Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse Assistance Listing Number: 93.959 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 4512-9069 – 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Commonwealth of Massachusetts – Department of Public Health Pass-Through Number(s): SUBABUSETSSFY2300000702 Award Period: July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Period of Performance Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR sections 200.308, 200.309 and 200.403(h) states 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. Condition: Internal controls were not in place to ensure that grant expenses charged to the grant were during the approved federal award's period of performance. Questioned costs: None reportable. Context: For 7 of the 8 transactions tested, we identified the Commission charged expenditures to the grant that were incurred outside of the period of performance, prior to the start date of the grant. Cause: Procedures were not in place to ensure expenditures charged to the grant were incurred during the period of performance. Effect: The expenditures incurred before the period of performance are subject to disallowance and are considered questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend procedures be implemented to ensure that all costs charged to the grant are incurred within the grant period of performance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse Assistance Listing Number: 93.959 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 4512-9069 – 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Commonwealth of Massachusetts – Department of Public Health Pass-Through Number(s): SUBABUSETSSFY2300000702 Award Period: July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Period of Performance Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR sections 200.308, 200.309 and 200.403(h) states 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. Condition: Internal controls were not in place to ensure that grant expenses charged to the grant were during the approved federal award's period of performance. Questioned costs: None reportable. Context: For 7 of the 8 transactions tested, we identified the Commission charged expenditures to the grant that were incurred outside of the period of performance, prior to the start date of the grant. Cause: Procedures were not in place to ensure expenditures charged to the grant were incurred during the period of performance. Effect: The expenditures incurred before the period of performance are subject to disallowance and are considered questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend procedures be implemented to ensure that all costs charged to the grant are incurred within the grant period of performance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse Assistance Listing Number: 93.959 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 4512-9069 – 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Commonwealth of Massachusetts – Department of Public Health Pass-Through Number(s): SUBABUSETSSFY2300000702 Award Period: July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Period of Performance Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR sections 200.308, 200.309 and 200.403(h) states 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. Condition: Internal controls were not in place to ensure that grant expenses charged to the grant were during the approved federal award's period of performance. Questioned costs: None reportable. Context: For 7 of the 8 transactions tested, we identified the Commission charged expenditures to the grant that were incurred outside of the period of performance, prior to the start date of the grant. Cause: Procedures were not in place to ensure expenditures charged to the grant were incurred during the period of performance. Effect: The expenditures incurred before the period of performance are subject to disallowance and are considered questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend procedures be implemented to ensure that all costs charged to the grant are incurred within the grant period of performance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse Assistance Listing Number: 93.959 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 4512-9069 – 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Commonwealth of Massachusetts – Department of Public Health Pass-Through Number(s): SUBABUSETSSFY2300000702 Award Period: July 1, 2022 - June 30, 2024 Type of Finding: Period of Performance Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR sections 200.308, 200.309 and 200.403(h) states 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. Condition: Internal controls were not in place to ensure that grant expenses charged to the grant were during the approved federal award's period of performance. Questioned costs: None reportable. Context: For 7 of the 8 transactions tested, we identified the Commission charged expenditures to the grant that were incurred outside of the period of performance, prior to the start date of the grant. Cause: Procedures were not in place to ensure expenditures charged to the grant were incurred during the period of performance. Effect: The expenditures incurred before the period of performance are subject to disallowance and are considered questioned costs. Recommendation: We recommend procedures be implemented to ensure that all costs charged to the grant are incurred within the grant period of performance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-029 – Noncompliance and Weakness in Controls with Special Tests and Provisions Requirements Award Years: Various Award Numbers: Various Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Various Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-034) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the fifth consecutive year, LSUHSC-S did not have adequate controls in place to ensure compliance with Special Tests and Provisions requirements. We reviewed a non-statistical sample of 12 federal R&D Cluster awards from a population of 58 awards, plus two additional awards based on materiality, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. We reviewed the biannual Time and Effort Certification forms, as applicable, for each award and the 24 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. We noted two of 24 (8%) key personnel had documentation of actual effort on the Time and Effort Certification forms that did not agree to the effort reported to the federal grantor, and there was no evidence of prior approval from the federal grantor for a change in key personnel. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.308(c) states that for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for one or more of the following program or budget-related reasons: (i) change in the scope or the objective of the project or program (even if there is no associated budget revision requiring prior written approval); (ii) change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award; (iii) the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25% reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Cause: LSUHSC-S’s controls are not effectively designed to ensure prior approval is obtained for changes in effort by key personnel as required by federal regulations, specifically relating to disengagement from a project for more than three months or a 25% reduction in effort. This is partially due to LSUHSC-S revising their Time and Effort Certification policy in September 2022, which changed the frequency of the certification from quarterly to semiannually. Effect: Failure to implement controls over key personnel requirements could result in noncompliance with Special Tests and Provisions requirements. Recommendation: Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and verify that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with Special Tests and Provisions requirements. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-40).
2023-029 – Noncompliance and Weakness in Controls with Special Tests and Provisions Requirements Award Years: Various Award Numbers: Various Compliance Requirement: Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Various Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-034) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the fifth consecutive year, LSUHSC-S did not have adequate controls in place to ensure compliance with Special Tests and Provisions requirements. We reviewed a non-statistical sample of 12 federal R&D Cluster awards from a population of 58 awards, plus two additional awards based on materiality, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. We reviewed the biannual Time and Effort Certification forms, as applicable, for each award and the 24 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. We noted two of 24 (8%) key personnel had documentation of actual effort on the Time and Effort Certification forms that did not agree to the effort reported to the federal grantor, and there was no evidence of prior approval from the federal grantor for a change in key personnel. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.308(c) states that for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for one or more of the following program or budget-related reasons: (i) change in the scope or the objective of the project or program (even if there is no associated budget revision requiring prior written approval); (ii) change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award; (iii) the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25% reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Cause: LSUHSC-S’s controls are not effectively designed to ensure prior approval is obtained for changes in effort by key personnel as required by federal regulations, specifically relating to disengagement from a project for more than three months or a 25% reduction in effort. This is partially due to LSUHSC-S revising their Time and Effort Certification policy in September 2022, which changed the frequency of the certification from quarterly to semiannually. Effect: Failure to implement controls over key personnel requirements could result in noncompliance with Special Tests and Provisions requirements. Recommendation: Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and verify that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with Special Tests and Provisions requirements. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-40).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
2023-007 - Control Weakness and Noncompliance with Personnel Expenses Charged to Federal Awards Award Years: 2018, 2020, 2021, 2022 Award Numbers: 1815976, 2033380, 2117785, 2120015, 2000629518, 22-PA-11080600-187, 5U19AI142636-05, 75N93020D00008/75N93020F00004, DE-AC07-05ID14517, DE-SC0019956, EMW-2021-SS-00019-S01, NA20OAR4310253C Compliance Requirements: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Special Tests and Provisions Pass-Through Entities: Battelle Energy Alliance, Norwich Technologies Inc., University Corporation for Atmospheric Research Repeat Finding: Yes (Prior Year Finding No. 2022-006) See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table Condition: For the third consecutive year, the University of Louisiana at Lafayette (UL Lafayette) did not have adequate controls in place to ensure personnel expenses charged to federal R&D awards accurately reflected work performed. From a population of 28,301 payroll and non-payroll expenses charged to R&D grants for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, a non-statistical sample of 25 transactions were tested for compliance with allowable costs and cost principles requirements. For five (20%) of the transactions, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation to show that personnel related expenses totaling $612 were supported by time and effort certifications to ensure the accuracy of budget estimates charged to federal awards as required by federal regulations. We reviewed 15 grant awards corresponding to the expense transactions selected and evaluated documentation to support the level of effort for each award and the 20 key personnel assigned to the selected awards. For 13 (65%) of the key personnel, UL Lafayette was unable to provide documentation that the key personnel complied with the effort required by the grant award. Criteria: 2 CFR 200.430(i) specifies the documentation standards for personnel expenses. In order to be allowable, charges to federal awards for personnel expenses must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed and must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to federal awards, but can be used for interim accounting purposes provided that internal controls include an after-the fact review to confirm the accuracy of final amounts charged to federal awards. Prior approval requirements related to key personnel effort are contained in 2 CFR 200.308(c) and within grant terms and conditions. A reduction of 25% or greater in time devoted to the project from key personnel requires prior approval as does disengagement of key personnel from the project for three or more months. Cause: UL Lafayette noted in their prior-year corrective action plan and in a draft effort reporting policy that certifications for employees charging time to federal awards would be required quarterly. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2023, certifications were only requested in July 2023, after the fiscal year-end, and were required to be returned within 30 days. Annual certifications are not sufficient to timely detect changes in key personnel effort and ensure prior approvals are obtained when applicable. Effect: Inadequate controls related to federal documentation standards for personnel expenses could result in noncompliance with federal allowable costs and cost principles, as well as noncompliance with special tests and provisions related to key personnel effort. Recommendation: Management should strengthen internal controls to ensure that personnel expenses charged to the federal awards are supported by a system of internal control, which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Additionally, management should revise the Time and Effort Certification policy or implement alternative controls designed to ensure compliance with special tests and provisions requirements. Management should monitor changes in effort for key personnel and ensure that prior written approval is obtained from the federal grantor for changes that exceed the thresholds set in federal regulations. Management’s Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management concurred with the finding and outlined a plan of corrective action (B-59).
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Opioid Response Grants Assistance Listing Number: 93.788 Federal Award Identification Number: H79TI083278 Pass-Through Entity: Illinois Department of Human Services Pass-Through Number: 43CBC03525 Award Periods: July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 Criteria: 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 incurred outside of the period of performance were charged to the grant. Questioned Costs: $26,230 Context: Six of eighteen transactions selected for testing. Cause: Unknown. Effect: The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the grant. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that only costs incurred during the period of performance be charged to the grant. For payroll in which periods extend over multiple budget periods, we recommend prorating the amount charged to the grant by days worked within the grant period. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
2023-003 – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Internal Control and Compliance over Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Significant Deficiency) Identification of the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Assistance Listing Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Pass-Through Entity: N/A Federal Award Number and Award Year: N/A Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Pursuant to Code of Federal Regulation §200.403 Requirements for pass-through entities. 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). Condition: During our audit, we noted that three (3) out of forty (40) samples summed up to $39,055.50 had no proper source documents to support the transactions charged to the grant brought by lost official receipts, hence, identified as not adequately documented. Alternatively, the City created a memo to document the loss of receipts signed by the department head. Cause: The City was not able to safeguard the documents substantiating the transactions being charged to the grant. Effect or Potential Effect: The City did not comply with the CFR’s requirements for allowable costs. There is an increased risk that the charges do not represent the actual costs incurred. Questioned Costs: Known questionable cost $39,056 and the estimated questionable cost is projected to be $69,269. Context: See condition above for context of the finding. Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: Not applicable. Recommendation: We recommended the City to strengthen safeguarding of source documents to properly substantiate the charges made to the grant. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs the finding.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Assistance Number – Research and Development Cluster, Multiple Federal Grantors, Multiple Award Periods Criteria or Specific Requirement – Special Test - Key Personnel In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.308(c)(2) and (3), for non-construction federal awards, recipients must request prior approvals from federal awarding agencies for the change in a key person specified in the application or the federal award or the disengagement from the project for more than three months, or a 25 percent reduction in time devoted to the project, by the approved project director or principal investigator. Condition – During testing, we did not identify any requests for changes or disengagement of key personnel. Questioned Costs – None noted. Context – During testing of key personnel, three individuals were included in the project budget for grant 2020-68012-31934 (ALN # 10.310) and only two were noted to have participated in the project during the year. The Institute provided support for the disengagement of one key personnel that was reported to the grantor; however, the reporting occurred after the fact rather than receiving prior approval as required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect – The disengagement of a named key person may have occurred without prior approval. Cause – The Institute's misunderstanding of the requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – Policies and procedures should be modified to ensure that management understands the key personnel policies and procedures outlined by the Uniform Guidance and that the Institute is in compliance. Views of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the stated finding and has implemented a corrective action plan.
Federal Agency: Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027 Award Year: 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Compliance 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 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 invoices for costs that occurred prior to the start of the School District’s fiscal year 2023 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. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs reported are $49,883. Recommendation The School District should implement controls to ensure that no costs are incurred for 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.
Federal Agency: Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027 Award Year: 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Compliance 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 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 invoices for costs that occurred prior to the start of the School District’s fiscal year 2023 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. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs reported are $49,883. Recommendation The School District should implement controls to ensure that no costs are incurred for 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.
Federal Agency: Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027 Award Year: 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Compliance 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 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 invoices for costs that occurred prior to the start of the School District’s fiscal year 2023 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. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs reported are $49,883. Recommendation The School District should implement controls to ensure that no costs are incurred for 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.
Federal Agency: Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027 Award Year: 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Compliance 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 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 invoices for costs that occurred prior to the start of the School District’s fiscal year 2023 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. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs reported are $49,883. Recommendation The School District should implement controls to ensure that no costs are incurred for 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.
Federal Agency: Department of Education Cluster/Program: Special Education Cluster AL Number(s): 84.027 Award Year: 2023 Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding Compliance 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 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 invoices for costs that occurred prior to the start of the School District’s fiscal year 2023 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. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs reported are $49,883. Recommendation The School District should implement controls to ensure that no costs are incurred for 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.
Reference Number: 2023-002 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Department: Portsmouth Public Schools (PPS) Federal Program: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: None, 2021, 2022, 2023 Pass-Through Entity: Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education Pass-Through Award Number and Period: H027A200107 (7/1/20-9/30/22) H027A210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) H027X210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) H027A220107 (4/17/23-9/30/23) H173A200107 (7/1/20-9/30/22) H173A210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) H173X210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Time and Effort Certifications) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Maternal Non-Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 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. See also § 200.306(b). (f) 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). Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should comply with the guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control-Integrated Framework," issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: PPS was unable to provide documentation supporting time and effort for employee’s salary charged to the grant. We were unable to support the allowable salary reported on the grant due to lack of time and effort certification. Context For 13 out of 40 employee’s salary selected for testing were not supported by time and effort certification. Questioned costs: $30,763, represents the employee’s salary charged to the federal program and not supported by time and effort certification. Cause: PPS did not maintain documentation supporting time and effort for employee pay charged to the grant. Effect: Failure to adhere to allowable cost requirements may result in PPS charging expenditures to the program that are not allowable. Recommendation: We recommend that PPS enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it retains documentation supporting time and effort on federal grants and that this documentation is available for audit purposes. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2023-002 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Department: Portsmouth Public Schools (PPS) Federal Program: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: None, 2021, 2022, 2023 Pass-Through Entity: Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education Pass-Through Award Number and Period: H027A200107 (7/1/20-9/30/22) H027A210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) H027X210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) H027A220107 (4/17/23-9/30/23) H173A200107 (7/1/20-9/30/22) H173A210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) H173X210107 (7/1/21-9/30/23) Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles (Time and Effort Certifications) Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Maternal Non-Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance – Per 2 CFR section 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. See also § 200.306(b). (f) 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). Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should comply with the guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control-Integrated Framework," issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: PPS was unable to provide documentation supporting time and effort for employee’s salary charged to the grant. We were unable to support the allowable salary reported on the grant due to lack of time and effort certification. Context For 13 out of 40 employee’s salary selected for testing were not supported by time and effort certification. Questioned costs: $30,763, represents the employee’s salary charged to the federal program and not supported by time and effort certification. Cause: PPS did not maintain documentation supporting time and effort for employee pay charged to the grant. Effect: Failure to adhere to allowable cost requirements may result in PPS charging expenditures to the program that are not allowable. Recommendation: We recommend that PPS enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it retains documentation supporting time and effort on federal grants and that this documentation is available for audit purposes. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2023-003 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Department: Portsmouth Public Schools (PPS) Federal Program: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: None, 2021 Pass-Through Entity: Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education Pass-Through Award Number and Period: H027A200107 (7/1/20-9/30/22) 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)). Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should comply with the guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control-Integrated Framework," issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition PPS charged program costs to the grant after the period of performance period ended. We noted that an invoice for $176.05, for goods/services received in October 2022, wase charged to the federal grant ending September 2022. PPS did not obtain prior approval or an extension from the awarding agency before charging the grant. Context: One out of twenty-one samples selected for testing was charged to the grant after period of performance. Questioned costs: $176.05, represents the costs charged to the program after the period of performance. Cause: PPS did not consistently monitor the period of performance for a federal award to ensure that costs were only charged during the allowed period. Effect: PPS expensing of funds out of the period of performance may result in noncompliance and questioned costs from the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend that PPS enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that expenditures are not charged to federal awards during the period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2023-003 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Department: Portsmouth Public Schools (PPS) Federal Program: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing: 84.027, 84.173 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: None, 2021 Pass-Through Entity: Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Education Pass-Through Award Number and Period: H027A200107 (7/1/20-9/30/22) 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)). Control – Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should comply with the guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control-Integrated Framework," issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition PPS charged program costs to the grant after the period of performance period ended. We noted that an invoice for $176.05, for goods/services received in October 2022, wase charged to the federal grant ending September 2022. PPS did not obtain prior approval or an extension from the awarding agency before charging the grant. Context: One out of twenty-one samples selected for testing was charged to the grant after period of performance. Questioned costs: $176.05, represents the costs charged to the program after the period of performance. Cause: PPS did not consistently monitor the period of performance for a federal award to ensure that costs were only charged during the allowed period. Effect: PPS expensing of funds out of the period of performance may result in noncompliance and questioned costs from the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend that PPS enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that expenditures are not charged to federal awards during the period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding number: 2023-012 Federal agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Programs: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance listing #: 21.027 Award year: 2023 Compliance requirement: Allowable Costs Criteria According to 2 CFR 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs: Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity. (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). Condition The Federal Government requires that costs must be adequately documented and must be incurred during the approved budget period. During our testing, we noted the College failed to provide a copy of check or ACH payment information for 1 expenditure, out of a sample of 5. As a result, the College was unable to provide the proof of payment to support the expenditure is an allowable cost. Our sample was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Cause The College failed to have the proper internal controls in place to keep the proof of payment to support the expenditure that was reimbursed from the federal award. Effect The invoice that was reimbursed from the federal award may not be an allowable cost. Questioned Costs $1,655 Identification as a Repeat Finding, if applicable Not applicable. Recommendation The College should implement internal control procedures to verify that reimbursement requests are only submitted for invoices that have been paid. View of Responsible Officials The College agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.
2023-001 U.S. Department of Education Passed-through the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027 & 84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) – ALN 84.027X & 84.173X Compliance Finding and Material Weakness in Internal Controls Over Compliance Criteria: 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)). Condition: Tuition invoices and payroll costs were charged to a 2023 grant that were for services rendered prior to the grant start date. Cause: The School did not review manual journal entries for period of performance compliance when reclassifying grant expenditures from other accounts. Effect: The School was not compliant with period of performance requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: $225,827.29 Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: The School should implement procedures to review all manual journal entries for period of performance compliance before posting to the general ledger. Views of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding.