2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
2024-038 Noncompliance with Payroll and Travel Expense Policies and Procedures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agencies: Various Pass-Through Entities: Various AL Numbers and Titles: Various – Research and Development Cluster Federal Award Numbers: Various Questioned Costs: None Identified Description: The University did not comply with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures. Background Information: During the year ended June 30, 2024, the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (“GIT” or the “Institute”) Department of Internal Audit completed audits of compliance with payroll and travel expense policies and procedures of two Schools within the Institute and identified noncompliance with those policies and procedures. Criteria: • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.302 Financial management • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.308 – Revision of budget and program plans • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.404 – Reasonable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.405 – Allocable costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.430 – Compensation – personal services • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.475 – Travel costs • Uniform Guidance 2 CFR § 200.432 – Conferences • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.12 • Title 41 CFR § 301-11.200 Subpart C – Reduced per Diem Condition: • Noncompliance with travel policies • Noncompliance with payroll expense policies and procedures Cause: • Lack of sufficient controls for proper review and approval of travel authorizations and expensed transactions associated with sponsored award expenses • Lack of sufficient controls to ensure time and effort is properly charged to sponsored awards • Lack of consistency enforcing payroll expense policies for sponsored award management Effect: Payroll and travel expenditures may not be in compliance with federal or grant award provisions. Recommendation: • Complete and approve spend authorizations before travel to validate the necessity and reasonableness of expenses. • Include detailed justifications in spend authorizations for the travel purpose and award benefit. • Require sufficient justification for payroll expenses charged to sponsored awards, particularly for significant variances in effort. • Update internal control policies to enhance oversight and verification of time and effort reporting. This should include clear guidelines on the documentation required to support the work performed and the consequences of non-compliance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See management’s corrective action plan.
Finding 2024-004 (Repeat finding 2023-004) – U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – COVID-19 – Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting, 93.870 Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance – Allowable Costs/Activities Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Activities Criteria – Per 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E (2 CFR Section 200.403): (h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to Section 200.308(e)(3). Condition – Prepaid gift cards for grocery and gas were purchased in bulk and recorded as federal expenses. However, not all cards were distributed to eligible beneficiaries as of June 30, 2024 and, therefore, should not have been expensed as not all criteria for allowable costs had been met. Cause – Current processes of the Organization record the purchase of gift cards as an expense, prior to all allowable cost requirements being met. Effect – By reporting federal expenses prior to meeting all criteria for allowable costs, the Organization runs the risk that amounts may be determined as unallowed by the federal awarding agency and the Organization may have to return the federal funds. Questioned Costs – Approximately $130,660 in expenses were reported that had not yet met all of the allowable cost criteria to be considered federal expenses. Context – The Organization distributed prepaid gift cards to eligible beneficiaries as needed throughout the year ended June 30, 2024. However, not all of the prepaid gift cards had been distributed by June 30, 2024. Recommendation – We recommend the Organization improve policies and procedures to record the purchase of gift cards as a prepaid transaction and only expense these items when all allowable cost criteria are met. Management’s Response – Management concurs with the finding, see Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-004 (Repeat finding 2023-004) – U.S. Department of Health and Human Services – COVID-19 – Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting, 93.870 Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance – Allowable Costs/Activities Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Activities Criteria – Per 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E (2 CFR Section 200.403): (h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to Section 200.308(e)(3). Condition – Prepaid gift cards for grocery and gas were purchased in bulk and recorded as federal expenses. However, not all cards were distributed to eligible beneficiaries as of June 30, 2024 and, therefore, should not have been expensed as not all criteria for allowable costs had been met. Cause – Current processes of the Organization record the purchase of gift cards as an expense, prior to all allowable cost requirements being met. Effect – By reporting federal expenses prior to meeting all criteria for allowable costs, the Organization runs the risk that amounts may be determined as unallowed by the federal awarding agency and the Organization may have to return the federal funds. Questioned Costs – Approximately $130,660 in expenses were reported that had not yet met all of the allowable cost criteria to be considered federal expenses. Context – The Organization distributed prepaid gift cards to eligible beneficiaries as needed throughout the year ended June 30, 2024. However, not all of the prepaid gift cards had been distributed by June 30, 2024. Recommendation – We recommend the Organization improve policies and procedures to record the purchase of gift cards as a prepaid transaction and only expense these items when all allowable cost criteria are met. Management’s Response – Management concurs with the finding, see Corrective Action Plan.
Finding No. 2024-035 Federal Awarding Agency: USDOD Impact: Significant Deficiency, Noncompliance AL Number and Title: 12.401 NGMOMP Federal Award Number: W91ZRU-23-2-1001, W91ZRU-23-2-1004, W91ZRU-23-2-1005, W91ZRU-23-2-1010, W91ZRU-23-2-1021E, W91ZRU-23-2-1021K, W91ZRU-23-2-1040 Applicable Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Condition: Six of seven award extensions for the NGMOMP program were untimely. Additionally, one award was not closed timely. Context: National Guard Bureau Grants and Cooperative Agreement Policy Letter 21-07, effective date July 19, 2021, revised the program period of performance requirements for extension requests to be submitted no later than 10 days prior to the end of the 120-day award closeout period. Award extension requests were required to be submitted no later than January 21, 2024. Three of the six extension requests were submitted on January 30, 2024 (nine days late); two were submitted on January 25, 2024 (six days late); and one was submitted on January 22, 2024 (one day late). The policy letter also revised the timeframe for award closeout requiring the grantee to conduct closeout within 120 calendar days from the end of the period of performance. Two awards closed during FY 24, of which one did not have a final accounting submitted within the 120 days. Award closeout was submitted approximately 200 days after the end of the period of performance or approximately 80 days late. Cause: DMVA has written procedures for federal extension requests and award closure. However, competing priorities resulted in untimely submission of extension requests. The final reimbursement requests were submitted to USDOD on January 25, 2024, six days before the end of the closeout period. Federal payment was not received until March 19, 2024. Due, in part, to the untimely receipt of the payments, closeout documentation was not signed by all necessary parties until April 13, 2024. Criteria: Per Title 2 CFR 200.308(e)(2) all requests for one-time extension should be submitted at least 10 calendar days before the conclusion of the period of performance. Title 2 CFR 200.344 prescribes the pass-through entity must close out the federal award when it determines that all administrative actions and required work of the federal award have been completed. A recipient must submit all reports and liquidate all financial obligations no later than 120 days after the conclusion of the period of performance. Title 2 CFR 200.303(a) requires the State to establish and maintain effective internal controls over federal awards that provide reasonable assurance that the State is managing federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards. Effect: Untimely award extension requests and award closeouts may result in unallowable program expenditures. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: DMVA’s DAS director should follow procedures to ensure cooperative award extensions and award closeout documents are submitted timely, including requesting final payments timely, given the extended timeframe for federal reimbursement. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding.
Finding No. 2024-085 Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Education Impact: Significant Deficiency, Noncompliance AL Number and Title: 84.031 Higher Education Institutional Aid Federal Award Number: P031R210002-23 Applicable Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking Condition: One sample of five grants with level of effort provisions in the grant award notification did not meet the level of effort for key personnel required by the federal agency. Context: During testing of special tests and provisions one grant of a sample of five from UAF was observed to not have met level of effort requirements as stipulated in the award documents. The campus had inadvertently submitted an incorrect budget with different key personnel to the agency and did not correct this with the federal agency upon receipt of the award documents stipulating the incorrect key personnel. Cause: An incorrect budget was submitted with the grant proposal to the Federal agency. Criteria: Per 2 CFR 200.308(f)(3) the Federal Government required a recipient of federal awards must receive prior written approval from the Federal agency for the disengagement of key personnel from a project for more than three months, or a 25% reduction in time and effort devoted to the Federal award. Per Uniform Guidance 2 CFR 200.303, nonfederal entities receiving federal awards are required to establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Effect: Key personnel listed in the award documents did not have time and effort tracked towards the grant project. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: UAF management should continue to review budgets and key personnel submitted with grant proposals to Federal agencies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding.
Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse ALN No. 93.959 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Opioid STR ALN No. 93.788 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Criteria or Specific Requirement – Activities Allowed and Unallowed and Cost Principles – 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, and Period of Performance – 2 CFR sections 200.308, 200.309, and 200.403(h) Condition – A sample of 80 expenditures were selected from each of the following populations: • ALN No. 93.959 – 1,152 items totaling $1,077,416 • ALN No. 93.788 – 1,222 items totaling $2,537,080 The samples were not, and are not intended to be, statistically valid. Of the 80 expenditures tested from each grant program, the following were determined to lack appropriate supporting documentation to support being charged to grant program: • ALN No. 93.959 - 41 items totaling $25,810, including projected errors over the total population totaling $191,145 • ALN No. 93.788 - 10 items totaling $72,347, including projected errors over the total population totaling $207,012 The Organization did not have adequate supporting documentation demonstrating actual time and effort reporting and lacked evidence of supporting invoices. Cause – The Organization charged budgeted percentages to the grant programs without a system in place to monitor and track that actual time and effort was consistent with budgeted percentages. In addition, the Organization charged expenditures to the grant programs without evidence of supporting invoices. Effect or potential effect – Costs charged to the grant programs could have varied from actual time and effort. In addition, costs charged to the grant could not be supported by actual invoices. Questioned costs – • ALN No. 93.959 - $25,810 • ALN No. 93.788 - $72,347 Context – The Organization did not have a reasonable methodology of allocating costs to these grant programs and did not maintain proper supporting invoices. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Repeat finding (see 2023-003) Recommendation – Management should implement policies and procedures that strengthen internal control over compliance in relation to activities allowed and cost principles. The policy and procedure should be designed to ensure that a reasonable allocation methodology is implemented and followed or that time and effort is certified by the employee on a regular basis. In addition, management should implement a document retention policy consistent with 2 CFR 200.334.
Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse ALN No. 93.959 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Opioid STR ALN No. 93.788 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Criteria or Specific Requirement – Activities Allowed and Unallowed and Cost Principles – 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E, and Period of Performance – 2 CFR sections 200.308, 200.309, and 200.403(h) Condition – A sample of 80 expenditures were selected from each of the following populations: • ALN No. 93.959 – 1,152 items totaling $1,077,416 • ALN No. 93.788 – 1,222 items totaling $2,537,080 The samples were not, and are not intended to be, statistically valid. Of the 80 expenditures tested from each grant program, the following were determined to lack appropriate supporting documentation to support being charged to grant program: • ALN No. 93.959 - 41 items totaling $25,810, including projected errors over the total population totaling $191,145 • ALN No. 93.788 - 10 items totaling $72,347, including projected errors over the total population totaling $207,012 The Organization did not have adequate supporting documentation demonstrating actual time and effort reporting and lacked evidence of supporting invoices. Cause – The Organization charged budgeted percentages to the grant programs without a system in place to monitor and track that actual time and effort was consistent with budgeted percentages. In addition, the Organization charged expenditures to the grant programs without evidence of supporting invoices. Effect or potential effect – Costs charged to the grant programs could have varied from actual time and effort. In addition, costs charged to the grant could not be supported by actual invoices. Questioned costs – • ALN No. 93.959 - $25,810 • ALN No. 93.788 - $72,347 Context – The Organization did not have a reasonable methodology of allocating costs to these grant programs and did not maintain proper supporting invoices. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Repeat finding (see 2023-003) Recommendation – Management should implement policies and procedures that strengthen internal control over compliance in relation to activities allowed and cost principles. The policy and procedure should be designed to ensure that a reasonable allocation methodology is implemented and followed or that time and effort is certified by the employee on a regular basis. In addition, management should implement a document retention policy consistent with 2 CFR 200.334.
Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal program title: Block Grants for Community Mental Health Services Assistance Listing Number: 93.958 Pass-Through Agency: Illinois Department of Human Services Pass-Through Number: 45CCB03514; 45CCB04278; 45CCB00648 Award Period: 07/01/2023 – 06/30/2024 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Immaterial Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award's period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Condition: Costs outside of the period of performance were charged to the grant. Questioned Costs: $7,311 Context: Four (4) of the twenty (20) transactions selected for testing. Cause: Oversight. Effect: The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal grant. Repeat Finding: Yes, prior year finding number was 2023-004 Recommendation: Management should review and revise its process for allocating costs to federal grants to include additional layers of review and so that costs for which some or all are from outside of the period of performance, may be appropriately excluded from the federal grant. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Improve Controls Over Period of Performance Over Federal Awards (Significant Deficiency) Federal Agency: Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Previously reported as 2023-001 Criteria or Specific Requirement A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Management of the School District is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal pro¬gram. A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of per¬forming their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. Condition and Context There were several payroll charges and invoices for costs that occurred prior to the start of the School District’s fiscal year 2024 IDEA special education grant. Since these costs occurred outside of the authorized period of performance, they are not eligible to be charged to that grant. Cause The School District has not established adequate procedures to ensure costs charged to the grant are within the authorized period of performance. Effect or Potential Effect Due to the weakness in internal control noted above, there are known and questioned costs reported related to salaries and contracted services incurred prior to the period of performance and charged to the grant, which could impact future grant funding. Questioned Costs The payroll charges and invoices for costs in question are below $25,000. Recommendation The School District should implement controls to ensure that no costs are charged to a grant prior to the authorized period of performance. Views of Responsible Official Management agrees with the finding. Planned Corrective Action Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the schedule of prior year findings.
MW-2024-002 Improve Controls Over Period of Performance Over Federal Awards Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027/84.173 Award Year: 2022 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Material Noncompliance Internal Control over Compliance – Material Weakness Criteria or Specific Requirement A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Management of the School Department is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal program. A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of per¬forming their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. Condition and Context There were invoices for costs incurred after the end of the School Department’s fiscal year 2022 ARP SPED IDEA/Preschool grant. Since these costs occurred outside the authorized period of performance, they are not eligible to be charged to the grant. Cause The School Department has not established adequate procedures to ensure costs charged to the grant are within the authorized period of performance. Effect or Potential Effect Due to the weakness in internal control noted above, there are known and questioned costs reported for expenditures incurred outside the period of performance and charged to the grant. Questioned Costs Questioned costs related to these invoices outside of the period of performance were approximately $60,000. Recommendation The School Department should implement controls to ensure that no costs are charged to a grant outside the authorized period of performance. Views of Responsible Officials Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the schedule of prior year findings.
Reference Number: 2024-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Defense State Agency: Military Department Federal Program: National Guard Military Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Projects Assistance Listing Number: 12.401 Award Number and Year: W912K6-24-2 (10/1/2023 – 9/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Military Department (Department) charged costs to the federal grant prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. The expenditures were incurred from six to twenty-three days prior to the start of the award period. Context: Two of forty transactions selected for testing were incurred prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. Cause: The Department’s procedures were not operating sufficiently to ensure that expenditures charged to the program were incurred within the awards’ period of performance. Internal controls did not prevent or detect the errors. Effect: Costs could be deemed unallowable by the awarding agency if funds are expended outside of the allowable period of performance. Questioned costs: $ 4,699, which represents the total of the expenditures incurred prior to the awards’ period of performance. Recommendation: The Department should review and enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it charges expenditures to the program that are incurred within an award’s allowable period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2024-023 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education State Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing Number: 84.027, 84.173 Award Number and Year: H027A230035 (7/1/2023 – 9/30/2024) H173A230089 (7/1/2023 – 9/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Department of Education (Department) charged costs to the federal grant prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. We noted that five of the seven exceptions were incurred from 213 to 92 days prior to the beginning of the period of performance. Context: Seven of eleven transactions selected for testing were incurred prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. Cause: The Department’s procedures were not operating sufficiently to ensure that expenditures charged to the program were incurred within the awards’ period of performance. Internal controls did not prevent or detect the errors. Effect: Costs could be deemed unallowable by the awarding agency if funds are expended outside of the allowable period of performance. Questioned costs: $4,411, which represents the total of the expenditures incurred prior to the awards’ period of performance. Recommendation: The Department should review and enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it charges expenditures to the program that are incurred within an award’s allowable period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2024-025 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services State Agency: Department of Human Services Federal Program: Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program Assistance Listing Number: 93.568 Award Number and Year: 2401MDLIEA (10/1/2023-9/30/2025) Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Department of Human Services (Department) charged costs to the federal grant prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. The expenditures were incurred from one to twenty-six days prior to the start of the award period. Context: Seventeen of forty transactions selected for testing were incurred prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. Cause: The Department’s procedures were not operating sufficiently to ensure that expenditures charged to the program were incurred within the awards’ period of performance. Internal controls did not prevent or detect the errors. Effect: Costs could be deemed unallowable by the awarding agency if funds are expended outside of the allowable period of performance. Questioned costs: $778,473, which represents the total of the expenditures incurred prior to the awards’ period of performance. Recommendation: The Department should review and enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it charges expenditures to the program that are incurred within an award’s allowable period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Special Tests and Provisions – Key Personnel Research and Development Cluster, Assistance Listing Number: 84.031S Federal Granting Agency: U.S. Department of Education Program Year 2023–2024 Award No. PP031S220202-23 Type of Finding: Other Instance of Noncompliance and Deficiency Criteria: Special Test - Key Personnel-Applications/proposals or awards may include staffing proposals that specify individuals who will work on the project and the extent of the planned involvement of personnel. The nonfederal entity may change the staffing mix and level of involvement within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, but may be required to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel (as identified in the award, which may differ from the nonfederal entity’s designation in the application/proposal) and changes in the project director’s time commitment/level of participation in the project (OMB Circular A-110 §§_.25(c)(2) and (3)/2 CFR Sections 200.308(b)(2) and (3)). Condition: Federal regulations provide that the University is responsible for ensuring the staffing mix and level of involvement is within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, and to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel. The University’s internal control system did not prevent or detect that key personnel did not complete personal activity reports to support their involvement in the project as required. Questioned Costs: None Context: Out of a population of 13 key personnel assigned to the grants, a sample of four key personnel were selected for testing. One out of the four key personnel did not have formal documentation related to charging their time to the project. Our sampling method was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Effect: Management failed to perform effective control activities to appropriately reduce the risk of noncompliance related to the key personnel special test during the fiscal year. The lack of an adequate control environment over this special test requirement could result in personnel being involved in projects utilizing federal funds that have not been properly approved by the granting agency. Cause: The University’s processes did not ensure that key personnel were properly involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster. Report Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its processes and controls to help ensure that all key personnel involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster are properly approved and involved in grant project objectives. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and recommendation. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
Special Tests and Provisions – Key Personnel Research and Development Cluster, Assistance Listing Number: 84.031S Federal Granting Agency: U.S. Department of Education Program Year 2023–2024 Award No. PP031S220202-23 Type of Finding: Other Instance of Noncompliance and Deficiency Criteria: Special Test - Key Personnel-Applications/proposals or awards may include staffing proposals that specify individuals who will work on the project and the extent of the planned involvement of personnel. The nonfederal entity may change the staffing mix and level of involvement within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, but may be required to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel (as identified in the award, which may differ from the nonfederal entity’s designation in the application/proposal) and changes in the project director’s time commitment/level of participation in the project (OMB Circular A-110 §§_.25(c)(2) and (3)/2 CFR Sections 200.308(b)(2) and (3)). Condition: Federal regulations provide that the University is responsible for ensuring the staffing mix and level of involvement is within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, and to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel. The University’s internal control system did not prevent or detect that key personnel did not complete personal activity reports to support their involvement in the project as required. Questioned Costs: None Context: Out of a population of 13 key personnel assigned to the grants, a sample of four key personnel were selected for testing. One out of the four key personnel did not have formal documentation related to charging their time to the project. Our sampling method was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Effect: Management failed to perform effective control activities to appropriately reduce the risk of noncompliance related to the key personnel special test during the fiscal year. The lack of an adequate control environment over this special test requirement could result in personnel being involved in projects utilizing federal funds that have not been properly approved by the granting agency. Cause: The University’s processes did not ensure that key personnel were properly involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster. Report Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its processes and controls to help ensure that all key personnel involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster are properly approved and involved in grant project objectives. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and recommendation. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
Special Tests and Provisions – Key Personnel Research and Development Cluster, Assistance Listing Number: 84.031S Federal Granting Agency: U.S. Department of Education Program Year 2023–2024 Award No. PP031S220202-23 Type of Finding: Other Instance of Noncompliance and Deficiency Criteria: Special Test - Key Personnel-Applications/proposals or awards may include staffing proposals that specify individuals who will work on the project and the extent of the planned involvement of personnel. The nonfederal entity may change the staffing mix and level of involvement within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, but may be required to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel (as identified in the award, which may differ from the nonfederal entity’s designation in the application/proposal) and changes in the project director’s time commitment/level of participation in the project (OMB Circular A-110 §§_.25(c)(2) and (3)/2 CFR Sections 200.308(b)(2) and (3)). Condition: Federal regulations provide that the University is responsible for ensuring the staffing mix and level of involvement is within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, and to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel. The University’s internal control system did not prevent or detect that key personnel did not complete personal activity reports to support their involvement in the project as required. Questioned Costs: None Context: Out of a population of 13 key personnel assigned to the grants, a sample of four key personnel were selected for testing. One out of the four key personnel did not have formal documentation related to charging their time to the project. Our sampling method was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Effect: Management failed to perform effective control activities to appropriately reduce the risk of noncompliance related to the key personnel special test during the fiscal year. The lack of an adequate control environment over this special test requirement could result in personnel being involved in projects utilizing federal funds that have not been properly approved by the granting agency. Cause: The University’s processes did not ensure that key personnel were properly involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster. Report Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its processes and controls to help ensure that all key personnel involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster are properly approved and involved in grant project objectives. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and recommendation. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
Special Tests and Provisions – Key Personnel Research and Development Cluster, Assistance Listing Number: 84.031S Federal Granting Agency: U.S. Department of Education Program Year 2023–2024 Award No. PP031S220202-23 Type of Finding: Other Instance of Noncompliance and Deficiency Criteria: Special Test - Key Personnel-Applications/proposals or awards may include staffing proposals that specify individuals who will work on the project and the extent of the planned involvement of personnel. The nonfederal entity may change the staffing mix and level of involvement within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, but may be required to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel (as identified in the award, which may differ from the nonfederal entity’s designation in the application/proposal) and changes in the project director’s time commitment/level of participation in the project (OMB Circular A-110 §§_.25(c)(2) and (3)/2 CFR Sections 200.308(b)(2) and (3)). Condition: Federal regulations provide that the University is responsible for ensuring the staffing mix and level of involvement is within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, and to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel. The University’s internal control system did not prevent or detect that key personnel did not complete personal activity reports to support their involvement in the project as required. Questioned Costs: None Context: Out of a population of 13 key personnel assigned to the grants, a sample of four key personnel were selected for testing. One out of the four key personnel did not have formal documentation related to charging their time to the project. Our sampling method was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Effect: Management failed to perform effective control activities to appropriately reduce the risk of noncompliance related to the key personnel special test during the fiscal year. The lack of an adequate control environment over this special test requirement could result in personnel being involved in projects utilizing federal funds that have not been properly approved by the granting agency. Cause: The University’s processes did not ensure that key personnel were properly involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster. Report Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its processes and controls to help ensure that all key personnel involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster are properly approved and involved in grant project objectives. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and recommendation. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
Special Tests and Provisions – Key Personnel Research and Development Cluster, Assistance Listing Number: 84.031S Federal Granting Agency: U.S. Department of Education Program Year 2023–2024 Award No. PP031S220202-23 Type of Finding: Other Instance of Noncompliance and Deficiency Criteria: Special Test - Key Personnel-Applications/proposals or awards may include staffing proposals that specify individuals who will work on the project and the extent of the planned involvement of personnel. The nonfederal entity may change the staffing mix and level of involvement within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, but may be required to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel (as identified in the award, which may differ from the nonfederal entity’s designation in the application/proposal) and changes in the project director’s time commitment/level of participation in the project (OMB Circular A-110 §§_.25(c)(2) and (3)/2 CFR Sections 200.308(b)(2) and (3)). Condition: Federal regulations provide that the University is responsible for ensuring the staffing mix and level of involvement is within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, and to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel. The University’s internal control system did not prevent or detect that key personnel did not complete personal activity reports to support their involvement in the project as required. Questioned Costs: None Context: Out of a population of 13 key personnel assigned to the grants, a sample of four key personnel were selected for testing. One out of the four key personnel did not have formal documentation related to charging their time to the project. Our sampling method was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Effect: Management failed to perform effective control activities to appropriately reduce the risk of noncompliance related to the key personnel special test during the fiscal year. The lack of an adequate control environment over this special test requirement could result in personnel being involved in projects utilizing federal funds that have not been properly approved by the granting agency. Cause: The University’s processes did not ensure that key personnel were properly involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster. Report Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its processes and controls to help ensure that all key personnel involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster are properly approved and involved in grant project objectives. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and recommendation. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
Special Tests and Provisions – Key Personnel Research and Development Cluster, Assistance Listing Number: 84.031S Federal Granting Agency: U.S. Department of Education Program Year 2023–2024 Award No. PP031S220202-23 Type of Finding: Other Instance of Noncompliance and Deficiency Criteria: Special Test - Key Personnel-Applications/proposals or awards may include staffing proposals that specify individuals who will work on the project and the extent of the planned involvement of personnel. The nonfederal entity may change the staffing mix and level of involvement within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, but may be required to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel (as identified in the award, which may differ from the nonfederal entity’s designation in the application/proposal) and changes in the project director’s time commitment/level of participation in the project (OMB Circular A-110 §§_.25(c)(2) and (3)/2 CFR Sections 200.308(b)(2) and (3)). Condition: Federal regulations provide that the University is responsible for ensuring the staffing mix and level of involvement is within limits specified by agency policy or in the award, and to obtain federal awarding agency approval of changes in key personnel. The University’s internal control system did not prevent or detect that key personnel did not complete personal activity reports to support their involvement in the project as required. Questioned Costs: None Context: Out of a population of 13 key personnel assigned to the grants, a sample of four key personnel were selected for testing. One out of the four key personnel did not have formal documentation related to charging their time to the project. Our sampling method was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Effect: Management failed to perform effective control activities to appropriately reduce the risk of noncompliance related to the key personnel special test during the fiscal year. The lack of an adequate control environment over this special test requirement could result in personnel being involved in projects utilizing federal funds that have not been properly approved by the granting agency. Cause: The University’s processes did not ensure that key personnel were properly involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster. Report Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the University strengthen its processes and controls to help ensure that all key personnel involved in projects under the Research and Development Cluster are properly approved and involved in grant project objectives. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and recommendation. See further information on the corrective action plan provided by management.
2023-001- Internal Control over Compliance and Compliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs and Cost Principles Information on the Major Federal Program U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Center for Disease Control and Prevention Assistance Listing Number: 93.988 Assistance Listing Name: Cooperative Agreements for State-Based Diabetes Control Programs and Evaluation of Surveillance Systems Grant Award Number(s): 1 NU58DP007372-01-00 Award Period: June 30, 2023 to June 29, 2028 Criteria or Specific Requirement – The Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In addition, per 2 CFR Section 200.403, “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 non-Federal entity. 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. g) Be adequately documented. h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3).” Furthermore, according to the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200), specifically §200.430(i), “charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated”. The records must also be supported by the approval of an individual with firsthand knowledge of the work performed. Condition - During our audit, within the tested sample of seven timesheets out of a population of twenty-six, three timesheets for employees charged to the federal program did not have proper approval in the system. The lack of signed approval indicates that the timesheets were not reviewed and approved by an individual with knowledge of the work performed, as required under the Uniform Guidance. ADA has documented expenditure policies and procedures. However, the review and approval process did not operate as designed. Cause – ADA did not adhere to its internal policies and procedures to ensure timesheets were properly reviewed and approved. Effect or Potential Effect – Without adequate internal controls in place to ensure costs are properly verified and approved, ADA could unallowably and inaccurately charge salary and wages expenditures to the federal program. Questioned Costs – None Context - This is a condition based on testing of ADA’s compliance. Based on tested samples, we noted four out of seven sampled timesheets were not properly approved in the system. The samples were selected using a non-statistical method. Repeat Finding - This finding is not a repeat finding. Recommendation - BDO recommends that ADA adhere to its documented policies and procedures to ensure all timesheets are reviewed and approved by authorized personnel with knowledge of the work performed. ADA should also provide training to all employees involved in the timesheet preparation and approval process to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The findings were primarily related to a change that ADA made to the Human Resources Information System. Going forward, ADA will adhere to our documented policies and procedures to ensure all timesheets are reviewed and approved by authorized personnel with knowledge of the work performed. Additionally, we will provide training to all employees involved in the timesheet preparation and approval process to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements.
Federal agency: All agencies in the SEFA Assistance Listing Number: See SEFA Award Period: 01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The compliance requirements for Federal Assistance Number 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Programs includes a Period of Performance element. The compliance requirement related to period of performance is that a non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period (also identified as the grant period) of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition: Allocations of indirect costs are performed once during the year-end closing process based on time study data for the entire year, and when program attendance data for programs that are ran for various increments throughout the year is available. The TANF grant period that was tested as a major program was December 2022 – August 2023. As the grant period ended in September, no costs incurred after that date should be considered major program expenditures. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. The questioned costs could be considered those indirect costs considered TANF expenditures that were incurred after August 2023. In addition, because the program attendance is used to allocate costs between programs, program attendance after August 2023 may be inappropriate to be considered when allocating those indirect costs to specific programs. Context: Indirect cost allocations are performed once during the year-end closing process by the auditee. Time studies are performed to allocate indirect costs between supporting and program functions. The indirect costs allocated to the program functions are then allocated between individual programs, including federally funded programs, based on the number of participant hours in each program. The time study and program hours used to allocate indirect costs are based on the entire year and not just the major program grant period. In addition, indirect costs that are allocated are incurred during the entire year and not just the major program grant period. Cause: Time and program participation data used to allocate costs are not consistent with the grant period. In addition, the costs that are allocated are not consistent with the grant period. Effect: The single annual allocation of costs means that costs incurred outside the major program grant/budget period are being allocated to the major program. In addition, allocation base data from outside the grant/budget period is being used as a base for the indirect cost allocation. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the auditee perform indirect cost allocations so that the costs and allocation base align with the grant/budget period. Performing the allocation of indirect costs annually may not create an equitable allocation at the individual program level. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree that the allocation being performed once annually does not create the most equitable allocation of costs between our individual programs. We will perform our indirect cost allocations more periodically during the course of the fiscal year to ensure that more appropriate times studies and applicable participant hours are being utilized to limit the potential of allocating unrelated indirect costs from the year to individual programs, including the federally funded programs.
Federal agency: All agencies in the SEFA Assistance Listing Number: See SEFA Award Period: 01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The compliance requirements for Federal Assistance Number 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Programs includes a Period of Performance element. The compliance requirement related to period of performance is that a non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period (also identified as the grant period) of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition: Allocations of indirect costs are performed once during the year-end closing process based on time study data for the entire year, and when program attendance data for programs that are ran for various increments throughout the year is available. The TANF grant period that was tested as a major program was December 2022 – August 2023. As the grant period ended in September, no costs incurred after that date should be considered major program expenditures. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. The questioned costs could be considered those indirect costs considered TANF expenditures that were incurred after August 2023. In addition, because the program attendance is used to allocate costs between programs, program attendance after August 2023 may be inappropriate to be considered when allocating those indirect costs to specific programs. Context: Indirect cost allocations are performed once during the year-end closing process by the auditee. Time studies are performed to allocate indirect costs between supporting and program functions. The indirect costs allocated to the program functions are then allocated between individual programs, including federally funded programs, based on the number of participant hours in each program. The time study and program hours used to allocate indirect costs are based on the entire year and not just the major program grant period. In addition, indirect costs that are allocated are incurred during the entire year and not just the major program grant period. Cause: Time and program participation data used to allocate costs are not consistent with the grant period. In addition, the costs that are allocated are not consistent with the grant period. Effect: The single annual allocation of costs means that costs incurred outside the major program grant/budget period are being allocated to the major program. In addition, allocation base data from outside the grant/budget period is being used as a base for the indirect cost allocation. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the auditee perform indirect cost allocations so that the costs and allocation base align with the grant/budget period. Performing the allocation of indirect costs annually may not create an equitable allocation at the individual program level. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree that the allocation being performed once annually does not create the most equitable allocation of costs between our individual programs. We will perform our indirect cost allocations more periodically during the course of the fiscal year to ensure that more appropriate times studies and applicable participant hours are being utilized to limit the potential of allocating unrelated indirect costs from the year to individual programs, including the federally funded programs.
Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S Department of Health and Human Services FALN: 93.926 Federal Award Identification Number: H49MC00119‐19‐00 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Department of Human Services Award Year: 2018‐2020 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)), the Organization may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity. Condition: The Organization lacked supporting documentation for non‐payroll expenses. Due to lack of supporting documentation, period of performance could not be verified. Of the sixty (60) nonpayroll transactions examined, ten (10) lacked supporting documentation for review, and 1 expense was for services performed in a prior period. Effect: Management possibly did not expend funds in accordance with the approved detailed lineitem budget and grant agreement and possibly expended funds in the incorrect period of performance. Cause: Expenses including approved invoices and/or supporting documentation were not properly maintained in part due to several changes in personnel within the accounting area and overall limited number of personnel for certain functions and lack of board oversight. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $7,674 and likely questioned costs of $34,117 for Healthy Start. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls be strengthened and processes implemented to ensure all expenses include supporting documentation/invoice indicating period of performance.
Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S Department of Health and Human Services FALN: 93.926 Federal Award Identification Number: H49MC00119‐19‐00 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Department of Human Services Award Year: 2018‐2020 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)), the Organization may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity. Condition: The Organization lacked supporting documentation for non‐payroll expenses. Due to lack of supporting documentation, period of performance could not be verified. Of the sixty (60) nonpayroll transactions examined, ten (10) lacked supporting documentation for review, and 1 expense was for services performed in a prior period. Effect: Management possibly did not expend funds in accordance with the approved detailed lineitem budget and grant agreement and possibly expended funds in the incorrect period of performance. Cause: Expenses including approved invoices and/or supporting documentation were not properly maintained in part due to several changes in personnel within the accounting area and overall limited number of personnel for certain functions and lack of board oversight. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $7,674 and likely questioned costs of $34,117 for Healthy Start. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls be strengthened and processes implemented to ensure all expenses include supporting documentation/invoice indicating period of performance.
Federal Agency: Department of Justice Federal Assistance Listing Number: 16.756 Program: Court Appointed Special Advocates Award Number: 15JDP-21-GK-02762-CASA Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.403 states that for costs to be allowable under federal awards, they must be adequately documented and there must be sufficient documentation. “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 non-federal entity. 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. h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to §200.308(e)(3).” Condition: National CASA/GAL allocated expenditures to programs during 2023 based on a direct allocation methodology. This allocation is done manually, and the support was inconsistently maintained. During our testing of costs (excluding salaries), we noted in accordance with §200.403(g) that: • 4 of 60 transactions was partially charged in the incorrect fiscal period, though within the period of performance. The cost of these 4 transactions were $5,246. • 2 of 60 transactions had an error in the allocation rate utilized. The cost of these 8 transactions were $33. • 4 of 60 transactions lacked documentation of review and approval of the allocation of costs made through journal entries. Cause: National CASA/GAL did not have procedures in place to document, and maintain the documentation of, the review and approval of the allocation methodology and the allocation of costs (journal entries). Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to ensure costs are allowable and reimbursable, including controls over review of allocation methodologies, National CASA/GAL could incorrectly charge expenditures to the federal programs. Known Questioned Costs: $5,279 Likely Questioned Costs: $131,271 Context: This is a condition identified per review of National CASA/GAL’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Nonpayroll costs in 2023 were $3,612,154. The sample tested consisted of 60 transactions totaling $145,247. Questioned costs consist of amounts lacking underlying support or amounts in excess of supported allocations. Identification as a Repeat Finding: 2022-004 and 2022-008. Recommendation: We recommend that policies and procedures be updated to ensure underlying support, as well as support for allocations, is appropriately maintained as required by §200.403. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the finding that documentation of support and allocation of costs should be maintained. Policies and procedures were enhanced in 2023 and through 2024 to ensure compliance.
FINDING 2023-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): CY 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context On December 15, 2020, the City entered into a Lease-Purchase agreement with the Crossroads Bank for police and fire radios. On August 28, 2023, the City made a payment of $2,431,243 to the Crossroads Bank to pay the remaining balance due for the police and fire radios from its Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) allocation. Per SLFRF program regulations, the period of performance for the SLFRF award began on March 3, 2021, when the funds were disbursed by the grantor agency. All costs must be incurred by December 31, 2024, and funds must be liquidated before December 31, 2026. Although the City's purchase is an eligible purchase under the SLFRF Final Rule, the purchase was initiated and approved by the City prior to the SLFRF period of performance beginning date of March 3, 2021. Further, the project was not prospective in nature, and the City incurred a financial obligation prior to the beginning of the period of performance. As such, the payment of $2,431,243 was determined to be questioned costs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 31 CFR 35.5(a) states: "In general. A recipient may only use funds for the purposes enumerated in § 35.6 (b) through (f) to cover costs incurred during the period beginning March 3, 2021, and ending December 31, 2024, subject to the restrictions set forth in sections 602(c)(2) and 603(c)(2) of the Social Security Act, as applicable. A recipient may only use funds for the purposes enumerated in § 35.6 (g) through (h) to cover costs incurred during the period beginning December 29, 2022, and ending December 31, 2024, subject to the restrictions set forth in sections 602(c)(2), 602(c)(5)(C), 603(c)(2), and 603(c)(6)(B) of the Social Security Act, as applicable." 31 CFR 35.3 states in part: ". . . Obligation means an order placed for property and services and entering into contracts, subawards, and similar transactions that require payment. . . ." 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: . . . (h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3)." Cause Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the City's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these polices. The system of internal controls, as designed and implemented by management of the City, was not effective to ensure SLFRF funds were used appropriately. The original date of the contract was not considered when determining the funding source of the payment. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, a payment on a debt associated with a project outside of the period of performance occurred. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs in the amount of $2,431,243 were identified as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that management of the City establish a system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure SLFRF funds are used appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Finding 2023-002 Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance related to period of performance. Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Program Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children Program Assistance Listing Number: 93.676 Award Numbers: 90ZU0339/03 and 90ZU0587/01 Project Period: February 1, 2022 - October 31, 2023 and November 1, 2023 - October 31, 2024 Criteria A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance. Any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award, must be authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition/Context for Evaluation During the audit for the year ending December 31, 2023, we noted four instances out of 40 where the Organization charged costs to the grant that were outside of the period of performance for the related award. Questioned Costs 90ZU0339/03 - $995 90ZU0587/01 - $408 Cause The Organization’s internal controls were not sufficient to ensure proper cutoff of grant expenditures and the allocation to the related award. Effect or Potential Effect Unallowable costs were charged to the grant. Repeat Finding Not Applicable. Recommendation We recommend that management develop internal controls for appropriate cutoff of grant expenditures and review to ensure the appropriate costs were charged to the budgeted period to the grant. Views of Responsible Officials of Auditee Management concurs with the finding and has provided the accompanying management corrective action.
Finding 2023-002 Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance related to period of performance. Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Program Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children Program Assistance Listing Number: 93.676 Award Numbers: 90ZU0339/03 and 90ZU0587/01 Project Period: February 1, 2022 - October 31, 2023 and November 1, 2023 - October 31, 2024 Criteria A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance. Any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award, must be authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition/Context for Evaluation During the audit for the year ending December 31, 2023, we noted four instances out of 40 where the Organization charged costs to the grant that were outside of the period of performance for the related award. Questioned Costs 90ZU0339/03 - $995 90ZU0587/01 - $408 Cause The Organization’s internal controls were not sufficient to ensure proper cutoff of grant expenditures and the allocation to the related award. Effect or Potential Effect Unallowable costs were charged to the grant. Repeat Finding Not Applicable. Recommendation We recommend that management develop internal controls for appropriate cutoff of grant expenditures and review to ensure the appropriate costs were charged to the budgeted period to the grant. Views of Responsible Officials of Auditee Management concurs with the finding and has provided the accompanying management corrective action.
2 CFR § 2400.101 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for 2 CFR § 200.303(a) which requires that the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the 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 § 2400.101 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for 2 CFR § 200.403 which states 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 non-Federal entity. (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) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3). State ex rel. McClure v. Hagerman, 155 Ohio St. 320 (1951) provides that expenditures made by a governmental unit should serve a public purpose. Typically, the determination of what constitutes a “proper public purpose” rests with the judgment of the governmental entity, unless such determination is arbitrary or unreasonable. Even if a purchase is reasonable, Ohio Attorney General Opinion 82-006 indicates that it must be memorialized by a duly enacted ordinance or resolution and may have a prospective effect only. Auditor of State Bulletin 2003-005 Expenditure of Public Funds/Proper “Public Purpose” states, in part, the Auditor of State’s Office will only question expenditures where the legislative determination of a public purpose is manifestly arbitrary and incorrect. The Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission, administrator of the Community Housing Impact and Preservation Program - CHIP (#B-C-21-1AB-1) for Allen County, incurred a charge of $4,386 for Admin January 2023 charges on invoice #106558 dated February 7, 2023 from the Great Lakes Community Action Partnership. On July 6, 2023, check number 7330652 was issued by Allen County which included payment of $4,386 on invoice number 106558. On August 3, 2023, check number 7332670 was issued by Allen County which included payment of $4,386 on invoice number 106558 which was approved by Tara Bales, Executive Director of the Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission. As a result, possibly due to the failure of an existing control or procedure, invoice number 106558 was paid twice resulting an overpayment of $4,386. On October 2, 2024, the Great Lakes Community Action Partnership refunded the overpayment with check number 20765 in the amount of $4,386. This refund was recorded in the Community Development Grant Fund (2414). The Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission should implement an additional control(s) and/or procedure(s) to prevent the duplicate payment of invoices.
2023-014 Period of Performance Assistance Listing No.: 14.267 Continuum of Care Program Condition: The Organization was unable to demonstrate consistent controls over the period of performance requirement. Criteria: The requirements for the period of performance are contained in 2 CFR section 200.1 Definitions for “budget period,” “financial obligations,” “period of performance,” 2 CFR section 200.308 (revision of budget and program plans), 2 CFR section 200.309 (modifications to period of performance), 2 CFR section 200.344 (closeout), program legislation, federal awarding agency regulations; and the terms and conditions of the award. Questioned Costs There are no questioned costs. Cause: The Organization did not have good controls on ensuring the period of performance requirement was met due to staff turn over. Effect: The Organization could have grant expenditures outside the grant period. Perspective: Thirty-one of forty items selected for testing did not have documentation of the control over compliance with the period of performance requirement. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. See finding 2022-017. Recommendation: In order to prevent future occurences of this deficiency, we recommend that management expand controls to ensure that they are able to demonstrate that all expenses meet their procurement policy. Auditee's Response: The Organization agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
2023-014 Period of Performance Assistance Listing No.: 14.267 Continuum of Care Program Condition: The Organization was unable to demonstrate consistent controls over the period of performance requirement. Criteria: The requirements for the period of performance are contained in 2 CFR section 200.1 Definitions for “budget period,” “financial obligations,” “period of performance,” 2 CFR section 200.308 (revision of budget and program plans), 2 CFR section 200.309 (modifications to period of performance), 2 CFR section 200.344 (closeout), program legislation, federal awarding agency regulations; and the terms and conditions of the award. Questioned Costs There are no questioned costs. Cause: The Organization did not have good controls on ensuring the period of performance requirement was met due to staff turn over. Effect: The Organization could have grant expenditures outside the grant period. Perspective: Thirty-one of forty items selected for testing did not have documentation of the control over compliance with the period of performance requirement. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. See finding 2022-017. Recommendation: In order to prevent future occurences of this deficiency, we recommend that management expand controls to ensure that they are able to demonstrate that all expenses meet their procurement policy. Auditee's Response: The Organization agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
2023-014 Period of Performance Assistance Listing No.: 14.267 Continuum of Care Program Condition: The Organization was unable to demonstrate consistent controls over the period of performance requirement. Criteria: The requirements for the period of performance are contained in 2 CFR section 200.1 Definitions for “budget period,” “financial obligations,” “period of performance,” 2 CFR section 200.308 (revision of budget and program plans), 2 CFR section 200.309 (modifications to period of performance), 2 CFR section 200.344 (closeout), program legislation, federal awarding agency regulations; and the terms and conditions of the award. Questioned Costs There are no questioned costs. Cause: The Organization did not have good controls on ensuring the period of performance requirement was met due to staff turn over. Effect: The Organization could have grant expenditures outside the grant period. Perspective: Thirty-one of forty items selected for testing did not have documentation of the control over compliance with the period of performance requirement. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. See finding 2022-017. Recommendation: In order to prevent future occurences of this deficiency, we recommend that management expand controls to ensure that they are able to demonstrate that all expenses meet their procurement policy. Auditee's Response: The Organization agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
2023-001- Internal Control over Compliance and Compliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs and Cost Principles Information on the Major Federal Program U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Center for Disease Control and Prevention Assistance Listing Number: 93.988 Assistance Listing Name: Cooperative Agreements for State-Based Diabetes Control Programs and Evaluation of Surveillance Systems Grant Award Number(s): 1 NU58DP007372-01-00 Award Period: June 30, 2023 to June 29, 2028 Criteria or Specific Requirement – The Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In addition, per 2 CFR Section 200.403, “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 non-Federal entity. 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. g) Be adequately documented. h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3).” Furthermore, according to the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200), specifically §200.430(i), “charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated”. The records must also be supported by the approval of an individual with firsthand knowledge of the work performed. Condition - During our audit, within the tested sample of seven timesheets out of a population of twenty-six, three timesheets for employees charged to the federal program did not have proper approval in the system. The lack of signed approval indicates that the timesheets were not reviewed and approved by an individual with knowledge of the work performed, as required under the Uniform Guidance. ADA has documented expenditure policies and procedures. However, the review and approval process did not operate as designed. Cause – ADA did not adhere to its internal policies and procedures to ensure timesheets were properly reviewed and approved. Effect or Potential Effect – Without adequate internal controls in place to ensure costs are properly verified and approved, ADA could unallowably and inaccurately charge salary and wages expenditures to the federal program. Questioned Costs – None Context - This is a condition based on testing of ADA’s compliance. Based on tested samples, we noted four out of seven sampled timesheets were not properly approved in the system. The samples were selected using a non-statistical method. Repeat Finding - This finding is not a repeat finding. Recommendation - BDO recommends that ADA adhere to its documented policies and procedures to ensure all timesheets are reviewed and approved by authorized personnel with knowledge of the work performed. ADA should also provide training to all employees involved in the timesheet preparation and approval process to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The findings were primarily related to a change that ADA made to the Human Resources Information System. Going forward, ADA will adhere to our documented policies and procedures to ensure all timesheets are reviewed and approved by authorized personnel with knowledge of the work performed. Additionally, we will provide training to all employees involved in the timesheet preparation and approval process to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements.
Federal agency: All agencies in the SEFA Assistance Listing Number: See SEFA Award Period: 01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The compliance requirements for Federal Assistance Number 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Programs includes a Period of Performance element. The compliance requirement related to period of performance is that a non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period (also identified as the grant period) of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition: Allocations of indirect costs are performed once during the year-end closing process based on time study data for the entire year, and when program attendance data for programs that are ran for various increments throughout the year is available. The TANF grant period that was tested as a major program was December 2022 – August 2023. As the grant period ended in September, no costs incurred after that date should be considered major program expenditures. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. The questioned costs could be considered those indirect costs considered TANF expenditures that were incurred after August 2023. In addition, because the program attendance is used to allocate costs between programs, program attendance after August 2023 may be inappropriate to be considered when allocating those indirect costs to specific programs. Context: Indirect cost allocations are performed once during the year-end closing process by the auditee. Time studies are performed to allocate indirect costs between supporting and program functions. The indirect costs allocated to the program functions are then allocated between individual programs, including federally funded programs, based on the number of participant hours in each program. The time study and program hours used to allocate indirect costs are based on the entire year and not just the major program grant period. In addition, indirect costs that are allocated are incurred during the entire year and not just the major program grant period. Cause: Time and program participation data used to allocate costs are not consistent with the grant period. In addition, the costs that are allocated are not consistent with the grant period. Effect: The single annual allocation of costs means that costs incurred outside the major program grant/budget period are being allocated to the major program. In addition, allocation base data from outside the grant/budget period is being used as a base for the indirect cost allocation. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the auditee perform indirect cost allocations so that the costs and allocation base align with the grant/budget period. Performing the allocation of indirect costs annually may not create an equitable allocation at the individual program level. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree that the allocation being performed once annually does not create the most equitable allocation of costs between our individual programs. We will perform our indirect cost allocations more periodically during the course of the fiscal year to ensure that more appropriate times studies and applicable participant hours are being utilized to limit the potential of allocating unrelated indirect costs from the year to individual programs, including the federally funded programs.
Federal agency: All agencies in the SEFA Assistance Listing Number: See SEFA Award Period: 01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The compliance requirements for Federal Assistance Number 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Programs includes a Period of Performance element. The compliance requirement related to period of performance is that a non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period (also identified as the grant period) of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition: Allocations of indirect costs are performed once during the year-end closing process based on time study data for the entire year, and when program attendance data for programs that are ran for various increments throughout the year is available. The TANF grant period that was tested as a major program was December 2022 – August 2023. As the grant period ended in September, no costs incurred after that date should be considered major program expenditures. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. The questioned costs could be considered those indirect costs considered TANF expenditures that were incurred after August 2023. In addition, because the program attendance is used to allocate costs between programs, program attendance after August 2023 may be inappropriate to be considered when allocating those indirect costs to specific programs. Context: Indirect cost allocations are performed once during the year-end closing process by the auditee. Time studies are performed to allocate indirect costs between supporting and program functions. The indirect costs allocated to the program functions are then allocated between individual programs, including federally funded programs, based on the number of participant hours in each program. The time study and program hours used to allocate indirect costs are based on the entire year and not just the major program grant period. In addition, indirect costs that are allocated are incurred during the entire year and not just the major program grant period. Cause: Time and program participation data used to allocate costs are not consistent with the grant period. In addition, the costs that are allocated are not consistent with the grant period. Effect: The single annual allocation of costs means that costs incurred outside the major program grant/budget period are being allocated to the major program. In addition, allocation base data from outside the grant/budget period is being used as a base for the indirect cost allocation. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the auditee perform indirect cost allocations so that the costs and allocation base align with the grant/budget period. Performing the allocation of indirect costs annually may not create an equitable allocation at the individual program level. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree that the allocation being performed once annually does not create the most equitable allocation of costs between our individual programs. We will perform our indirect cost allocations more periodically during the course of the fiscal year to ensure that more appropriate times studies and applicable participant hours are being utilized to limit the potential of allocating unrelated indirect costs from the year to individual programs, including the federally funded programs.
Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S Department of Health and Human Services FALN: 93.926 Federal Award Identification Number: H49MC00119‐19‐00 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Department of Human Services Award Year: 2018‐2020 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)), the Organization may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity. Condition: The Organization lacked supporting documentation for non‐payroll expenses. Due to lack of supporting documentation, period of performance could not be verified. Of the sixty (60) nonpayroll transactions examined, ten (10) lacked supporting documentation for review, and 1 expense was for services performed in a prior period. Effect: Management possibly did not expend funds in accordance with the approved detailed lineitem budget and grant agreement and possibly expended funds in the incorrect period of performance. Cause: Expenses including approved invoices and/or supporting documentation were not properly maintained in part due to several changes in personnel within the accounting area and overall limited number of personnel for certain functions and lack of board oversight. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $7,674 and likely questioned costs of $34,117 for Healthy Start. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls be strengthened and processes implemented to ensure all expenses include supporting documentation/invoice indicating period of performance.
Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S Department of Health and Human Services FALN: 93.926 Federal Award Identification Number: H49MC00119‐19‐00 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Department of Human Services Award Year: 2018‐2020 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)), the Organization may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity. Condition: The Organization lacked supporting documentation for non‐payroll expenses. Due to lack of supporting documentation, period of performance could not be verified. Of the sixty (60) nonpayroll transactions examined, ten (10) lacked supporting documentation for review, and 1 expense was for services performed in a prior period. Effect: Management possibly did not expend funds in accordance with the approved detailed lineitem budget and grant agreement and possibly expended funds in the incorrect period of performance. Cause: Expenses including approved invoices and/or supporting documentation were not properly maintained in part due to several changes in personnel within the accounting area and overall limited number of personnel for certain functions and lack of board oversight. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $7,674 and likely questioned costs of $34,117 for Healthy Start. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls be strengthened and processes implemented to ensure all expenses include supporting documentation/invoice indicating period of performance.
Federal Agency: Department of Justice Federal Assistance Listing Number: 16.756 Program: Court Appointed Special Advocates Award Number: 15JDP-21-GK-02762-CASA Criteria: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR §200.403 states that for costs to be allowable under federal awards, they must be adequately documented and there must be sufficient documentation. “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 non-federal entity. 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. h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to §200.308(e)(3).” Condition: National CASA/GAL allocated expenditures to programs during 2023 based on a direct allocation methodology. This allocation is done manually, and the support was inconsistently maintained. During our testing of costs (excluding salaries), we noted in accordance with §200.403(g) that: • 4 of 60 transactions was partially charged in the incorrect fiscal period, though within the period of performance. The cost of these 4 transactions were $5,246. • 2 of 60 transactions had an error in the allocation rate utilized. The cost of these 8 transactions were $33. • 4 of 60 transactions lacked documentation of review and approval of the allocation of costs made through journal entries. Cause: National CASA/GAL did not have procedures in place to document, and maintain the documentation of, the review and approval of the allocation methodology and the allocation of costs (journal entries). Effect or Potential Effect: Without adequate controls in place to ensure costs are allowable and reimbursable, including controls over review of allocation methodologies, National CASA/GAL could incorrectly charge expenditures to the federal programs. Known Questioned Costs: $5,279 Likely Questioned Costs: $131,271 Context: This is a condition identified per review of National CASA/GAL’s compliance with specified requirements not using a statistically valid sample. Nonpayroll costs in 2023 were $3,612,154. The sample tested consisted of 60 transactions totaling $145,247. Questioned costs consist of amounts lacking underlying support or amounts in excess of supported allocations. Identification as a Repeat Finding: 2022-004 and 2022-008. Recommendation: We recommend that policies and procedures be updated to ensure underlying support, as well as support for allocations, is appropriately maintained as required by §200.403. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the finding that documentation of support and allocation of costs should be maintained. Policies and procedures were enhanced in 2023 and through 2024 to ensure compliance.
FINDING 2023-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): CY 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context On December 15, 2020, the City entered into a Lease-Purchase agreement with the Crossroads Bank for police and fire radios. On August 28, 2023, the City made a payment of $2,431,243 to the Crossroads Bank to pay the remaining balance due for the police and fire radios from its Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) allocation. Per SLFRF program regulations, the period of performance for the SLFRF award began on March 3, 2021, when the funds were disbursed by the grantor agency. All costs must be incurred by December 31, 2024, and funds must be liquidated before December 31, 2026. Although the City's purchase is an eligible purchase under the SLFRF Final Rule, the purchase was initiated and approved by the City prior to the SLFRF period of performance beginning date of March 3, 2021. Further, the project was not prospective in nature, and the City incurred a financial obligation prior to the beginning of the period of performance. As such, the payment of $2,431,243 was determined to be questioned costs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 31 CFR 35.5(a) states: "In general. A recipient may only use funds for the purposes enumerated in § 35.6 (b) through (f) to cover costs incurred during the period beginning March 3, 2021, and ending December 31, 2024, subject to the restrictions set forth in sections 602(c)(2) and 603(c)(2) of the Social Security Act, as applicable. A recipient may only use funds for the purposes enumerated in § 35.6 (g) through (h) to cover costs incurred during the period beginning December 29, 2022, and ending December 31, 2024, subject to the restrictions set forth in sections 602(c)(2), 602(c)(5)(C), 603(c)(2), and 603(c)(6)(B) of the Social Security Act, as applicable." 31 CFR 35.3 states in part: ". . . Obligation means an order placed for property and services and entering into contracts, subawards, and similar transactions that require payment. . . ." 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: . . . (h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3)." Cause Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the City's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these polices. The system of internal controls, as designed and implemented by management of the City, was not effective to ensure SLFRF funds were used appropriately. The original date of the contract was not considered when determining the funding source of the payment. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, a payment on a debt associated with a project outside of the period of performance occurred. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs in the amount of $2,431,243 were identified as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that management of the City establish a system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure SLFRF funds are used appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Finding 2023-002 Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance related to period of performance. Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Program Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children Program Assistance Listing Number: 93.676 Award Numbers: 90ZU0339/03 and 90ZU0587/01 Project Period: February 1, 2022 - October 31, 2023 and November 1, 2023 - October 31, 2024 Criteria A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance. Any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award, must be authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition/Context for Evaluation During the audit for the year ending December 31, 2023, we noted four instances out of 40 where the Organization charged costs to the grant that were outside of the period of performance for the related award. Questioned Costs 90ZU0339/03 - $995 90ZU0587/01 - $408 Cause The Organization’s internal controls were not sufficient to ensure proper cutoff of grant expenditures and the allocation to the related award. Effect or Potential Effect Unallowable costs were charged to the grant. Repeat Finding Not Applicable. Recommendation We recommend that management develop internal controls for appropriate cutoff of grant expenditures and review to ensure the appropriate costs were charged to the budgeted period to the grant. Views of Responsible Officials of Auditee Management concurs with the finding and has provided the accompanying management corrective action.
Finding 2023-002 Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance related to period of performance. Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Program Title: Unaccompanied Alien Children Program Assistance Listing Number: 93.676 Award Numbers: 90ZU0339/03 and 90ZU0587/01 Project Period: February 1, 2022 - October 31, 2023 and November 1, 2023 - October 31, 2024 Criteria A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance. Any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award, must be authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition/Context for Evaluation During the audit for the year ending December 31, 2023, we noted four instances out of 40 where the Organization charged costs to the grant that were outside of the period of performance for the related award. Questioned Costs 90ZU0339/03 - $995 90ZU0587/01 - $408 Cause The Organization’s internal controls were not sufficient to ensure proper cutoff of grant expenditures and the allocation to the related award. Effect or Potential Effect Unallowable costs were charged to the grant. Repeat Finding Not Applicable. Recommendation We recommend that management develop internal controls for appropriate cutoff of grant expenditures and review to ensure the appropriate costs were charged to the budgeted period to the grant. Views of Responsible Officials of Auditee Management concurs with the finding and has provided the accompanying management corrective action.
2 CFR § 2400.101 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for 2 CFR § 200.303(a) which requires that the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the 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 § 2400.101 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for 2 CFR § 200.403 which states 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 non-Federal entity. (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) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3). State ex rel. McClure v. Hagerman, 155 Ohio St. 320 (1951) provides that expenditures made by a governmental unit should serve a public purpose. Typically, the determination of what constitutes a “proper public purpose” rests with the judgment of the governmental entity, unless such determination is arbitrary or unreasonable. Even if a purchase is reasonable, Ohio Attorney General Opinion 82-006 indicates that it must be memorialized by a duly enacted ordinance or resolution and may have a prospective effect only. Auditor of State Bulletin 2003-005 Expenditure of Public Funds/Proper “Public Purpose” states, in part, the Auditor of State’s Office will only question expenditures where the legislative determination of a public purpose is manifestly arbitrary and incorrect. The Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission, administrator of the Community Housing Impact and Preservation Program - CHIP (#B-C-21-1AB-1) for Allen County, incurred a charge of $4,386 for Admin January 2023 charges on invoice #106558 dated February 7, 2023 from the Great Lakes Community Action Partnership. On July 6, 2023, check number 7330652 was issued by Allen County which included payment of $4,386 on invoice number 106558. On August 3, 2023, check number 7332670 was issued by Allen County which included payment of $4,386 on invoice number 106558 which was approved by Tara Bales, Executive Director of the Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission. As a result, possibly due to the failure of an existing control or procedure, invoice number 106558 was paid twice resulting an overpayment of $4,386. On October 2, 2024, the Great Lakes Community Action Partnership refunded the overpayment with check number 20765 in the amount of $4,386. This refund was recorded in the Community Development Grant Fund (2414). The Lima-Allen County Regional Planning Commission should implement an additional control(s) and/or procedure(s) to prevent the duplicate payment of invoices.
2023-014 Period of Performance Assistance Listing No.: 14.267 Continuum of Care Program Condition: The Organization was unable to demonstrate consistent controls over the period of performance requirement. Criteria: The requirements for the period of performance are contained in 2 CFR section 200.1 Definitions for “budget period,” “financial obligations,” “period of performance,” 2 CFR section 200.308 (revision of budget and program plans), 2 CFR section 200.309 (modifications to period of performance), 2 CFR section 200.344 (closeout), program legislation, federal awarding agency regulations; and the terms and conditions of the award. Questioned Costs There are no questioned costs. Cause: The Organization did not have good controls on ensuring the period of performance requirement was met due to staff turn over. Effect: The Organization could have grant expenditures outside the grant period. Perspective: Thirty-one of forty items selected for testing did not have documentation of the control over compliance with the period of performance requirement. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. See finding 2022-017. Recommendation: In order to prevent future occurences of this deficiency, we recommend that management expand controls to ensure that they are able to demonstrate that all expenses meet their procurement policy. Auditee's Response: The Organization agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
2023-014 Period of Performance Assistance Listing No.: 14.267 Continuum of Care Program Condition: The Organization was unable to demonstrate consistent controls over the period of performance requirement. Criteria: The requirements for the period of performance are contained in 2 CFR section 200.1 Definitions for “budget period,” “financial obligations,” “period of performance,” 2 CFR section 200.308 (revision of budget and program plans), 2 CFR section 200.309 (modifications to period of performance), 2 CFR section 200.344 (closeout), program legislation, federal awarding agency regulations; and the terms and conditions of the award. Questioned Costs There are no questioned costs. Cause: The Organization did not have good controls on ensuring the period of performance requirement was met due to staff turn over. Effect: The Organization could have grant expenditures outside the grant period. Perspective: Thirty-one of forty items selected for testing did not have documentation of the control over compliance with the period of performance requirement. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. See finding 2022-017. Recommendation: In order to prevent future occurences of this deficiency, we recommend that management expand controls to ensure that they are able to demonstrate that all expenses meet their procurement policy. Auditee's Response: The Organization agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.