements may not be met, that ineligible costs could be charged as match, or that insufficient documentation may exist to support amounts reported to the granting agency. This could lead to questioned costs, disallowance of claimed matching contributions, or potential noncompliance with federal grant requirements. Recommendation: We recommend that management develop and implement written policies and procedures that describe the process for identifying, tracking, and reviewing matching expenditures.
Finding 2024‐001: Matching – Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance and compliance finding. Continuum of Care Program ALN 14.267 Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.306, non‐federal entities are required to provide the level of matching (cost sharing) specified in the terms and conditions of the federal award. Matching contributions must be verifiable from the non‐federal entity’s records, not be included as contributions for any other federal award, and be necessary and reasonable for accomplishment of program objectives. Condition: During matching testing, the auditor noted the Organization did not meet the required 25% matching contribution specified in the award agreement. Questioned Costs: $21,917, representing the shortfall in matching contributions. Cause: In January and February of 2024, the Organization was transitioning from being a program of CitySquare to becoming an independent 501(c)(3). Following the transition, two staff members previously allocated to the match departed in September 2024, and their associated match was not reassigned. Effect: The Organization’s matching contributions did not meet the grant requirement in accordance with its internal control procedures over compliance. Failure to meet the required matching contribution may result in noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the federal award and could impact the allowability of federal expenditures claimed. The full amount of the federal expenditures may be subject to disallowance by the awarding agency. Recommendation: Management should implement controls to strengthen its grant management procedures to ensure all matching requirements are clearly understood, budgeted for, and monitored regularly. This includes assigning responsibility for tracking match contributions and reconciling them periodically to ensure compliance throughout the grant period. Management’s Response: See corrective action plan.
Finding Reference 2024-003: Insufficient Non-Federal Share Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Commerce Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Efforts, Earmarking Federal Program: 11.034 - MBDA Business Center- Capital Readiness Program Grant Award: MB23OBD8020301 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Condition/Context: CRMSDC reported $191,585 in matching expenditures for Grant Year 1. However, the supporting documentation provided totaled only $114,473, which did not align with the categories in the approved matching budget of $189,250. Reported costs included expenditures outside of approved categories and did not reconcile to the grant agreement requirements. As a result, there was a shortfall of $74,777 in the required non-federal share. Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR §200.306, cost sharing or matching contributions must be verifiable from the recipient’s records, necessary and reasonable for the program, and must meet the amounts and categories established in the approved award budget. Cause: CRMSDC did not establish adequate procedures to ensure that matching expenditures were tracked and reported in accordance with approved budget categories and amounts. Further, management did not seek or obtain prior approval from the awarding agency for any modification or waiver of the matching requirement. Effect: As a result, CRMSDC did not fully meet the required non-federal share. This noncompliance exposes the organization to potential disallowance of costs, repayment of federal funds, or other administrative actions by the awarding agency. Questioned Costs: $74,777 32 CAPITAL REGION MINORITY SUPPLIER DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2024 – (CONTINUTED) Recommendation: We recommend that CRMSDC strengthen its monitoring controls and procedures to ensure compliance with matching requirements. Specifically, management should: • Implement periodic reviews (e.g., quarterly) to compare actual contributions against the required match amounts and approved budget categories. • Maintain detailed and verifiable documentation for all matching costs. • Provide training to staff responsible for grant compliance on Uniform Guidance and award-specific requirements. • Seek timely approval from the awarding agency for any modifications to budget categories or matching requirements. • Develop and implement a corrective action plan to address the identified shortfall and to prevent recurrence in future grant periods. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned
Federal Program 23.002 - Appalachian Area Development Award Number ARC-22699 Federal Agency Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) Compliance Requirement Matching Type of Finding Internal Control over Compliance - Significant Deficiency Compliance - Noncompliance Questioned costs None Criteria Per 2 CFR §200.306, federal awards may require non-federal entities to contribute a specific percentage of matching funds. ARC grant 23.002 requires a minimum match of 66.9456%. Internal controls should be designed to ensure compliance with such requirements prior to requesting reimbursement. Condition During testing of the ARC grant 23.002, we noted the City of Batesville's initial reimbursement request included ARC charges exceeding the allowable federal share by $26, 180, representing 1.6426% of total allocable expenditures for the year. The overstatement resulted in a cumulative match percentage below the required 66.9456%. The error was identified by the State oversight agency prior to disbursement, and the City subsequently revised Request #4 to bring the overall match into compliance. No federal funds were improperly drawn. Cause The City's internal controls over grant reimbursement requests did not include sufficient review procedures to ensure compliance with federal match requirements prior to submission. The error was not detected internally and was instead identified by the State. Effect Although the error was corrected· before reimbursement and no questioned costs resulted, the lack of internal detection indicates a control deficiency that could lead to future noncompliance or improper use of federal funds if not addressed. Recommendation We recommend the City strengthen its internal controls over grant reimbursement requests by implementing formal review procedures to verify compliance with federal match requirements before submission. This may include checklist protocols, supervisory sign-off, or automated validation tools. Views of Responsible Officials Management concurs with the finding. The City acknowledges that the initial reimbursement request exceeded the allowable federal share and appreciates the State's oversight in identifying the issue prior to disbursement. Moving forward, the City will implement a formal review process for reimbursement submissions, including supervisory approval and automated checks to ensure compliance with match requirements. Staff will also receive training on ARC match calculations and documentation standards.
Finding 2024-043 - Use of Federal Funds to Satisfy Required Local Match Without Prior Approval Summary: The City of Batesville substituted federal Delta Regional Authority (ORA) and Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) funds for required local match obligations under two federal grants-ARC (ALN 23.002) and CDBG (ALN 14.228)-without obtaining prior written approval from the awarding agencies. Although CDBG was not selected for audit testing, the questioned costs originally exceeded the $10,000 threshold and are reported in accordance with 2 CFR §200.516(a): Total questioned costs of $800,406 were initially allocated proportionally between the two programs; These costs have since been resolved through formal amendments to both grant agreements. Federal Programs 23.002 _; Appalachian Area Development (ARC) 14.228 - Community Development Block Grants/State's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii· (CDBG) Note: ALN 14.228 was not selected for audit testing under the Uniform Guidance compliance requirements. However, a finding is presented in accordance with 2 CFR §200.516(a) due to the materiality of the issue and its connection to ARC grant MS-20699. Award Numbers ARC: MS-20699 CDBG Subgrant: 1137 ~21-111-PF-01 Federal Agencies U.S. Department of the Treasury (via Appalachian Regional Commission) U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Compliance Requirements Matching - 2 CFR §200.306 Allowable Costs/Cost Principles - 2 CFR §200.403 Internal Controls -2 CFR §200.303 Audit Finding Threshold - 2 CFR §200.516(a) Type of Finding Internal Control over Compliance - Material Weakness Compliance - Noncompliance Questioned Costs Based on actual net expenditures and proportional match requirements: (TABLE) These questioned costs have been eliminated following receipt of amended contracts from ARC and CDBG approving the use of ORA and CDBG funds as match. Criteria The following federal regulations and grant conditions establish the requirements violated in this finding: 1. Matching Requirements - 2 CFR §200.306 Federal funds may not be used to meet a required cost share or match unless expressly authorized by the awarding agency. Matching contributions must: Be verifiable from the recipient's records Not be included as contributions for any other federal award Be necessary and reasonable for accomplishing program objectives Be allowable under the cost principles Not be paid by. the federal government under another award, unless authorized 2. Allowable Costs ... 2 CFR §200.403 Costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and conform to limitations in the award terms. Costs must be adequately documented and consistent with policies that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. 3. Internal Controls - 2 CFR §200.303 Recipients must establish and maintain effective internal controls to ensure compliance with feqeral statutes, regulations, and award terms. Controls should provide reasonable assurance that the organization is managing the award in compliance with applicable requirements. 4. Audit Finding Threshold-2 CFR §200.516(a) Auditors must report known questioned costs that exceed $10,000 for a federal program, even if the program was not selected for audit testing. Condition During the audit of ARC grant MS-20699 (ALN 23.002), we noted that the City of Batesville substituted $569,600 in federal ORA funds for the originally budgeted local match of $341,784. Additionally, for COBG grant ALN 14.228, the City substituted $569,600 in ORA funds and $553,000 in ARC grant funds for the originally budgeted local match of $901,784. These substitutions were made without prior written approval or executed amendments from the awarding agencies, as required under 2 CFR §200.306 and the respective grant agreements. Resolution Following the audit fieldwork, the City obtained formal amendments to both grant agreements: On October 24, 2025, ARC approved the substitution of ORA and COBG funds as match under ALN 23.002. On November 7, 2025, COBG approved the substitution of ORA and ARC funds as match under ALN 14.228. These approvals eliminate the previously identified questioned costs totaling $800,406. However, the lack of contemporaneous documentation and prior approval reflects a breakdown in internal controls and remains a material compliance issue. Cause The City lacked adequate internal controls to ensure changes to match sources were formally reviewed and approved by the awarding agencies prior to implementation. The substitution of federal funds for required local match was not documented or authorized at the time of expenditure. Effect Although questioned costs have been resolved, the City was in noncompliance with federal matching requirements and allowable cost principles at the time of expenditure. This reflects a broader control deficiency in the City's grant management process and increases the risk of future noncompliance. Recommendation We recommend the City strengthen its internal controls over grant compliance, including: Formal review and documentation of match sources prior to drawdown Written approval from awarding agencies before substituting federal funds for required match Staff training on federal match requirements and Uniform Guidance compliance Views of Responsible Officials Management concurs with the finding. The City acknowledges that federal ORA and ARC funds were applied toward required match obligations without prior approval or amendment to the respective grant agreements. ARC and CDBG representatives have since approved the substitutions through formal amendments. The City will implement procedures requiring written authorization for any future match substitutions and establish a formal review process to verify match sources prior to drawdown.
REFERENCE: 2024-103 CFDA NUMBER 84.425D – COVID 19 – EDUCATION STABILIZATION FUND CFDA NUMBER 84.425U – COVID 19 – EDUCATION STABILIZATION FUND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – 2022 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – 2023 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – 2024 PASSED THROUGH ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION GRANT NUMBERS: S425D200038, S425D210038, S425U2100038 QUESTIONED COSTS N/A CONDITION For of 3 of 60 non-payroll transactions tested, documentation was not available to demonstrate that the cost was allowable and approved in the final grant application. The costs were removed from the completion report approved by the Arizona Department of Education on December 19, 2024. Additionally, a fiscal monitoring completed by the Arizona Department of Education in December 2024, that covered the period of March 15, 2020 through September 30, 2023, reported the following unallowable costs, associated with Education Stabilization Funds grants, that the School is required to repay. • $4,982.34 (ESSER I) for continual internet and phone services not included in the approved grant budget; • $547.82 (ESSER I) for an online foreign language program not included in the approved grant budget; • $631.14 (ESSER II) for outdoor play equipment not included in the approved grant budget. • $3,000.00 (ESSER II) for contracted technical coach services not approved in the approved grant budget. The total known questioned costs are $9,161.30. CRITERIA In accordance with OMB Compliance Supplement, Part 6 – Internal Control, non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. In accordance with Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart E -Cost Principles 200.403 Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: a. Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. b. Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. c. Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the recipient or subrecipient. d. Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. e. Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for state and local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f. Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. See also § 200.306(b). g. Be adequately documented. See also §§ 200.300 through 200.309 of this part. h. Administrative closeout costs may be incurred until the due date of the final report(s). If incurred, these costs must be liquidated prior to the due date of the final report(s) and charged to the final budget period of the award unless otherwise specified by the Federal agency. All other costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. At its discretion, the Federal agency is authorized to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods. See § 200.308(g)(3). EFFECT Program requirements were not complied with. The School did not maintain adequate documentation of all costs charged to the federal program. CAUSE Internal controls were not designed appropriately to ensure that all charges to the federal grant were allowable. RECOMMENDATION AND BENEFIT A control system should be developed and implemented to ensure that documentation of all purchases charged to a federal program include only allowable costs and that the costs are included in the grant applications. Any reviews should be documented. This will help ensure that program requirements are complied. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS See Corrective Action Plan.
REFERENCE: 2024-102 CFDA NUMBER 84.367 – IMPROVING TEACHER QUALITY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – 2023 PASSED THROUGH ARIZONA STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION GRANT NUMBER: S367A220049 QUESTIONED COSTS $28,100 CONDITION A fiscal monitoring completed by the Arizona Department of Education in December 2024, covering fiscal year 2023, reported $28,100 in unallowable costs for therapeutic services, not outlined in the approved grant budget, and that the School is required to repay. CRITERIA In accordance with Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Subpart E -Cost Principles 200.403 Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: a. Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. b. Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. c. Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the recipient or subrecipient. d. Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. e. Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for state and local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f. Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. See also § 200.306(b). g. Be adequately documented. See also §§ 200.300 through 200.309 of this part. h. Administrative closeout costs may be incurred until the due date of the final report(s). If incurred, these costs must be liquidated prior to the due date of the final report(s) and charged to the final budget period of the award unless otherwise specified by the Federal agency. All other costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. At its discretion, the Federal agency is authorized to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods. See § 200.308(g)(3). In accordance with OMB Compliance Supplement, Part 6 – Internal Control, non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control over the Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal awards. EFFECT Program requirements were not complied with. The School did not maintain adequate documentation of all costs charged to the federal program. CAUSE Internal controls were not designed appropriately to ensure that all charges to the federal grant were allowable. RECOMMENDATION AND BENEFIT A control system should be developed and implemented to ensure that documentation of all purchases charged to a federal program include only allowable costs and that the costs are included in the grant applications. Any reviews should be documented. This will help ensure that program requirements are complied. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS See Corrective Action Plan.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Defense Program/Cluster: Community Economic Adjustment Assistance for Responding to Threats to the Resilience of a Military Installation Federal Assistance Listing Number: 12.003 Award No.: MIR1973-22-01 Award Year: 2023 Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort and Earmarking Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.430(g)(4) Salaries and wages of employees used in meeting cost sharing requirements on Federal awards must be supported in the same manner as salaries and wages claimed for reimbursement from Federal awards. 2 CFR 200.306(f) requires that if services furnished by a third-party organization are claimed as a cost-sharing match, these services must be valued at the employee’s regular rate of pay, plus an amount of fringe benefits that is reasonable, necessary, allocable, and otherwise allowable. Condition: We noted personnel services furnished by third-party organizations totaled $31,025 for the life of the grant, including $10,854 in fiscal year 2024. For the services furnished by third-party organizations as a local match of costs, the City valued the personnel time based on budgeted rates. The City could not provide documentation supporting the actual cost incurred by the third-party organization to support the in-kind services claimed. Cause: The City’s policies and procedures for in-kind services furnished by third-party organizations toward the grant did not include obtaining documentation to support the actual costs incurred and value of services claimed. Effect: The City did not comply with required local match of expenses for the grant. Questioned Costs: We identified questioned costs totaling $2,435 for unsubstantiated costs furnished by third-party organizations claimed as local cost share expenditures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 13 out of 54 local cost share expenditures were tested. This represents $9,114 of local cost share expenditures out of a total of $46,809 incurred for fiscal year 2024. Upon further investigation, the questioned costs were isolated to contributed services furnished by third-party organizations which totaled $10,854 in the fiscal year 2024. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No. Recommendation: We recommend the City establish policies and procedures and documentation standards to comply with the Uniform Guidance standards for documentation of personnel expenses used to meet the local share of expenses. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.
2024-003: Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls over Compliance and Compliance – Setup and Monitoring of Reporting and Match Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration Program(s) and Federal Award Listing Number(s): Airport Improvement Program ALN: 20.106 FAIN: 3-02-0133-092-2022, 3-02-0133-098-2023, 3-02-0133-100-2023 New or Repeat: New Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires internal controls to ensure accuracy in financial reporting, while 2 CFR 200.306 mandates proper tracking and documentation of matching contributions. Condition: Internal controls were not sufficiently designed and implemented to ensure that matching funds were correctly allocated in accordance with grant requirements. As a result, errors in the match setup were not detected in a timely manner, leading to discrepancies between the financial data provided for audit and the City and Borough’s prepared reports submitted to the grantor. Internal controls over reporting were not designed or implemented to detect and correct the errors prior to report submission. Context: The City and Borough’s financial system was not properly configured to allocate matching funds correctly, resulting in discrepancies in reported amounts. Specifically, an under-allocation to an Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grant and an over-allocation to the match occurred in one project of $474,704 and an under-allocation to match and over-allocation of $107,651 to two other AIP grants occurred. Effect: Overall expenses were under-allocated to the AIP and over-allocated to match funding. The overall impact of these errors resulted in discrepancies between reported amounts and supporting documentation. Due to amount reported as AIP costs being under-reported, this is considered immaterial non-compliance and is reported as an other matter. Questioned costs: No questioned costs as overall program impact was the under-allocation of expenses to the grants as of June 30, 2024. The City and Borough elected not to adjust the amounts reported in the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, since allocations and reports can be corrected in the following reporting year. Cause: Internal controls were not designed or implemented to detect the incorrect system configuration for allocating project expenses between grant and match funds in a timely manner, nor was the report preparation review process sufficiently designed or implemented to detect and correct the under-and over-allocations of project costs being reported. Recommendation: We recommend the City and Borough improve monitoring controls over the setup for project expense allocations and the review controls over report preparation process to ensure that errors are detected and corrected in a timely manner. View of responsible officials: Management concurs with this finding, see corrective action plan.