2025-002 – Procurement, Suspension & Debarment Federal Program Information: U.S. Department of Agriculture Passed through the State of Maine Department of Education: ALN 10.553,10.555, 10.559 & 10.579 Child Nutrition Cluster Criteria: The following CFR(s) apply to this finding: 2 CFR 200.317-200.327 Condition: During audit procedures, it was identified that the Unit did not follow policies and procedures. Cause: The Unit did not understand the procurement requirements for the program. Effect: Insufficient controls could result in unallowable expenses being charged to the program and subsequently improperly reimbursed by federal funds Identification of Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: During audit procedures, auditor requested copies of the contracts and procurement history files, none could be provided. This is not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Unit familiarize themselves with the program requirements and implement the internal control policies and procedures that have already been adopted by the Unit. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Please see the Corrective Action Plan issued by the Regional School Unit No. 29.
FINDING 2025-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027X, 84.173X Other Identifying Numbers: 22611-042-ARP, 22619-042-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northeast Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for the simplified acquisition threshold and for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. Procurement When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold. Therefore, the SAT threshold is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. When the purchase value exceeds the micro-purchase threshold but is less than the simplified acquisition threshold, a small purchase occurs. Small purchases require documented full and open competition or a documented rationale for limited competition. For 2023-2024, three vendors with disbursements totaling $175,125 were identified as being less than the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 but exceeding the $50,000 micropurchase threshold and were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes for two of the three vendors, and there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 SMITH-GREEN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the Cooperative in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, the Cooperative disclosed there were not any documented internal controls or procedures. Nine covered transactions were identified. The covered transactions, totaling $803,836, were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not verify the suspension and debarment status of the tested vendors prior to payment. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 SMITH-GREEN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance awards exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Cooperative noted that the American Rescue Plan (ARP) portion of the Special Education grant was new for 2023-2024. The ARP funding gave opportunity for types of expenditures that do not typically get expensed using special education funding. The transactions noted within the Condition and Context were from the ARP portion of the grant, which provided property or services that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Management of the Cooperative was unaware of the procurement requirements when property or services exceed the micro-purchase threshold. In addition, management of the Cooperative was unaware of the suspension and debarment requirements when a covered transaction is expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Cooperative could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments are equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 SMITH-GREEN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the reduction of future federal funding to the Cooperative. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Cooperative's management design and implement a system of internal controls related to procurement and suspension and debarment procedures to ensure procurement requirements are met and to ensure entities are neither suspended nor debarred or otherwise excluded or disqualified prior to entering into any covered transactions. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-001 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 2023-24, FY 2024-25 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-002. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a nonfederal entity. The State of Indiana has established a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 for informal procurement methods. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Small purchase procedures require that price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources or have documented reasoning to support a single source provider. Two vendors were identified that were paid $27,726 and $70,168, respectively, during the audit period using federal funds under the award, thereby requiring small purchase procedures for both procurements. Both vendors were selected for testing. The School Corporation was unable to provide any documentation for the vendor that was paid $70,168 that the procurement method used was appropriate or that the procurement provided full and open competition or rationale to support the determination to limit competition. Additionally, the history of procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of the vendor, and the basis for the price, was not adequately documented for the vendor. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that vendors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from receiving federal funds. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS), collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Four covered transactions that equaled or exceeded $25,000 were identified. All four transactions totaling $4,082,816 were selected for testing. For two of the four vendors, the School Corporation did not verify the vendor's suspension and debarment status prior to entering into the covered transaction with either vendor. The amount paid to both vendors totaled $97,894. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use document procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases– (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The School Corporation did not have adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with procurement and suspension and debarment requirements. The School Corporation was aware of the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement and relied on its food service management company to ensure compliance. There was not sufficient oversight by the School Corporation to ensure proper procedures were followed. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS, INC. SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect The lack of an effective internal control system enabled material noncompliance to occur and remain undetected. Noncompliance with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement could enable small purchases made by the School Corporation to be uncompetitive and could lead to contracting with vendors who are suspended or debarred from receiving federal grant funding. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure that there are appropriate procurement procedures for goods and services and that contractors and subrecipients, as appropriate, are verified to not be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into any contracts or subawards. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-001 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 2024, FY 2025 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context An effective internal control system, which would include segregation of duties, was not in place at the School Corporation in order to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Adequate internal controls were not in place over procurements made under the simplified acquisition threshold for one of two vendors tested during the audit period. The School Corporation made purchases with a vendor in fiscal year 2023-2024 totaling $289,127, but it did not provide audit evidence that methods and procedures performed for the selection of the vendor aligned with requirements related to vendors procured under the simplified acquisition threshold. Adequate internal controls were not in place over procurements made under the small purchase threshold for one of five vendors tested during the audit period. The School Corporation made purchases with a vendor in 2023-2024 totaling $103,519 and in 2024-2025 totaling $111,613, but it did not provide audit evidence that the procurement procedures performed in relation to the award had been reviewed or approved. The School Corporation did not provide documentation that it had entered into a contract with the vendor during either year of the audit period. The lack of internal controls was a systemic issue throughout the audit period. The noncompliance was isolated to procurement requirements. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.318(a): "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non- Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (1) . . . (iv) Non-Federal entity increase to the micro-purchase threshold up to $50,000. Non-Federal entities may establish a threshold higher than the micro-purchase threshold identified in the FAR in accordance with the requirements of this section. The non-Federal entity may self-certify a threshold up to $50,000 on an annual basis and must maintain documentation to be made available to the Federal awarding agency and auditors in accordance with § 200.334. The self-certification must include a justification, clear identification of the threshold, and supporting documentation of any of the following: (A) A qualification as a low-risk auditee, in accordance with the criteria in § 200.520 for the most recent audit; (B) An annual internal institutional risk assessment to identify, mitigate, and manage financial risks; or, (C) For public institutions, a higher threshold consistent with State law. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. (i) In order for sealed bidding to be feasible, the following conditions should be present: (A) A complete, adequate, and realistic specification or purchase description is available; (B) Two or more responsible bidders are willing and able to compete effectively for the business; and (C) The procurement lends itself to a firm fixed price contract and the selection of the successful bidder can be made principally on the basis of price. (ii) If sealed bids are used, the following requirements apply: (A) Bids must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified sources, providing them sufficient response time prior to the date set for opening the bids, for local, and tribal governments, the invitation for bids must be publicly advertised; (B) The invitation for bids, which will include any specifications and pertinent attachments, must define the items or services in order for the bidder to properly respond; (C) All bids will be opened at the time and place prescribed in the invitation for bids, and for local and tribal governments, the bids must be opened publicly; (D) A firm fixed price contract award will be made in writing to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Where specified in bidding documents, factors such as discounts, transportation cost, and life cycle costs must be considered in determining which bid is lowest. Payment discounts will only be used to determine the low bid when prior experience indicates that such discounts are usually taken advantage of; and (E) Any or all bids may be rejected if there is a sound documented reason. (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. They are awarded in accordance with the following requirements: (i) Requests for proposals must be publicized and identify all evaluation factors and their relative importance. Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified offerors. Any response to publicized requests for proposals must be considered to the maximum extent practical; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (ii) The non-Federal entity must have a written method for conducting technical evaluations of the proposals received and making selections; (iii) Contracts must be awarded to the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the non-Federal entity, with price and other factors considered; and (iv) The non-Federal entity may use competitive proposal procedures for qualifications based procurement of architectural/engineering (A/E) professional services whereby offeror's qualifications are evaluated and the most qualified offeror is selected, subject to negotiation of fair and reasonable compensation. The method, where price is not used as a selection factor, can only be used in procurement of A/E professional services. It cannot be used to purchase other types of services though A/E firms that are a potential source to perform the proposed effort. . . ." Cause Staff responsible for purchasing were not adequately trained on the School Corporation's procurement policy for obtaining bids for purchases above the simplified acquisition threshold and formal contract requirements for purchases above $50,000. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation cannot ensure that contractors paid under the small purchase and simplified acquisition methods were awarded the best price for their services. This could result in federal funding not providing as many services or projects as possible. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation strengthen its system of internal controls to ensure the proper procurement method is followed and documentation is retained. We also recommended strengthening its policies and procedures to ensure that appropriate audit evidence is retained for audit. Views of Responsible Official For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.027X, 84.173, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-056-PN01, 22611-056-ARP, 22619-056-PN01, 22619-056-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a similar finding from the immediately prior audit reports. The prior audit finding numbers were 2021-002 and 2023-003. Condition and Context Procurement - Small Purchases Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for goods or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is customarily set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 or less for when small purchase procedures may be used. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. If it is determined a single source provider can be used for a small purchase, documentation must be retained supporting the determination. There were 23 vendors identified that fell within the small purchase's threshold. Of those vendors, 4 were selected for testing. For each of those 4 vendors tested that fell within the small purchases threshold, the School Corporation did not obtain an adequate number of price or rate quotations to ensure the procurements provided full and open competition. In addition, history of the procurements which would include the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of the vendor, and basis for price was not documented. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 28 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Procurement - Simplified Acquisition When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000; however, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold, and, therefore, the threshold the SAT is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. One vendor was identified that fell within the SAT, with total purchases of $165,816. Sealed bids or competitive proposals were not obtained, nor was a circumstance met that would have allowed for a noncompetitive procurement for the purchases. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 29 METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not in place to ensure that bids were solicited before entering into a contract or that quotes were obtained. The School Corporation was unaware of the requirement to solicit bids for contracts that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. Additionally, they were unaware of the requirement to obtain an adequate number of quotes for purchases that exceeded the small purchase threshold. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, procurement procedures for goods and services were not adhered to for procurements that fell within the small purchase threshold. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure there are appropriate procurement procedures for goods for small purchases and simplified acquisition purchases. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Department of Housing and Urban Development Continuum of Care, Federal Financial Assistance Listing 14.267, Affects all grant awards included under Federal Financial Assistance Listing 14.267 on the Schedule Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.318 maintains that recipients must have and use documented procurement policies and must conform to procurement standards in sections 200.317 through 200.327. Condition: Catholic Charities has documented procurement and suspension and debarment procedures that conform to applicable federal standards regarding procurement and testing vendors for suspension and debarment; however, the procedures were not followed for four vendors selected for testing for procurement and one for suspension and debarment. Cause: Catholic Charities did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure that the processes laid out in their procurement policy regarding the process of obtaining quotes to support procurement and testing vendors for suspension and debarment were followed. Effect: Payments could be made to vendors who have higher costs than other vendors or who were suspended or debarred. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 17 vendors out of 83 total transactions were selected for testing, which accounted for $81,494 of $681,188 federal program expenditures. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): Yes, 2024-002 Recommendation: We recommend Catholic Charities enhance internal control procedures to ensure all procurement and suspension and debarment verification procedures are performed prior to entering into the transactions. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding 2025-001: United States Department of Agriculture, Child Nutrition Cluster, Assistance Listing 10.555,10.559,10.553, 10.582. Passed through by Oregon Department of Education. Compliance requirement: Methods of procurement. Criteria: Uniform Guidance requires non‑Federal entities to maintain written procurement procedures that comply with applicable federal regulations, including methods of procurement, competition requirements, conflict‑of‑interest standards, and documentation expectations. These written procedures must be consistently followed and updated to reflect current federal requirements. Condition and Context: The District did not maintain written procurement policies as required by the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Existing policy reflects state law and does not include the procurement standards outlined in 2 CFR 200.317–200.327. Cause: The District’s procurement policies are designed to be consistent with state law. Effect: Without written federal procurement policies, the District is at increased risk of noncompliance with federal procurement standards. Recommendation: The District should develop, adopt, and maintain written procurement policies that fully align with Uniform Guidance requirements. Policies should be reviewed at least annually and updated as federal regulations change. Views of Responsible Officials: The District concurs with the finding that procurement policies did not fully comply with Uniform Guidance. Policies were based on state law, and staff turnover and limited federal procurement training contributed to the deficiency. All purchases were fair and reasonable; no waste or abuse occurred. Procurement policies have been updated to align with 2 CFR 200 standards, all procurement staff have been trained on Uniform Guidance requirements, and standardized procurement checklists and templates have been implemented to ensure documentation of cost analysis and vendor selection.
Finding Reference: 2025-001 – Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Program: 84.027 – IDEA Compliance Requirement:Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance and NonCompliance Criteria: The School District is required to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards, and those procedures must be consistent with state/local requirements and the federal procurement standards in 2 CFR 200.317-200.327. When a noncompetitive (sole source) procurement method is used, it must be supported by circumstances and documentation consistent with the Uniform Guidance procurement methods requirements in 2 CFR 200.320 (including maintaining sufficient documentation to support the selected procurement method in the procurement file). Statement of Condition: The School District procured IDEA services through the Lincoln Intermediate Unit using a noncompetitive (sole source) approach. The School District did not retain documentation in the procurement file to support the basis for noncompetitive procurement. Statement of Cause: The School District did not consistently follow documented procurement procedures for the IDEA program and the procedures. Possible Asserted Effect: Without documentation supporting the noncompetitive procurement method, the School District is not able to demonstrate compliance with federal procurement requirements applicable to IDEA. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: One vendor was utilized and there was not appropriate documentation maintained of procurement regarding the services. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that a process be implemented to review the services provided under the IDEA program to ensure procurement documentation is appropriately maintained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The School District's practice has been to utilize all IDEA funding to support the education of IDEA-qualified students through the use of the Lincoln Intermediate Unit services conducted at the Franklin Learning Center (FLC). 100% of the IDEA funds are utilized to pay for a portion of the services provided by the FLC. The FLC is the only center operating in Franklin County. To ensure compliance with this standard in the future, the Assistant to the Chief Financial and Operations Officer will provide the Director of Special Education and the Superintendent with the Sole Source Justification form by July 1st of each year. The Director of Special Education and the Superintendent will be responsible for completing the Sole Source Justification form and submitting a copy of the signed document to the Business Office. The Special Education Financial Secretary will attach the Sole Source Justification form to the purchase requisition for services from the Franklin Learning Center for the IDEA-qualified students.
Program: AL 21.027 – COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – Subrecipient Monitoring Grant Number & Year: SLFRP1965, March 3, 2021, through December 31, 2024 Federal Grantor Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Criteria: 2 CFR § 200.332 (January 1, 2024) states, in relevant part, the following: All pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. * * * * (ii) Subrecipient’s unique entity identifier; (iii) Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); (iv) Federal Award Date . . . . * * * * (x) Federal award project description, as required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); (xi) Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding official of the Pass-through entity; (xii) Assistance Listings title and number; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at the time of disbursement; * * * * (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to access the subrecipient’s records and financial statements for the pass-through entity to fulfill its monitoring requirements; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning the closeout of the subaward. * * * * (d) Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the passthrough entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the passthrough entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by §200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward . . . . * * * * (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F of this part when it is expected that the subrecipient’s Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in §200.501. 2 CFR § 200.318 (January 1, 2024) states, in relevant part, the following: (a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§200.317 through 200.327. * * * * (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. 2 CFR § 180.300 (January 1, 2024) requires that the pass-through entity take specific steps to document that subrecipients are not suspended or debarred, as outlined below: When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM.gov Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. 2 CFR § 200.430(i) (January 1, 2024) states the following in relevant part: (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: * * * * (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities (for IHE, this per the IHE’s definition of IBS); * * * * (vii) Support the distribution of the employee’s salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. (viii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards[.] Good internal controls and sound business practices require policies and procedures to ensure that adequate monitoring is performed to verify that subrecipients are using funds in accordance with all Federal and grant requirements. Condition: The State lacked procedures to ensure that: • Subrecipient use of funds was monitored to ensure compliance with all Federal and grant requirements. • Subrecipients obtained audits required by Federal requirements, and those audits were obtained and reviewed in a timely manner. Repeat Finding: No Questioned Costs: None Statistical Sample: No Context: The State paid $172,943,444 to subrecipients for 143 subawards during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. We selected 17 subrecipients to test. Additionally, we reviewed the single audit tracking procedures for all State agencies acting as pass-through entities. We noted the following: Insufficient Subrecipient Monitoring Procedures For 5 of 17 subawards tested, the APA noted that subrecipient monitoring was insufficient to ensure that the subrecipient complied with all Federal and grant requirements. Additionally, for one of the subawards tested, the APA noted that the pass-through entity did not have documentation on file to support it verified the subrecipient was not suspended or otherwise debarred. Deficiencies noted included the following: • One $86,650,000 subaward tested was issued by the Military Department (Military) to the University of Nebraska Board of Regents (University). During testing, the APA noted that the only monitoring performed by the Military was a review of the University’s single audit for fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. A total of $47,533,117 was paid to the University for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. • During our audit, we observed that for two subawards, one issued by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and one by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), each valued at $2,000,000 for capital riverfront improvements and the construction of a youth activity center, respectively, significant disbursements were used to cover construction costs. However, neither pass-through entity could provide documentation supporting that subrecipient monitoring performed or planned included adequate procedures to ensure that the subrecipient had followed its written procurement policies, and procurement procedures were adequately documented. These subrecipients were paid $1,362,909 and $841,446, respectively, during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. • For one subaward tested, issued by the Department of Correctional Services (Corrections) for $1,505,826 to implement a transitional living and vocational skills program for former inmates, the APA did not observe any documentation supporting that Corrections had verified the subrecipient was not suspended or otherwise debarred from receiving Federal funds. Additionally, the APA noted that the subaward included significant costs for subrecipient payroll and benefit costs. For those salaried employees who had only a portion of their payroll coded to the grant, Corrections relied on budget estimates submitted at the beginning of the subaward to ensure the cost allocation was proper. The APA observed that six salaried employees had payroll costs coded to the grant, ranging from 2% - 98% of their total salaries. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, the total paid to the subrecipient for this subaward was $204,302. • For one subaward issued by DHHS for $4,000,000 to be used towards increasing childcare license capacity, the APA noted that DHHS failed to perform the subrecipient monitoring procedures outlined in their monitoring policy. The monitoring policy for the subaward indicated that 10% of all expenses would be reviewed. DHHS claimed to have reviewed 10% of all reimbursements between July 2023 – April 2024; however, the APA observed $628,610 of reimbursed costs after April 2024, all of which was disbursed in August 2024 for which no review was performed. Additionally, the APA noted DHHS did not obtain appropriate documentation to support $387 of payroll costs coded to the grant. A total of $627,110 was paid to this subrecipient during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. Failure to Communicate all Required Subaward Information During our review of subrecipient monitoring, the APA noted that, for 4 of 17 subawards tested, the subaward did not contain all required information or contained erroneous information, as follows: • In two instances of subawards issued by DHHS, the subaward listed the Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN) as SLFRP3145; however, the primary CLSFRF award to the State of Nebraska was SLFRP1965, while the SLFRP3145 award merely passed through the State to various Non-Entitlement Units (NEU’s) in the State that were the primary recipients. • One subaward issued by DNR and one subaward issued by Corrections lacked required information, as noted below. Neither department could provide documentation showing that this information had otherwise been communicated to the subrecipient. See Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs for chart/table. Single Audit Tracking Procedures During our review of single audit tracking procedures implemented by the State, we noted the following: • DNR and the Department of Labor (DOL) lacked procedures for determining if subrecipients were required to have a single audit or obtain and review such audits. DOL had 10 subrecipients who had received cumulative payments as of June 30, 2025, ranging from $1,000 to $318,669. DNR had 13 subrecipients that received cumulative payments as of June 30, 2025, ranging from $12,557 to $32,256,022. Three of DNR’s subrecipients have received payments over $750,000 as of June 30, 2025. In reviewing the Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC), two of these subrecipients had single audits for the subrecipients’ fiscal year 2024, which listed CSLFRF (ALN 21.027) as a major program and reported no findings. • During testing, the APA identified three instances of DHHS failing to obtain and review subrecipient single audits due to errors in that agency’s tracking procedures. The three subrecipients had received $2,209,137 in CSLFRF funds as of June 30, 2025. The APA obtained the fiscal year 2024 single audits for all three subrecipients from the FAC and noted that ALN 21.027 was listed as a major program on all three audits. None of the audits noted any program-related findings. Cause: Inadequate procedures to ensure that subrecipients complied with all Federal and grant requirements or to ensure that subrecipients obtained single audits when required. Effect: Without adequate monitoring and review procedures, there is an increased risk of Federal awards being used for unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend the State strengthen procedures to ensure that subrecipient monitoring is designed properly to ensure compliance with all Federal and grant requirements. We also recommend the State strengthen procedures to ensure that subrecipient single audit requirements are tracked properly, and all single audits are reviewed in a timely manner. Management Response: Military Department The Department of Military disagrees with this finding. The subrecipient submitted an independent audit on 4/1/2025. The independent auditor employed auditing standards generally accepted in the United States (GAAS). Major federal programs included COVID-19, Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, Assistance Listing Number 21.027. The independent auditor concluded there were no significant deficiencies or material weaknesses. The auditee was deemed “low risk.” In NEMA’s risk evaluation, it considers two separate University of Nebraska offices whose responsibility includes work to monitor and ensure compliance with Federal regulations. When determining risk appetite and risk tolerance, the “…cost of internal control should never exceed anticipated benefits. Thus, an entity must accept a certain level of risk.” Findings by the independent auditor and Auditor of Public Accounts exceed any benefit that might have been gained by additional subrecipient monitoring. In October 2025, the Agency formally adopted the Subrecipient Monitoring policy and procedure it has informally used the last several years. APA Response: 2 CFR § 200.332(d)(4) (January 1, 2024) requires pass-through entities to perform subrecipient monitoring, which includes obtaining and reviewing subrecipient Single Audit reports. Subsection (d)(4) of this regulation states: If a subrecipient has a current Single Audit report posted in the Federal Audit Clearinghouse and has not otherwise been excluded from receipt of Federal funding (e.g., has been debarred or suspended), the pass-through entity may rely on the subrecipient’s cognizant audit agency or cognizant oversight agency to perform audit follow-up . . . . Such reliance does not eliminate the responsibility of the pass-through entity to issue subawards that conform to agency and award-specific requirements, to manage risk through ongoing subaward monitoring, and to monitor the status of the findings that are specifically related to the subaward. Department of Natural Resources While DNR conducted general subrecipient monitoring activities, documentation did not sufficiently demonstrate that monitoring procedures included a review of subrecipient procurement practices for compliance. DNR communicated the required federal award information to the subrecipient through other means, it was not consistently incorporated into the formal subaward agreement as required. While DNR does require Single Audits per their contracts, they did not have formalized, written procedures to consistently determine whether subrecipients met the Single Audit threshold, to ensure timely receipt and review of Single Audit reports when required. The Department acknowledges that documented procedures are necessary to ensure compliance with applicable federal regulations and to strengthen subrecipient oversight. Department of Health and Human Services Agency agrees with finding. Department of Correctional Services Management agrees with the finding.
FINDING 2025-004 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): SY25 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance related to the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 BORDEN-HENRYVILLE SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAMs exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Most large purchases for food and supplies are made through contracts entered into by a purchasing cooperative that the School Corporation belongs to. Those transactions were tested at the cooperative level, and no noncompliance or lack of internal controls were noted. It is the School Corporation's policy that it will either require a certification from the vendor or check the exclusion list prior to entering a covered transaction. The School Corporation only entered into one covered transaction at the School Corporation level. It was unable to provide evidence that it followed its policy for ensuring that the vendor was not suspended or debarred prior to making a series of purchases that totaled $53,414. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance was only noted in the second year of the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non- Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 BORDEN-HENRYVILLE SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The School Corporation's management failed to properly design and implement an internal control system that would have ensured that its policy over the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement was adhered to during the audit period. Effect The failure to design and implement an effective internal control system enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Additionally, the School Corporation could have made payments to a vendor that was suspended or debarred. Payments to such vendors are unallowable. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure compliance and comply with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The system should be designed to ensure that vendors are not suspended or debarred, or otherwise excluded, prior to the School Corporation entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-004 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027X, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-042-ARP, 22619-042-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation is a member of the Northeast Indiana Special Education Cooperative (Cooperative). During fiscal year 2023-2024, the Cooperative operated the special education program and spent the federal money on behalf of all its members. As the grant agreement was between the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) and each member school, the School Corporation was responsible for ensuring and providing oversight of the Cooperative. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure that the Cooperative complied with the procurement and the suspension and debarment requirements. The Cooperative did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for the simplified acquisition threshold and for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 LAKELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Procurement When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), or a lower threshold established by a nonfederal entity, formal procurement methods are required. The SAT is typically set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold. Therefore, the SAT threshold is set at $150,000. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. When the purchase value exceeds the micro-purchase threshold but is less than the simplified acquisition threshold, a small purchase occurs. Small purchases require documented, full and open competition or a documented rationale for limited competition. For 2023-2024, three vendors with disbursements totaling $175,125 were identified as being less than the simplified acquisition threshold of $150,000 but exceeding the $50,000 micropurchase threshold and were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not obtain price or rate quotes for two of the three vendors and there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the Cooperative in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, the Cooperative disclosed there were not any documented internal controls or procedures. Nine covered transactions were identified. The covered transactions totaling $803,836 were selected for testing. The Cooperative did not verify the suspension and debarment status of the tested vendors prior to payment. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 LAKELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: . . . (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 LAKELAND SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause The Cooperative noted that the ARP portion of the special education grant was new for the 2023-2024 school year. The ARP funding gave opportunity for types of expenditures that do not typically get expensed using special education funding. The transactions noted within the Condition and Context were from the ARP portion of the grant, which provided property or services that exceeded the micropurchase threshold. Management of the Cooperative was unaware of the procurement requirements when property or services exceed the micro-purchase threshold. In addition, management of the Cooperative was unaware of the suspension and debarment requirements when a covered transaction is expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Cooperative could be overpaying for services. Unverified vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 could be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Cooperative's management design and implement a system of internal controls related to procurement and suspension and debarment procedures to ensure procurement requirements are met and to ensure entities are neither suspended nor debarred, or otherwise excluded or disqualified, prior to entering into any covered transactions. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Information on the federal program: Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster, Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: Child Nutrition Cluster Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY2024, FY2025 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Finding: Material Weakness, Qualified Opinion Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO)...." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . .” 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: “The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . “ 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Condition: The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure compliance with the procurement and suspension and debarment requirements. The School Corporation had not designed or implemented adequate policies or procedures to ensure that proper procurement procedures for small purchase and simplified acquisition procurement thresholds were followed. Cause: Although the School Corporation has adopted a procurement policy that establishes purchasing requirements based on defined dollar thresholds and requires verification of vendor suspension and debarment status, the policy was not fully adhered to. Required procurement methods were not utilized for certain purchases that exceeded applicable thresholds and the required suspension and debarment verifications were not consistently performed. This condition resulted from insufficient oversight and monitoring to ensure compliance with all aspects of the School Corporation’s procurement policy. Effect: Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, procurement procedures for goods and services were not adhered to and vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 were not verified to be not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs: There were no questioned costs identified. Context: Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-Federal entity. As Indiana Code has set a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds. Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micropurchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The School Corporation did not review procurements done by the food service management company to ensure that proper procurement policies were followed. The School Corporation did not ensure that the food service management company did not use suspended or debarred vendors. During the audit period, we noted two small purchases for which the School Corporation did not have evidence of obtaining multiple quotes or documented rationale for selecting the vendor. Only the final invoice, purchase order, and quote from the selected vendor were available. During fiscal year 2024, we noted that for one of the three vendors tested, the correct procurement method was not followed. Purchases from the vendor were in excess of $150,000 during the fiscal year, requiring the simplified acquisition procurement process; however, the School Corporation applied the small purchase procurement process. The purchase was for equipment at two different buildings. The School Corporation issued two requests for quotes, one for each school, and treated them as separate procurements. However, as the purchases were similar in nature, the requests for quotes were dated the same day and sent to the same vendor, this should have been treated as one procurement in aggregate. The School Corporation did not have support for public advertisement, requests for formal sealed bids, or formal documentation for the basis of award. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. “Covered transactions” include but are not limited to contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAMs exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. During the audit period, we noted two vendors out of three that were sampled, over the $25,000 suspension and debarment threshold for which the School Corporation did not have evidence of a suspension and debarment check. Identification as a repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the School Corporation strengthen its system of internal control by establishing and implementing policies and procedures to ensure that procurement activities for goods and services comply with applicable requirements and that contractors and subrecipients are verified as not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into contracts or subawards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
FINDING 2025-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 2023-2024, FY 2024-2025 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed and implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance related to the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 15 NORTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for goods or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is customarily set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 or less for when small purchase procedures may be used. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds. Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. If it is determined a single source provider can be used for a small purchase, documentation must be retained supporting the determination. Two vendors were tested that exceeded the small purchase threshold during the audit period. For one vendor no quotes were obtained. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAMs exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. The School Corporation entered into four covered transactions during the audit period and were unable to provide evidence they followed its policy for one of those transactions. The total purchases made from that vendor totaled $29,091. The lack of internal controls was a systemic issue throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(i) states: "The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 NORTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states: The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not implemented by management of the School Corporation, which would include segregation of key functions. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 NORTH HARRISON COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that provide segregation of duties and additional oversight as needed, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, adequate documentation was not retained for procurements that fell within the small purchase threshold. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation design and implement a proper system of internal controls, including policies and procedures that would provide segregation of duties to ensure appropriate reviews, approvals, and oversight are taking place. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.582 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY25 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed and implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance related to the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAMs exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. It is the School Corporation's policy that they either require a certification from the vendor or check the exclusion list prior to entering into a covered transaction. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 SPRINGS VALLEY COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation entered into three covered transactions during the audit period and it was unable to provide evidence that it followed its policy for one of those transactions. The total purchases made from that vendor totaled $64,855. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were only noted in the second year of the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The School Corporation's management failed to properly design and implement an internal control system that would have ensured that its policy over the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement was followed during the audit period. Effect The failure to design and implement an effective internal control system enabled material noncompliance to go undetected. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement could have resulted in the loss of federal funds to the School Corporation. Additionally, the School Corporation could have made payment to a vendor that was suspended or debarred. Payments to such vendors are unallowable. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 SPRINGS VALLEY COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The system should be designed to ensure that vendors are not suspended or debarred, or otherwise excluded, prior to the School Corporation entering into a covered transaction. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18
FINDING 2025-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY24, FY25 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-005. Condition and Context Procurement When the value of goods or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, the proper purchasing method would be the bidding process, unless the purchase meets certain other qualifications. Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for goods or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is customarily set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 or less for when small purchase procedures may be used. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micropurchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. If it is determined a single source provider can be used for a small purchase, documentation must be retained supporting the determination. The School Corporation procured goods totaling $149,426 from five vendors that fell under the small purchase threshold during the audit period. Price or rate quotes were not obtained for any of the vendors nor was there any documentation detailing the history of procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 DELPHI COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions, recipients are required to verify that contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (e.g., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 and all subawards. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions list, collection of a certification from that person or entity, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person or entity. There were four covered transactions over $25,000 identified during the audit period totaling $130,448. All four were selected for testing; however, the School Corporation did not verify that two of the four vendors totaling $70,411 were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non- Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327." 2 CFR 200.318(i) states: "The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price." Indiana Code 5-22-8-3(d) states: "If the purchasing agent receives a satisfactory quote, the purchasing agent shall award a contract to the lowest responsible and responsive offeror for each line or class of supplies required." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 DELPHI COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use document procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause Management had not designed or implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Effect Material noncompliance with the grant agreement and compliance requirements could cause federal expenditures to be unallowable which the funding agency could potentially recover. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure compliance with requirements related to procurement and suspension and debarment. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 DELPHI COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.027X, 84.173 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-151-PN01, 23611-151-PN01, 24611-151-PN01, 22611-151-ARP, 23619-151-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement When the value of goods or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, the proper purchasing method would be the bidding process, unless the purchase meets certain other qualifications. Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for goods or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is customarily set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 or less for when small purchase procedures may be used. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micropurchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. If it is determined a single source provider can be used for a small purchase, documentation must be retained supporting the determination. The School Corporation procured goods totaling $60,002 from four vendors that fell under the small purchase threshold during the audit period. The School Corporation did not provide adequate documentation detailing the history of procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used, for all four vendors. Price or rate quotes were not obtained for three of the vendors as required. The School Corporation obtained three quotes for one vendor; however, the highest quote was selected without a documented reason. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions, recipients are required to verify that contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (e.g., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 and all subawards. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions list, collection of a certification from that person or entity, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person or entity. There was one covered transaction over $25,000 identified during the audit period which was selected for testing. The School Corporation did not verify that the vendor was not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 DELPHI COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318(a) states: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327." 2 CFR 200.318(i) states: "The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price." Indiana Code 5-22-8-3(d) states: "If the purchasing agent receives a satisfactory quote, the purchasing agent shall award a contract to the lowest responsible and responsive offeror for each line or class of supplies required." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use document procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 DELPHI COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause Management had not designed or implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Effect Material noncompliance with the grant agreement and compliance requirements could cause federal expenditures to be unallowable which the funding agency could potentially recover. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure compliance with requirements related to procurement and suspension and debarment. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA)- Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.027X, 84.173, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 22611-148-PN01, 23611-148-PN01, 24611-148-PN01, 25611-148-PN01, 22611-148-ARP, 22619-148-PN01, 23619-148-PN01, 24619-148-PN01, 25619-148-PN01, 22619-148-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 28 GRIFFITH PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance related to the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Procurement - Micro-Purchases Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, which is set at $10,000. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. Three vendors determined to fall under the micro-purchase threshold were selected for testing. One claim from one of the vendors selected for testing did not have proper supporting documentation maintained by the School Corporation to determine if the proper procurement method was followed. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. One vendor provided contracted services paid with special education grant funds during the audit period totaling $269,948. Upon inquiry of the School Corporation, it was determined that the School Corporation did not verify that the contractor was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. The lack of effective internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 29 GRIFFITH PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (1) Micro-purchases — (i) Distribution. The acquisition of supplies or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (See the definition of micro-purchase in § 200.1). To the maximum extent practicable, the non-Federal entity should distribute micro-purchases equitably among qualified suppliers. (ii) Micro-purchase awards. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price or rate quotations if the non-Federal entity considers the price to be reasonable based on research, experience, purchase history or other information and documents it files accordingly. Purchase cards can be used for micropurchases if procedures are documented and approved by the non-Federal entity. (iii) Micro-purchase thresholds. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining and documenting an appropriate micro-purchase threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk, and its documented procurement procedures. The micropurchase threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. Non-Federal entities may establish a threshold higher than the Federal threshold established in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) in accordance with paragraphs (a)(1)(iv) and (v) of this section. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 30 GRIFFITH PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (iv) Non-Federal entity increase to the micro-purchase threshold up to $50,000. Non-Federal entities may establish a threshold higher than the micro-purchase threshold identified in the FAR in accordance with the requirements of this section. The non-Federal entity may self-certify a threshold up to $50,000 on an annual basis and must maintain documentation to be made available to the Federal awarding agency and auditors in accordance with § 200.334. The self-certification must include a justification, clear identification of the threshold, and supporting documentation of any of the following: (A) A qualification as a low-risk auditee, in accordance with the criteria in § 200.520 for the most recent audit; (B) An annual internal institutional risk assessment to identify, mitigate, and manage financial risks; or, (C) For public institutions, a higher threshold consistent with State law. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation, which would include segregation of key functions. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to affect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, procurement procedures for goods and services were not adhered to, and vendors to whom payments equal to, or in excess of $25,000, were not verified to not be suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 31 GRIFFITH PUBLIC SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure there are appropriate procurement procedures for goods and services and contractors and subrecipients, as appropriate, are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into any contracts or subawards. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-004 Subject: Special Education Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States Assistance Listings Number: 84.027X Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): 22611-019-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Significant Deficiency, Other Matters Condition and Context Procurement Small purchases, procurements between $50,000 and $150,000, require three quotes to be obtained and a contract awarded. There was one disbursement tested for $52,598 for small purchase procurement, and, while the appropriate number of quotes were obtained, a contract was not awarded for the transaction as required by Indiana Code 5-22-8-3. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with the Special Education Cluster (IDEA) award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Excluded Parties List System (EPLS), collecting a certification from that person or entity, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person or entity. It was determined that the School Corporation had a process in place to verify that vendors were not suspended or debarred, but the process was not operating effectively. For the one vendor tested also related to the transaction noted above, documentation of the SAM.gov search could not be provided. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 OAK HILL UNITED SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the transaction and award number noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.214 states: "Non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 OAK HILL UNITED SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . ." Indiana Code 5-22-8-3 states: "(a) This section applies only if the purchasing agent expects the purchase to be: (1) at least fifty thousand dollars ($50,000); and (2) not more than one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). (b) A purchasing agent may purchase supplies under this section by inviting quotes from at least three (3) persons known to deal in the lines or classes of supplies to be purchased. (c) The purchasing agent shall mail an invitation to quote to the persons described in subsection (b) at least seven (7) days before the time fixed for receiving quotes. (d) If the purchasing agent receives a satisfactory quote, the purchasing agent shall award a contract to the lowest responsible and responsive offeror for each line or class of supplies required. (e) The purchasing agent may reject all quotes. (f) If the purchasing agent does not receive a quote from a responsible and responsive offeror, the purchasing agent may purchase the supplies under IC 5-22-10-10." 31 CFR 19.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the EPLS, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person if allowed by this rule, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The School Corporation was not aware of the Indiana Code requirement to enter into a contract for the equipment purchase. The School Corporation was aware of the requirements to check for suspension and debarment, but due to newer personnel at the School Corporation they were not able to locate the records or verify that the suspension and debarment verification was performed. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 OAK HILL UNITED SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect The failure to design and implement an effective internal control system enabled noncompliance to remain undetected. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the reduction of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation amend its procurement policy and system of internal controls to ensure that procurement requirements meet the stricter federal and/or state requirements. Additionally, the internal control system effectiveness should be improved to ensure all contractors that are paid $25,000 or more, all or in part with federal funds, are not suspended or debarred from participating in federal programs before entering into contracts. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
2025-003 – GRANT AWARD POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a non-federal entity must “(a) establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). 2 CFR 200.318 requires that the non-federal entity “must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327.” Condition: There was a lack of adequate documentation to support control activities were present. Specifically, the Municipality had no policies and procedures related to the administration of federal awards. Questioned Costs: None. Context: There were approximately 15 total disbursements totaling $1,031,467. Cause: The Municipality lacks formal internal controls and procedures related to the administration of federal awards. Effect: There is an increased risk that noncompliance with a federal award could occur and not be detected in a timely fashion. Recommendation: Management should establish proper policies and procedures which ensure that federal awards are adequately administered in accordance with program requirements. Management’s Response: Management concurs with the finding and has developed a plan to correct the issue. See corrective action plan. Status: This finding was not present in the prior audit year.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Program Name: Special Education Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 84.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: H027A230035 and 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Maryland State Department of Education Pass-Through Numbers: 24132402 Award Period: October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2025 Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or Specific Requirement: Uniform Guidance requires non-federal entities to establish and follow documented procurement procedures that are consistent with federal procurement standards and ensure full and open competition. Such policies must address allowable procurement methods, required documentation, applicable thresholds, and approval requirements in accordance with 2 CFR §§ 200.317–200.327. Condition/Context: During testing of procurement transactions charged to the federal program, one of five procurement transactions tested did not follow the procurement requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically, the required procurement method was not properly applied and supporting documentation was insufficient to demonstrate compliance with federal procurement standards. Questioned Costs: None Cause: The Board’s procurement policies were not fully compliant with federal procurement requirements under Uniform Guidance. As a result, internal controls did not adequately ensure that procurement transactions charged to federal programs complied with applicable federal standards prior to payment. Effect: Procurement policies that are not aligned with federal requirements increase the risk of noncompliance with Uniform Guidance, potentially resulting in disallowed costs, reduced competition, or the need for corrective action by the pass-through or federal awarding agency. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the Board revise its procurement policies to fully align with Uniform Guidance requirements and strengthen internal controls to ensure procurement transactions charged to federal awards are reviewed for compliance prior to payment. This should include updated policy guidance, staff training, and documented supervisory review. Views of Responsible Officials: The Board concurs with the finding.
FINDING 2025-004 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): FY 2023-2024, FY 2024-2025 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-004. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not designed or implemented at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Procurement When the value of goods or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, the proper purchasing method would be the bidding process, unless the purchase meets certain other qualifications. Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for goods or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is customarily set at $250,000. However, Indiana Code 5-22-8 has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000 or less for when small purchase procedures may be used. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds. Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micropurchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. If it is determined a single source provider can be used for a small purchase, documentation must be retained supporting the determination. The School Corporation procured goods and services totaling $5,967,079 from three vendors that exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold during the audit period. The School Corporation did not follow procurement requirements for one of the three vendors. Multiple quotes were obtained for the purchase of cafeteria equipment totaling $361,575; however, the procurement method used should have been the bidding process. Additionally, the School Corporation did not obtain a contract for the purchase. The School Corporation made three small purchases totaling $35,045 that were selected for testing. The School Corporation did not obtain price or rate quotes as required. Documentation detailing the history of procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used, was not available for audit. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 25 SCHOOL CITY OF EAST CHICAGO SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions, recipients are required to verify that contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (e.g., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 and all subawards. The verification is to be done by checking the SAM exclusions list, collection of a certification from that person or entity, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person or entity. There were three covered transactions over $25,000 during the audit period, which totaled $5,967,079. The School Corporation did not verify that one of the three covered transactions, totaling $361,575, was not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal assistance programs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." Indiana Code 5-22-8-3(d) states: "If the purchasing agent receives a satisfactory quote, the purchasing agent shall award a contract to the lowest responsible and responsive offeror for each line or class of supplies required." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use document procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 26 SCHOOL CITY OF EAST CHICAGO SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause Management had not designed or implemented a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance with the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Effect Material noncompliance with the grant agreement and compliance requirements could cause federal expenditures to be unallowable which the funding agency could potentially recover. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 27 SCHOOL CITY OF EAST CHICAGO SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure compliance with requirements related to procurement and suspension and debarment. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2025-002 Subject: Child Nutrition Cluster - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Programs: School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Summer Food Service Program for Children, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program Assistance Listings Numbers: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559, 10.582 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2024 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-004. Condition and Context The School Corporation did not have effective internal controls in place to ensure compliance with the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. The School Corporation did not have adequate procedures in place to ensure that the requirements for small purchases were met for each applicable procured good or service or to ensure that vendors were not suspended or debarred prior to entering into a covered transaction. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 WABASH CITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a nonfederal entity. As Indiana Code has set a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds: micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. For the audit period, the School Corporation self-certified a micro-purchase threshold of $50,000. Any purchase above this threshold but below the $150,000 simplified acquisition threshold would be considered a small purchase. During fiscal year 2023-2024 , the School Corporation had one vendor with disbursements totaling $60,757, which exceeded the School Corporation established small purchase threshold of $50,000. The School Corporation did not provide supporting documentation that an adequate number of price or rate quotes were obtained from qualified sources for the purchases. The lack of effective internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the one vendor noted above. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAMs exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. Upon inquiry of the School Corporation and inspection of supporting documentation in order to review the procedures in place for verifying that a vendor with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded, it was identified that the School Corporation did not have policies or procedures in place to verify if vendors were suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participation in federal awards. In 2023-2024, for one covered transaction totaling $60,757, there was no evidence provided that the School Corporation verified the vendor's suspension and debarment status prior to payment. The lack of effective internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the one vendor noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 WABASH CITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases — (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 WABASH CITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause An effective system of internal controls was not designed and implemented by management of the School Corporation. The School Corporation had outlined a process for handling small purchase vendor related transactions, but that process was not followed, nor was supporting evidence maintained for the items described in the Condition and Context. Also, the School Corporation had designed a process for determining whether a vendor is suspended or debarred, but that process was not completed. Effect As a result of not designing and implementing an effective system of internal controls and following the School Corporation's policies and procedures, goods that fell within the small purchase threshold were not properly procured, and vendors to whom payments equal to or in excess of $25,000 were made were not verified to be not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation design and implement an effective internal control system and follow through with the policies and procedures related to small purchase vendor procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirements that they designed through an action plan to correct the prior audit period finding. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
(2025-016) Title: Internal control over SNAP procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office for Family Independence Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Title: SNAP Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 10.551, 10.561 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 7 CFR 277.14; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. 7 CFR 277.14 requires the Department to submit proposed contracts and related procurement documents to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) for preaward review and approval when the procurement is expected to exceed $10,000 and is to be awarded without competition, or only one bid or offer is received in response to solicitation. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. Condition: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides monthly benefits to eligible households to purchase nutritious foods, along with funds for administration, nutrition education, and obesity prevention. SNAP is administered by the Office for Family Independence (OFI). OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJF) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSA tested 2 noncompetitive contracts that accounted for approximately $4.4 million of the $5.8 million in SNAP procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • OFI could not provide documentation that FNS approved applicable procurement documents prior to contract award as required by 7 CFR 277.14. • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OFI were accurate. • For 1 contract, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review and OSPS approved the PJF after the contract had commenced, 42 days and 66 days, respectively, after the contract start date. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $5.8 million in procurement-related transactions from SNAP administration funds of $19.5 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OFI develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • Federal pre-procurement approvals are obtained before contracts are awarded, if required; • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OFI for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-13 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1108-06)
(2025-027) Title: Internal control over Summer EBT procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office for Family Independence Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Title: Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer Program for Children Assistance Listing Number: 10.646 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 7 CFR 277.14; 7 CFR 292.11; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. 7 CFR 277.14 requires the Department to submit proposed contracts and related procurement documents to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) for preaward review and approval when the procurement is expected to exceed $10,000 and is to be awarded without competition, or only one bid or offer is received in response to solicitation. 7 CFR 292.11 states that the standards prescribed in 7 CFR 277.14, as well as the requirement for prior approval, apply to information system services and equipment acquired primarily to support Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT). Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. Condition: The Summer EBT program provides a $120 annual benefit to eligible children to purchase nutritious foods during the summer and is administered by the Office for Family Independence (OFI). OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJF) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSA tested 2 contracts, 1 procured competitively and 1 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for $408,351 of the $424,272 in Summer EBT program procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • OFI could not provide documentation that FNS approved applicable procurement documents prior to contract award as required by 7 CFR 292.11. • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OFI were accurate. OSA utilized a risk-based approach to select 1 contract issued by OFI and a non-statistical random sample of all other contracts. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $424,272 in procurement-related transactions from Summer EBT funds of $14.5 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances. • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OFI develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • Federal pre-procurement approvals are obtained before contracts are awarded, if required; • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OFI for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-17 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS will amend and formalize our draft policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This will include the expansion of an agency-focused section to further emphasize contract submission and processing expectations, as well as the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. The amended and additional content will be integrated into the draft OSPS Policy Manual for release later this year. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1121-03)
(2025-035) Title: Internal control over Health Disparities program procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Maine Center for Disease Control & Prevention Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (STLT) Health Department Response to Public Health or Healthcare Crises Assistance Listing Number: 93.391 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or non-competitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. A Notice of Intent to Waive the Competitive Bidding Process (NOI) must be posted to the OSPS website for 7 calendar days prior to the start of a noncompetitively bid contract. Condition: The Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (STLT) Health Department Response to Public Health or Healthcare Crises (Health Disparities) program was implemented to address disparities in access to healthcare in populations that are at high-risk and underserved, including racial and ethnic minority groups and people living in rural communities. The Health Disparities program is administered by the Maine Center for Disease Control & Prevention’s (MeCDC) Division of Population Health Equity. OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJFs) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSPS must publicly post a NOI for all procurements over $10,000 entered into without a competitive process for a minimum of 7 days prior to the start of the contract. The NOI includes the signed PJF provided to OSPS by DCM. OSA tested 30 contracts, 21 procured competitively and 9 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for approximately $4.5 million of the $6.2 million in Health Disparities program procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by MeCDC were accurate. • For 27 contracts, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review after the contract had commenced, between 1 and 131 days after the contract start date. For all 30 contracts, OSPS approved the PJF after the contract commenced, between 5 and 169 days after the contract start date. • For all 9 noncompetitive contracts, OSPS posted the NOI after contract performance had commenced, between 24 and 171 days after the contract start date. For 7 of these contracts, services had been initiated and financial obligations incurred prior to the NOI. OSA utilized a risk-based approach to select 21 contracts issued by MeCDC and a non-statistical random sample of all other contracts. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $6.2 million in procurement-related transactions from Health Disparities program funds of $6.7 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements, including NOI posting requirements, could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and MeCDC develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by MeCDC for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-20 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1123-06)
(2025-039) Title: Internal control over PDG procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office of Child and Family Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Every Student Succeeds Act/Preschool Development Grants Assistance Listing Number: 93.434 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. A Notice of Intent to Waive the Competitive Bidding Process (NOI) must be posted to the OSPS website for 7 calendar days prior to the start of a non-competitively bid contract. Condition: The Every Student Succeeds Act/Preschool Development Grants (PDG) program assists states in helping low-income and disadvantaged children enter kindergarten prepared and ready to succeed in school and helps improve the transitions from the early care and education setting to elementary school. PDG is administered by the Office of Child and Family Services (OCFS). OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJFs) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSPS must publicly post a NOI for all procurements over $10,000 entered into without a competitive process for a minimum of 7 calendar days prior to the start of the contract. The NOI includes the signed PJF provided to OSPS by DCM. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 10 OCFS contracts, 4 procured competitively and 6 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for $5.6 million of the $6.5 million in OCFS PDG procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OCFS were accurate. • For 6 contracts, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review after the contract had commenced, between 16 and 192 days after the contract start date. For 8 contracts, OSPS approved the PJF after the contract commenced, between 18 and 214 days after the contract start date. For 1 contract, documentary evidence of PJF approval by OSPS could not be provided. • For 4 noncompetitive contracts, OSPS posted the NOI after contract performance had commenced, between 38 and 214 days after the contract start date. Additionally, for 1 noncompetitive contract, services had been initiated and financial obligations incurred and a NOI was not posted to the OSPS webstie. OSA utilized a risk-based approach to select 5 contracts issued by OCFS and a non-statistical random sample of all other contracts. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $6.5 million in OCFS procurement-related transactions from PDG funds of $11.5 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements, including NOI posting requirements, could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OCFS develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OCFS for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-22 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1122-05)
(2025-046) Title: Internal control over TANF procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office for Family Independence Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Assistance Listing Number: 93.558 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. A Notice of Intent to Waive the Competitive Bidding Process (NOI) must be posted to the OSPS website for 7 calendar days prior to the start of a noncompetitively bid contract. Condition: The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program was implemented to provide temporary cash assistance, job training, and support services to low-income families with children. The TANF program is administered by the Office for Family Independence (OFI). OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJFs) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSPS must publicly post a NOI for all procurements over $10,000 entered into without a competitive process for a minimum of 7 calendar days prior to the start of the contract. The NOI includes the signed PJF provided to OSPS by DCM. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 14 contracts, 6 procured competitively and 8 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for $21.6 million of the $35.0 million in TANF procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OFI were accurate. • For 7 contracts, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review after the contract had commenced, between 5 and 109 days after the contract start date. For 12 contracts, OSPS approved the PJF after the contract commenced, between 11 and 159 days after the contract start date. For 1 contract, the PJF was not provided. • For 2 noncompetitive contracts, OSPS posted the NOI after contract performance had already commenced, between 44 and 59 days after the contract start date. For both of these contracts, services had been initiated and financial obligations incurred prior to the NOI. OSA selected a non-statistical random sample. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $35.0 million in procurement-related transactions from TANF funds of $100.2 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements, including NOI posting requirements, could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OFI develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OFI for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-24 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1111-10)
(2025-051) Title: Internal control over CCDF procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office of Child and Family Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: CCDF Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 93.489, 93.575, 93.596 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. A Notice of Intent to Waive the Competitive Bidding Process (NOI) must be posted to the OSPS website for 7 calendar days prior to the start of a noncompetitively bid contract. Condition: The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) Cluster is administered by the Office of Child and Family Services (OCFS) and provides funding to increase the availability, affordability, and quality of childcare services in the State. OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJFs) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSPS must publicly post a NOI for all procurements over $10,000 entered into without a competitive process for a minimum of 7 calendar days prior to the start of the contract. The NOI includes the signed PJF provided to OSPS by DCM. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 13 contracts, 3 procured competitively and 10 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for $10.1 million of the $14.4 million in CCDF program procurement- related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OCFS were accurate. • For 11 contracts, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review after the contract had commenced, between 7 and 198 days after the contract start date. For 12 contracts, OSPS approved the PJF after the contract commenced, between 12 and 200 days after the contract start date. • For 3 of the noncompetitive contracts, OSPS posted the NOI after contract performance had commenced, between 12 and 208 days after the contract start date. For all 3 contracts, services had been initiated and financial obligations incurred prior to the NOI. OSA utilized a risk-based approach to select 2 contracts issued by OCFS and a non-statistical random sample of all other contracts. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $14.4 million in procurement-related transactions from CCDF funds of $45.1 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements, including NOI posting requirements, could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OCFS develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OCFS for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-26 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1114-06)
(2025-057) Title: Internal control over Foster Care procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office of Child and Family Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Foster Care – Title IV-E Assistance Listing Number: 93.658 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. A Notice of Intent to Waive the Competitive Bidding Process (NOI) must be posted to the OSPS website for 7 calendar days prior to the start of a noncompetitively bid contract. Condition: The Foster Care – Title IV-E (Foster Care) program is designed to help states provide safe and stable out-of-home care for children under its jurisdiction until the children are returned home safely, placed with adoptive families, or placed in other planned arrangements for permanency. The Foster Care program is administered by the Office of Child and Family Services (OCFS). OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJFs) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSPS must publicly post a NOI for all procurements over $10,000 entered into without a competitive process for a minimum of 7 calendar days prior to the start of the contract. The NOI includes the signed PJF provided to OSPS by DCM. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 4 contracts, 1 procured competitively and 3 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for approximately $4 million of the $4.6 million in Foster Care program procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OCFS were accurate. • For 1 contract, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review after the contract had commenced, 38 days after the contract start date. For all 4 contracts, OSPS approved the PJF after the contract commenced, between 25 and 60 days after the contract start date. • For 1 of the noncompetitive contracts, OSPS posted the NOI after contract performance had commenced, 40 days after the contract start date. For this contract, services had been initiated and financial obligations incurred prior to the NOI. OSA utilized a risk-based approach to select 2 contracts issued by OCFS and a non-statistical random sample of all other contracts. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $4.6 million in procurement-related transactions from Foster Care funds of approximately $12 million. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements, including NOI posting requirements, could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OCFS develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OCFS for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-28 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1109-04)
(2025-065) Title: Internal control over Medicaid procurement needs improvement Prior Year Findings: None State Department: Administrative and Financial Services Health and Human Services State Bureau: Office of State Procurement Services Division of Contract Management Office of MaineCare Services Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Title: Medicaid Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 93.775, 93.777, 93.778 Federal Award Identification Number: See E-65 to E-66 Compliance Area: Procurement and suspension and debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency Questioned Costs: None Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303; 2 CFR 200.317; 5 MRSA 1825-B and D; Office of State Procurement Services (OSPS) policies The Department must establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. The Department must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. Awards shall be made to the best-value bidder, taking into consideration the best interest of the State. The requirement to competitively bid a contract may be waived if specific criteria is met, including the item or service can only be procured from one source or it is an emergency procurement. Each bid, with the name of the bidder, must be entered on record. Each record, with the successful bid indicated, must be open to public inspection after the letting of the contract. The Department must justify the selection of vendor, either through competitive or noncompetitive process, and provide a detailed explanation of cost, demonstrating how the best value for the State is ensured. The Chief Procurement Officer shall make the public aware of contracts and grants for which bids are being requested and communicate the procedure used in reviewing bids. Contracts must be submitted to OSPS at least 14 days prior to the contract start date. A Notice of Intent to Waive the Competitive Bidding Process (NOI) must be posted to the OSPS website for 7 calendar days prior to the start of a noncompetitively bid contract. Condition: The Medicaid program is administered by the Office of MaineCare Services (OMS). OSPS is the central oversight agency for all State procurement. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Division of Contract Management (DCM) oversees the solicitation and contract implementation for all DHHS procurement. DCM coordinates with DHHS program personnel to evaluate and select vendors and subrecipients, determine contract terms, and provide required documentation to OSPS. OSPS is responsible for reviewing and approving Procurement Justification Forms (PJFs) submitted by DCM on behalf of program personnel prior to the award of contracts. The PJF represents program personnel’s assertion that the selected procurement method is appropriate under applicable State and Federal requirements, and that required evaluation procedures have been performed. OSPS must publicly post a NOI for all procurements over $10,000 entered into without a competitive process for a minimum of 7 calendar days prior to the start of the contract. The NOI includes the signed PJF provided to OSPS by DCM. The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) tested 26 contracts, 6 procured competitively and 20 procured noncompetitively, that accounted for $42.8 million of the $91.3 million in Medicaid procurement-related transactions in fiscal year 2025 and found: • PJFs were reviewed for reasonableness by DCM and OSPS, but DHHS could not provide documentation to support the assertions made by OMS were accurate. • For 18 contracts, DCM provided the PJF to OSPS for their review after the contract had commenced, between 5 and 152 days after the contract start date. For 18 contracts, OSPS approved the PJF after the contract commenced, between 7 and 182 days after the contract start date. For 2 contracts, documentary evidence of PJF approval by OSPS could not be provided. • For 9 noncompetitive contracts, OSPS posted the NOI after contract performance had commenced, between 7 and 169 days after the contract start date. For 7 of these contracts, services had been initiated and financial obligations incurred prior to the NOI. OSA utilized a risk-based approach to select 6 contracts issued by OMS and a non-statistical random sample of all other contracts. Context: In fiscal year 2025, the Department expended $91.3 million in procurement-related transactions from Medicaid funds of $3.4 billion. Cause: • Lack of adequate policies and procedures • Lack of supervisory oversight Effect: • Potential questioned costs and future disallowances • Noncompliance with Federal and State procurement requirements, including NOI posting requirements, could result in the need to void a contract or exposure to legal proceedings. Recommendation: We recommend that OSPS: • increase agency awareness of the procedures related to the timing of procurement contract documentation being submitted to OSPS for review prior to the contract start date; and • finalize and implement an updated procurement policy and procedure manual that identifies the parties responsible for key aspects of the procurement process. We also recommend that DCM and OMS develop policies and procedures and increase oversight to ensure all procurement transactions comply with Federal and State requirements, including: • DCM obtaining and reviewing documentation to support the assertions made by OMS for accuracy and reasonableness; and • ensuring PJFs are completed, reviewed, and submitted to OSPS prior to the contract start date. Corrective Action Plan: See F-32 Management’s Response: DAFS Response: The Department agrees with this finding. OSPS does not authorize, encourage, or approve agencies allowing vendors to perform work at risk. However, OSPS also does not delay review and approval solely due to contract start-date issues, as doing so would increase the State’s risk exposure, potentially disrupt federally required programs, and hinder agencies’ compliance with federal period-of-performance requirements. To address these concerns, OSPS will formalize and issue policy guidance that clearly defines agency and OSPS roles and responsibilities in the contracting process. This guidance will expand the agency-focused section to emphasize timely submission and processing, along with the risks and implications associated with contracting delays. In advance of fiscal year-end, OSPS will issue a separate policy document and companion guidance as a spotlight topic in the monthly newsletter and posted to the intranet for agency reference. DAFS Contact: David Morris, Acting Chief Procurement Officer, OSPS, 207-624-7335 DHHS Response: The Department partially agrees with this finding. There is not a requirement to provide documentation that the Department personnel’s assertions are accurate regarding Department personnel’s review of PJFs. The Department agrees that it can improve the timing of procurement documents in relation to the start dates of the contracts. Extenuating circumstances exist periodically that prevent the timeliness of these documents. In some cases, there are delays in the grant approval at the Federal level. Delays in Legislative approval of budgets can also lead to procurement documentation delays. DHHS Contact: Jim Lopatosky, Director, Division of Contract Management, DHHS, 207-287-5075 Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: 2 CFR 200.303 requires the Department to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over Federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the Department is managing awards in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of awards. Absent adequate documentation to support the veracity of the assertions made on the PJF by program personnel, the best value for the State cannot be ensured. The finding remains as stated. (State Number: 25-1106-06)
Reference Number: 2025-014 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury State Department Name: Division of Libraries Federal Program: COVID-19 – Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund Assistance Listing Number: 21.029 Award Number and Year: CPFFN0144 (2/4/2022 – 12/31/2026) Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or Specific Requirement Compliance: Per 2 CFR section 200.317 Procurements by states, when procuring property and services under a Federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements from its non-Federal funds. Per 29 Del C. Chapter 69, section 6981 Large professional service procurement process: (a) Any state contract for which an agency is a party with probable fees, including reimbursable expenses and amendments, greater than the threshold amount or amounts established by the Contracting and Purchasing Advisory Council pursuant to § 6913 of this title for the completed job will be subject to the provisions of this subchapter. (b) Each agency shall publicly announce, not less than once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper published or circulated in each county of the State, when professional services are required (c) Each agency shall publicly announce each professional services contract subject to subsection (a) of this section by electronic publication accessible to the public in a manner prescribed pursuant to § 6902(9) of this title for two consecutive weeks. (d) Such announcement shall include: (1) The project identification; (2) General description and scope of the project; (3) Location; (4) Deadline for submission of brief letters of interest; (5) Criteria for selection of professionals including any special criteria required for any particular project; (6) Indication of how interested professionals can apply for consideration; (7) The agency's intention to award to more than one firm, if applicable; and (8) A description of the selection process to be used, as defined in § 6982 of this title. (f) Each agency shall establish written administrative procedures for the evaluation of applicants. These administrative procedures shall be adopted and made available to the public by each agency before publicly announcing an occasion when professional services are required. One or more of the following criteria may be utilized in ranking the applicants under consideration: (1) Experience and reputation; (2) Expertise (for the particular project under consideration); (3) Capacity to meet requirements (size, financial condition, etc.); (4) Location (geographical); (5) Demonstrated ability; (6) Familiarity with public work and its requirements; or (7) Distribution of work to individuals and firms or economic considerations. (g) In addition to the above, other criteria necessary for a quality, cost-effective project may be utilized. (h) Each project shall be given individual attention, and a weighted average may be applied to criteria according to its importance to each project. (i) For the selection process described in § 6982(b) of this title, price may be a criteria used to rank applicants under consideration. Per 29 Del C. Chapter 69, section 6982 Selection: (a) Agencies shall use the selection process described in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) Based upon the criteria established pursuant to § 6981(f) of this title, the agency shall determine all applicants that meet the minimum qualifications to perform the required services. (2) The agency shall then interview at least one of the qualified firms. The agency may negotiate with one firm without terminating negotiations with another firm and may negotiate with one or more firms during the same period. At any point in the negotiation process, the agency may, at its discretion, terminate negotiations with any or all firms. (3) The agency may require the firm with whom the agency is negotiating to execute a truth-in-negotiation certificate stating the wage rates and other factual unit costs supporting the compensation are accurate, complete and current at the time of contracting. All professional service contracts shall provide that the original contract price and any additions thereto shall be adjusted to exclude significant sums where the agency determines the contract price was increased due to inaccurate, incomplete or noncurrent wage rates and other factual unit costs. All such contract adjustments shall be made within one year following the end of the contract. Sole source procurement shall be avoided, except when no reasonable alternative sources exist. A written determination by the agency for the sole source procurement shall be included in the agency's contract file. (29 Del. C. §6904(i)) Control: Per 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The Division of Libraries (Division) was unable to provide evidence that it had procured a contract in accordance with the State’s procurement policies. Context For one of five contracts selected for testing, the Division was unable to provide supporting documentation that it had procured the contract in accordance with the State’s procurement policies. Questioned Costs Undetermined. Cause The Division’s internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that federal and statewide procurement policies were followed for purchases made for the program. Effect Failure to adhere to procurement policies and procedures may result in the contract being issued under terms and conditions that are not in the best interest of the federal program and/or the State. Recommendation The Division should review and enhance controls and procedures to ensure that it follows the State’s procurement policies for all contracts charged to the program. Views of Responsible Officials The Department of State, Division of Libraries disputes the audit finding of “significant deficiency in internal control over compliance, other matters” on the basis that Title 29, Chapter 69 of the Delaware Code is inapplicable and exempts the purchase of services by libraries from the State procurement process, including construction. Without admission to any deficiency in the Division’s “internal control over compliance, other matters,” the Division of Libraries will review all internal controls and procedures to ensure compliance with the State’s procurement process. Auditor Rejoinder Auditors acknowledge that Title 29, Chapter 69(d) of the Delaware Code includes exemptions related to libraries. Specifically, it states: “This chapter shall not apply to any purchase of library materials such as books, periodicals, subscriptions and software by libraries of any agency, nor shall this chapter apply to the purchase of services by libraries of any agency pursuant to Chapter 66 of this title.” Library services is further defined in Title 29, Chapter 66, §6602(a), Contracting for library services, which states the following: “In order to encourage the maintenance and development of proper standards, including personnel standards, hours of operation, library materials, collection standards and interlibrary resource sharing, and to provide for the development of statewide public library service, the Delaware Division of Libraries may contract with any public library, including privately incorporated public libraries or public library systems established pursuant to Chapter 8 of Title 9, which qualifies under standards established by the Division with the approval of the Delaware Council on Libraries, to provide library services.” Furthermore, Title 29, Chapter 66A, establishes requirements regarding library construction which includes a provision for proposal review and does not exempt such projects from following established procurement policies. The contract identified by auditors in this finding is a $22 million contract for “management and construction services for the North Wilmington Library Think Do (“Project”)”. Auditors believe the scope and nature of this agreement does not fall under the exemptions established for library services under Title 29, Chapter 69(d) of the Delaware Code. The Division was unable to provide auditors with documentation that it had followed established procurement procedures when it entered into this agreement.
Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Consultant Payments Program Name: Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (Assistance Listing 20.326) Federal Award Agency: Department of Transportation Award Years: Federal Fiscal Years 2024 and 2025 Federal Award Number: 69A36524520310FSPCT Background The Department of Transportation (DOT) Consultant Design Administration Manual defines extra work as work the department orders beyond the scope of the agreement when such work is not reflected in the fee payments specified in the agreement. Criteria Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200.317 requires that when conducting procurement transactions under a federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-federal funds. Title 2 CFR Part 200.403(c) and (g) provides that to be allowable under federal awards, costs must be consistent with established policies and procedures and adequately documented. The DOT Consultant Design Administration Manual requires consultants to obtain written authorization from the department before they begin any extra work; otherwise, DOT is not obligated to compensate the consultant for that work. Condition Our review of 11 transactions totaling $46,543,994 disclosed that DOT made a $47,870 payment for extra work performed by a consultant that it did not authorize before work began. Context During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, non-payroll expenditures totaled $105,024,824. We randomly selected ten payments to review, as well as one manual journal adjustment. The sample was not statistically valid. Questioned Costs $47,870 Effect Failure to comply with DOT’s policies regarding extra work performed by consultants may result in unauthorized costs. Cause A lack of management oversight contributed to this condition. Prior Audit Finding We have not previously reported this finding. Recommendation The Department of Transportation should strengthen internal controls over consultant payments for extra work. Views of Responsible Officials “We agree with this finding.”
Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program Name: Wisconsin Charter Schools Program Waiver Cohort Assistance Listing Number: 84.282 Pass-Through Agency: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Pass-Through Number(s): 2025-138005-DPI-WCSPWC1-360 Award Period: July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria: 2 CFR Sections 200.317 – 200.327 of the Uniform Guidance details procurement requirements for non-federal entities. Condition: One City Schools, Inc. did not document procurement methods, rationales, and decisions in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned costs: None Context: We sampled 6 procurement transactions, noting that 5 of them did not have documentation following the procurement policy. Cause: Policies and procedures were put in place but not consistently followed. Effect: This could result in noncompliance, disallowed costs, or discontinuance of federal funding. Repeat Finding: Yes (2024-002) Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization maintain effective internal controls over procurement requirements. Views of responsible officials: One City Schools, Inc. agrees with the finding and are working on implementing internal controls over procurement.
2025-001 - Procurement, Debarment and Suspension Federal Program Information: U.S. Department of the Treasury, passed through the Vermont Department of Public Safety CFDA - 21.027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria: The following CFRs apply to this finding: 2 CFR 200.214, 2 CFR section 200.317-200.327 Condition: During audit procedures it was identified that the Town did not check sam.gov to confirm that the contractor was not debarred or suspended from receiving federal funds nor did they request a Suspension and Debarment certification from the contractor. Cause: The Town does not have the necessary internal controls over compliance. Effect: Contracts may be awarded to contractors that are debarred or suspended from working on federally funded projects. Identification of Questioned Costs: None Identified. Context: Two contracts were reviewed out of three. This is not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Town revise its procurement policy to fully incorporate all elements required by 2 CFR §200.317-200.327. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Please see the Corrective Action Plan.
Federal agency: U.S. Small Business Administration Federal program name: Congressional Grants Inclusive Ventures Small Business Program Assistance listing number: 59.059 Pass-through agency: Anne Arundel County, Maryland Pass-through number: SBAHQ23I0140 Award Period: September 1,2023 through August 31, 2028 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Findings: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: Nonfederal entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327. 2 CFR section 200.318 states the grant recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in sections 200.317 through 200.327. Compliance: Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the nonfederal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA), (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The Corporation did not follow their written procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations which also conform to the applicable federal law and standards identified in the Uniform Guidance. The Corporation could not provide documentation that it ensured contractors were not suspended or debarred before executing contracts with the entities. Questioned Costs Amounts paid to the two contractors for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 was $175,000. Context Supporting documentation for the procurement, suspension and debarment status for two of the two contractors selected for testing was not documented. Cause The Corporation has not historically received federal funding so the procurement, suspension and debarment documentation was not deemed necessary. Effect A lack of documented procurement standards for the Corporation could increase the risk of goods and services being procured through a method which is not in accordance with applicable State, local, and tribal law as well as federal regulations including the Uniform Guidance. If the suspension and debarment status is not verified when entering into covered transactions, it is possible that a subaward could be issued to an ineligible entity. Repeat Finding No Recommendation We recommend that management follow their written procurement policies and controls to ensure it maintains documentation of procurement, suspension and debarments checks and that the documentation is available for audit. Views of Responsible Officials Management agrees with finding. See corrective action plan for additional information.
Finding 2025-001 Internal control deficiency and noncompliance over procurement and suspension and debarment. Identification of the federal program: Assistance Listing Number 93.493: • Congressional Directives • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services • Federal award identification number – CE146487 • Federal award year – 7/1/2024 – 6/30/2025 • Pass-through entity – The Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center • Pass-through entity identifying numbers: H79FG000747 and H79FG001034 Criteria or specific requirement (including statutory, regulatory, or other citation): Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.303, Internal controls: The non-Federal entity must (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government,” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.318, General procurement standards: (a) the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 200.317 through 200.327; (b) non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders; (c) (1) the non-Federal entity must maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.318, General procurement standards: (i) the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.319, Competition: (a) All procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of this section and 200.320. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.320, Methods of procurement to be followed: The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award: (a) (2) Small purchases – (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity; (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate –(1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price; (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.320, Methods of procurement to be followed: (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold; (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.324, Contract cost and price: (a) The non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but, as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart C 200.214, Suspension and debarment: Non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations that restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter I, Part 180, Subpart C 180.300: What must I do before I enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier? When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our testing over procurement, we observed management did not have documented procurement procedures that conformed to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR section 200.318 to 200.327 and written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Management did not have internal controls in place over procurements to ensure price or rate quotations were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources, formal procurements to ensure sealed bids or proposals were obtained through public advertising, and completion of a cost or price analysis in connection with all procurement actions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold. Management did not maintain records for procurements to document the history of procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. In addition, during our testing over suspension and debarment, we observed management did not retain support for internal control documentation for all vendors, evidencing that the vendors were searched for suspension and debarment upon entering into a contract supported with federal funds. Cause: Management did not have internal controls in place over the compliance requirements as stated in the criteria or specific requirement section above. Effect or potential effect: Procurements were not supported by internal controls and could potentially include unreasonable prices or rates. In addition, if a search for suspension and debarment is not conducted, the entity could contract with vendors that are suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: $1,385,165 – Assistance Listing Number 93.493 Federal award identification number – CE146487 Pass-through entity identifying numbers: H79FG000747 and H79FG001034 Questioned costs were computed as all procurements selected for testing. Questioned costs for each award are as follows: • CE146487: $60,874 • H79FG000747: $119,479 • H79FG001034: $1,204,812 Questioned costs means an amount, expended or received from a Federal award, that (1) is noncompliant or suspected noncompliant with Federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of the Federal award or (2) at the time of the audit, lacked adequate documentation to support compliance. Context: During our testing over procurements, we selected five vendors for testing with total expenditures of $1,385,165 from a population of procurements totaling $1,425,361, subject to formal procurement procedures. We observed management did not have internal controls in place to ensure the compliance requirements as stated in the criteria or specific requirement section above were performed for any of the five procurements selected for testing. For suspension and debarment, we selected five vendors for testing totaling $1,385,165. Management was unable to provide documentation that internal controls were executed for any of the vendors selected for testing. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: Management should create documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.327 and written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Management should develop and implement internal controls over procurements to ensure price or rate quotations are obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources, formal procurements to ensure sealed bids or proposals are obtained through public advertising, and completion of a cost or price analysis in connection with all procurement actions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold. Management should maintain records for procurements to document the history of procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Management should create documented suspension and debarment procedures and develop and implement internal controls to ensure vendors were searched for suspension and debarment at the time of awarding a contract supported by federal funding and retain evidence supporting such procedures. Management should review the procurements identified as questioned costs to identify if any improper payments were made to the entity. Views of responsible officials: We agree with the finding that internal controls were not sufficient to maintain compliance with federal procurement standards under Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.318 to 200.327 for a non-federal entity. However, the funds were expended for the intended purpose of the federal award. The Company is committed to implementing internal controls to ensure procurement related to federal awards follow 2 CFR section 200.318 to 200.327. The Company will update the procurement policy to ensure it complies with the requirements of 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.327, which includes the written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest, governing the actions of its employees who select, award, and administer procurement contracts. This policy will include procedures to ensure proper procurement for purchases to ensure sufficient price quotations are obtained from the required number of qualified sources, proper sealed bids or proposals are obtained through public advertising, an appropriate cost or price analysis is performed for procurement actions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, documentation is retained, and proper oversight is exercised to demonstrate compliance with 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.327.
Assistance Listing Number 84.181 Special Education Department of Education Passed Through Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians Procurement 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327 Criteria Procurement Standards require for the District to maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. Condition The District performed a procurement activity that did not follow District policies as well as standards found in 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. The District failed to obtain quotes or bids for a purchase exceeding $10,000. This condition was noted for the following expenditure: Check 240313 Dated 10/17/2024 for $10,219.00 Context Per discussion with the District staff and review of program expenditures, there were 2 expenditures incurred in which quotes or bids should have been obtained. Both transactions were tested and it was noted that 1 transaction did not have the necessary quotes or bids. Cause District’s internal controls in place failed to ensure all procurement policies are followed. Effect District is not in compliance with their internal procurement policies and procurement standards. Questioned Costs Undeterminable. Repeat Finding See prior year finding 2024-006 Recommendation Recommend the District to review internal controls to ensure all internal policies and compliance requirements are both being monitored and the District is remaining in compliance. Management’s Response See corrective action plan.
Finding 2025-001 – Material Weakness AL No: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Passed-through: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Passed-through Grantor’s No’s.: SPIL-6085 (091) for Caltrans and #240023 for SACOG. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E (Uniform Guidance) Section 200.318(a) states that the “The recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in Sections 200.317 through 200.327.” The contract should have conformed to the following sections in the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM): - Section 10.1 provides requirements for federally funded architectural and engineering (A&E) contracts. - Section 10.3 provides requirements for non-A&E contracts. - Section 10.1.9 states that the local public agency (LPA) must “obtain Caltrans approval on the Exhibit 12- F: Cost Effectiveness/Public Interest Finding/A&E Noncompetitive and retain all documents in the project files” for procurements by noncompetitive proposals. - Section 9.7.2 states that the LPA must have a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal set, and “must have an Exhibit 9-D: DBE Contract Goal Methodology submitted to the” District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE). “LPAs may not advertise the contract before receiving DLAE feedback on the DBE goal.” Condition: Caltrans notified the Authority that two Next-Generation Facility Project (the Project) consulting contracts were procured in compliance the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) procurement guidelines but did not conform with the State of California LAPM. Caltrans indicated that the AECOM A&E consultant contract procurement did not comply with Sections 10.01 and 10.1.9 of the LAPM, including not including a Public Interest Finding for the sole source procurement of the agreement, and the LeFlore Group, LLC non-A&E consultant contract procurement did not comply with Section 10.3 of the LAPM. In addition, a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise goal was not requested nor completed as part of the advertisement for the project, which was required under Section 9.7.2 of the Caltrans LAPM. Effect: The Authority was not in compliance with the Caltrans LAPM and as a result, the Authority was required to halt work and repay Caltrans and SACOG for funds already reimbursed to the Project of $300,000 under AL 20.205. Cause: Caltrans and SACOG are both pass-through agencies for this grant, with the Authority being the final subrecipient. SACOG was not aware that the procurement requirements under this grant follow U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration requirements that differ from U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration requirements, which are administered by a different Caltrans department. As a result, the additional requirements in the LAPM were not communicated to the Authority and the Authority was not aware of the requirements and failed to comply with the LAPM. Context: The Authority submitted the procurement to the Caltrans Federal Transit Administration Programs Procurement Oversight Branch for approval prior to contracting with the consultants and the procurement was approved. However, the grant was provided through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans has a different oversight Branch for FHWA funded projects, which was not made clear to the Authority by either passthrough agency. AL 20.205 was originally reported on the SEFA and was selected for testing a major program as it was a high-risk Type B program under which the Authority incurred $300,000 of grant expenses and received the grant proceeds prior to June 30, 2025. Caltrans issued a sanction letter on December 9, 2025, which required the grant funds to be returned to Caltrans. As a result, the Authority removed the expenses from the SEFA, but the program is reported as a major program to report the procurement finding on the schedule of findings and questioned costs. - Questioned Costs: $300,000 Recommendation: We recommend the Authority add additional language to its Procurement Policy documenting the requirement to follow Section 10 of the LAPM and the criteria under which it applies when grants are received from the FHWA. Management’s Response: Management’s response is included in the attached Corrective Action Plan. Report on Internal Control over Compliance See finding 2025-001 above, which is also considered to be an internal control over compliance finding in the Major Federal Awards Program Audit.
Section III - Findings and Questioned Costs - Major Federal Award Program Audit Finding Reference Number: 2025-001 Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program: Economic Development Initiative, Community_x0004_ Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants - 14.251 Type of Finding: Federal Award Finding Finding Resolution Status: In Process Information on Universe Population Size: N/A Sample Size Information: N/A Identification of Repeat Finding and Finding Reference Number: Not a repeat finding Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.318(a), non-federal entities must establish and maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders. As required under 2 CFR Subpart D (§§200.317–200.327), organizations must follow written procurement procedures that reflect applicable state, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal law and the standards in the Uniform Guidance. Statement of Condition: United Playaz, Inc. and Subsidiary (the "Organization") does not have a documented procurement policy that complies with the procurement standards in 2 CFR 200.317–200.327. The Organization has purchasing policies, but no written procedures addressing required elements such as procurement methods, competition, conflicts of interest, domestic preferences, price/cost analysis, or contractor oversight. Cause: The absence of a compliant procurement policy appears to stem from insufficient familiarity with the detailed procurement requirements in the Uniform Guidance, as this was their first award and audit under these standards. Management utilized other local government procurement policies to perform their procurement procedures. Effect or Potential Effect: While no procurement errors were identified during the audit and no questioned costs resulted from this condition, the lack of required written procedures increases the risk of: -Noncompliance with Federal procurement standards -Inadequate competition and pricing documentation -Increased susceptibility to conflict of interest risks -Potential future questioned costs or disallowed expenditures Failure to maintain documented procedures also impairs the organization’s ability to demonstrate compliance to Federal agencies and pass through entities. Auditor Non-Compliance Code: S - Internal control deficiencies Questioned Costs: $- Reportable Views of Responsible Officials: While United Playaz did not have their own policy compliant with federal standards, the organization has historically used procurement guidelines as required by the San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) which complies to the Federal standards and guidelines administered and approved by HUD. In addition, the general contractor procurement process was completed prior to the initiation and receipt of the HUD award. _x0004__x0004_Management acknowledges that, while procurement activities were performed using established external guidelines, the Organization did not have a formally adopted written procurement policy that fully complies with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.317–200.327 at the time of the audit. Management has since identified this gap and is in the process of developing a compliant written procurement policy. Context: For procurement processes, the Organization has historically utilized procurement guidelines required by the San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development and other applicable local government procurement frameworks. In addition, the general contractor procurement process was completed prior to the initiation and receipt of the federal award. Recommendations: 1. Develop and formally adopt a written procurement policy that complies with 2 CFR 200.317–200.327 addressing at minimum: -Procurement methods and applicable dollar thresholds -Full and open competition requirements -Standards of conduct and conflicts of interest -Price or cost analysis (200.324) -Domestic preference (200.322) -Use of small/minority owned businesses (200.321) -Required contract provisions (200.327) 2. Train staff involved in procurement to ensure consistent understanding and implementation. 3. Periodically review and update the policy to remain compliant as Federal requirements evolve Auditors’ Summary of the Auditee’s Comments on the Findings and Recommendations: Response Indicator: Agree Completion Date: 6/30/2026 Response: The Organization is in the process of developing, and will formally adopt and implement, a written procurement policy that complies with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.317–200.327. The policy will address, at a minimum, procurement methods, competition requirements, standards of conduct and conflicts of interest, price or cost analysis, domestic preference requirements, and required contract provisions. In addition, management will provide formal training to personnel involved in procurement to ensure consistent application of the policy and ongoing compliance with Federal procurement standards.
Finding Reference: 2025-003 – I. Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Federal Program Information Federal Agencies: Department of Health and Human Services Department of Justice Awards: Assistance Listing 93.078 – Strengthening Emergency Care Delivery in the United States Healthcare System through Health Information and Promotion Assistance Listing 16.753 – Congressionally Recommended Awards Award Periods: September 30, 2023 – September 29, 2025 July 1, 2024 – September 30, 2026 Description: Incomplete Federal Requirements within Procurement Policies Criteria In accordance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 200.303, Internal controls, “The Non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).” Part 200.320 Methods of procurement to be followed states the following: “The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319” regarding the methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. Condition As part of our testing over the operating effectiveness of internal controls over the Procurement, Suspension and Debarment assertion for our major programs, we noted that the Corporation did not have a procurement policy that conforms to all applicable standards contained in the Uniform Guidance, when purchasing goods or services with the federal funds. Cause The Corporation did not comply and maintain a procurement policy that conforms to the provisions required by the Uniform Guidance upon receiving such federal funds related to their federal programs. Effect or potential effect Purchasing of goods and/or servicing with the major federal programs may not be in compliance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned costs None. Identification of a repeat finding This is a repeat finding of Finding 2024-006. Context Management has not established a procurement policy in line with the applicable standards contained in the Uniform Guidance based on review of the existing policy and discussions with management, however, no other instances of noncompliance with procurement standards identified in 2 CFR part 200 were noted as the amount of purchases exceeding the micro-purchase threshold was not direct and material to these programs and therefore no further testing over procurement was performed. Recommendation The Corporation should update its procurement policy to include the provisions required by the Uniform Guidance for purchasing goods and/or services with federal funds. View of responsible officials There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Finding No. 2025-064 Federal Awarding Agency: USDOT Impact: Significant Deficiency, Noncompliance AL Number and Title: 20.205 HPC Federal Award Number: 0956(028), 0391(017), 0920(032), 0932(055), 0003(309) Applicable Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Condition: Four of four judgmentally selected engineering and design-related professional service procurements were not publicly noticed on the Alaska Online Public Notice System. Context: DOTPF uses AASHTOWare, a web-based application designed for States to manage preconstruction and construction processes. A platform of AASHTOWare called BidX was used by DOTPF procurement staff to advertise and award contracts via the department’s webpage. DOTPF added this method of advertising for construction-related professional services to more closely align with the construction bidding process. DOTPF’s federally approved written procedures for procuring engineering and design-related services requires that DOTPF advertise all engineering and design-related service requests on the department’s internet home page and on the State’s Online Public Notice System. Of the 31 FY 25 engineering and design-related professional services procurements, the audit reviewed four randomly selected and four judgmentally selected procurements. All four judgmentally selected procurements were from the Southcoast region. According to DOTPF procurement staff, during FY 25, Southcoast region procurements were advertised solely on BidX and were not posted on the State’s Online Public Notice System. Cause: Failure to publicly notice the procurements on the Alaska Online Public Notice System was due to human error. Additionally, the Southcoast region lacked monitoring controls to ensure professional service procurements were advertised on the State’s Online Public Notice System. Criteria: Title 23 CFR 172.5(c) requires the State to prepare and maintain federally approved written policies and procedures for the procurement, management, and administration of engineering and design related consultant services. Title 2 CFR 200.317 requires that States, when procuring property and services under a federal award, to follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements from its non-federal funds. The State’s procurement policies are outlined in the State Procurement Code – AS 36.30. Alaska Statute 36.30.130(a) requires the procurement officer to give adequate public notice of the invitation to bid at least 21 days before the date for the opening of bids. Notice shall be posted on the Alaska Online Public Notices System. Effect: Noncompliance with federal solicitation requirements may have prohibited qualified vendors from being considered for a contract award. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: DOTPF’s chief contracts officer should strengthen procedures to ensure all engineering and design-related professional services solicitations are advertised on the State’s Online Public Notice System. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding.
Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Treasury 2025-001 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (Allowable Costs, Period of Performance, and Procurement) and Congressional Directives (Procurement) Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.302 and 200.403, non-federal entities must maintain records sufficient to demonstrate that costs charged to Federal Awards are allowable, properly allocated and adequately supported. Under 2 CFR 200.309 costs must provide documentation that costs were incurred within the approved period of performance. Additional 2 CFR 200.317-200.327 requires entities to maintain documentation sufficient to support the procurement process for the use of Federal Awards. Condition: The Center did not maintain adequate documentation to support compliance with Federal requirements related to allowable costs, period of performance, and procurement standards. Allowable Costs – The Center provided grant allocation worksheets that show individual employees hours charged to the federal awards; however, the grant allocation worksheets did not include any employee or supervisor signatures to attest the hour allocations were accurate. Additionally, certain invoices had a portion of the total costs allocated to the federal award, but the Center could not substantiate the basis for the allocation. Period of Performance – The Center had charged costs to the federal award for costs incurred outside the period of performance as defined by the grant agreement but could not provide documentation that supported the grantor allowed charges to be made for costs incurred outside that period. Procurement – The Center entered a contract with a Company under the Simple Acquisition threshold for procurement but was unable to provide documentation that quotes were obtained from multiple qualified vendors. Cause: The Center did not have effective controls in place to ensure proper documentation was obtained and retained to support compliance with the federal award. Effect: Without adequate supporting documentation the Organization is unable to demonstrate its compliance with all requirements of the federal award. Questioned Costs: $175,389 out of $2,453,443 of total expenditures tested. Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend The Center review and revise its documentation policies and procedures to ensure that compliance is met with regards to federal awards. Management Response: Management agrees with the finding and has collaborated with grant personnel to implement standardized personnel activity reporting and cost allocation documentation for all federal grants. The Center will strengthen controls to ensure that only allowable costs incurred within the approved grant period are charged to federal awards. In addition, procurement procedures have been revised to ensure compliance with 2 CFR $$ 200.317-200.327. Corrective actions have been implemented or are in progress and apply to all federal awards moving forward beginning in FY2026.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY; CRITERIA: 2 CFR §200.318(a) requires non‑Federal entities to maintain and follow written procurement procedures that are consistent with Federal laws, the Uniform Guidance, and applicable state laws. State procurement rules also require local governments to follow competitive purchasing and contracting procedures when expending public funds.; CONDITION: The Town’s written procurement policies have not been updated to reflect current Federal procurement standards under 2 CFR §§200.317–200.327 or applicable state procurement requirements. ; EFFECT: Because the Town’s procurement policies are not current with Federal and state requirements, the Town risks noncompliance with Federal procurement standards which increases the likelihood of questioned costs for federally funded purchases. Noncurrent policies could allow insufficient competition, incomplete documentation, or use of unallowable contract types. FEMA or other Federal agencies could determine costs to be ineligible, resulting in reimbursement reductions or the need for the Town to repay Federal funds.; CAUSE: The Town had not conducted a recent review of its procurement policies and procedures and was unaware of necessary updates. Limited staffing in the finance and administrative functions contributed to the delay in updating the written policies.; RECOMMENDATION: The Town should update its written procurement policies to fully incorporate the current Federal procurement standards under 2 CFR §200.317–§200.327 and applicable state laws. The Town should provide staff training on the revised procurement procedures and establish a periodic review schedule to ensure ongoing compliance with Federal and state requirements.; VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS AND PLANNED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: The Town of Spruce Pine agrees with this finding. Procurement policies and procedures will be updated to be compliant with federal and state laws. Staff will be trained on new procedures, and the policy will be reviewed on an annual basis.
SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCY; CRITERIA: Per 2 CFR 200.320 the auditee must use appropriate procurement methods based on dollar amounts and conditions of project-level contracts.; CONDITION: For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025 one FEMA‑funded project reviewed during the audit period, the Town allowed the contractor to begin work before a written contract was executed. The contractor mobilized and started work without a signed agreement defining scope, pricing, Federal requirements, or terms and conditions.; EFFECT: Noncompliance with Federal procurement regulations increases the risk that FEMA may consider associated costs ineligible or unreasonable. The Town could be subject to disputes over scope, pricing, or performance due to the absence of formal terms agreed upon before work began. Lack of assurance that required Federal contract provisions were included carries the potential for questioned costs that could lead to deobligation or repayment of FEMA funds.; CAUSE: The Town initiated work urgently due to the nature of the emergency event and did not follow formal procurement procedures. Staff cited time constraints and the immediate need for response activities, but no emergency procurement documentation or justification was concurrently prepared as allowed under 2 CFR §200.320(c) (noncompetitive procurement during public exigency). Personnel were also not fully aware of FEMA documentation requirements.; RECOMMENDATION: The Town should update its written procurement policies to fully incorporate the current Federal procurement standards under 2 CFR §200.317–§200.327 and applicable state laws. The Town should provide staff training on the revised procurement procedures and establish a periodic review schedule to ensure ongoing compliance with Federal and state requirements.; VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS AND PLANNED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: The Town of Spruce Pine agrees with this finding. Finance procedures will be updated to include a standard form and procedure for cost and price analysis that will be implemented immediately.
govern the performance of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Cause of Condition: Policies and procedures have not been designed and implemented to ensure compliance with all federal award requirements. Effect of Condition: This condition resulted in noncompliance with federal grant requirements and could lead to a loss of federal funds to the County. Recommendation: OSAI recommends county officials and department heads gain an understanding of federal programs awarded to Creek County. Internal control procedures should be designed and implemented to ensure compliance with federal requirements. Management Response: Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners and County Clerk: It has been brought to our attention that we need an additional policy that covers conflict of interests and govern the performance of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. We have taken this recommendation and are implementing the proper language, for all employees to acknowledge in our County Handbook. We will strengthen this control, and add this to the handbook and it will be updated yearly, so that all conflict can be disclosed. Creek County prides itself in moving toward complete transparency and holding each employee accountable to disclose all information needed to make a proper selection of purchases. Creek County Clerk's Office will work with the District Attorney's Office for proper language. Criteria: Compliance and Reporting Guidance, State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (8. Procurement, Suspension & Debarment.) Section 200.308 General Procurement Standards reads as follows: (a) Documented procurement procedures. The recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. (b) Oversight of contractors. Recipients and subrecipients must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders. See also § 200.501(h). (c) Conflicts of interest. (1) The recipient or subrecipient must maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. No employee, officer, agent, or board member with a real or apparent conflict of interest may participate in the selection, award, or administration of a contract supported by the Federal award. A conflict of interest includes when the employee, officer, agent, or board member, any member of their immediate family, their partner, or an organization that employs or is about to employ any of the parties indicated herein, has a financial or other interest in or a tangible personal benefit from an entity considered for a contract. An employee, officer, agent, and board member of the recipient or subrecipient may neither solicit nor accept gratuities, favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors. However, the recipient or subrecipient may set standards for situations where the financial interest is not substantial or a gift is an unsolicited item of nominal value. The recipient's or subrecipient's standards of conduct must also provide for disciplinary actions to be applied for violations by its employees, officers, agents, or board members. (2) If the recipient or subrecipient has a parent, affiliate, or subsidiary organization that is not a State, local government, or Indian Tribe, the recipient or subrecipient must also maintain written standards of conduct covering organizational conflicts of interest. Organizational conflicts of interest mean that because of relationships with a parent company, affiliate, or subsidiary organization, the recipient or subrecipient is unable or appears to be unable to be impartial in conducting a procurement action involving a related organization. (d) Avoidance of unnecessary or duplicative items. The recipient's or subrecipient's procedures must avoid the acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items. Consideration should be given to consolidating or breaking out procurements to obtain a more economical purchase. When appropriate, an analysis should be made between leasing and purchasing property or equipment to determine the most economical approach. (e) Procurement arrangements using strategic sourcing. When appropriate for the procurement or use of common or shared goods and services, recipients and subrecipients are encouraged to enter into State and local intergovernmental agreements or inter-entity agreements for procurement transactions. These or similar procurement arrangements using strategic sourcing may foster greater economy and efficiency. Documented procurement actions of this type (using strategic sourcing, shared services, and other similar procurement arrangements) will meet the competition requirements of this part. (f) Use of excess and surplus Federal property. The recipient or subrecipient is encouraged to use excess and surplus Federal property instead of purchasing new equipment and property when it is feasible and reduces project costs. (g) Use of value engineering clauses. When practical, the recipient or subrecipient is encouraged to use value engineering clauses in contracts for construction projects of sufficient size to offer reasonable opportunities for cost reductions. Value engineering means analyzing each contract item or task to ensure its essential function is provided at the overall lowest cost. (h) Responsible contractors. The recipient or subrecipient must award contracts only to responsible contractors that possess the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed contract. The recipient or subrecipient must consider contractor integrity, public policy compliance, proper classification of employees (see the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201, chapter 8), past performance record, and financial and technical resources when conducting a procurement transaction. See also § 200.214. (i) Procurement records. The recipient or subrecipient must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of each procurement transaction. These records must include the rationale for the procurement method, contract type selection, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. (j) Time-and-materials type contracts. (1) The recipient or subrecipient may use a time-and-materials type contract only after a determination that no other contract is suitable and if the contract includes a ceiling price that the contractor exceeds at its own risk. Time-and-materials type contract means a contract whose cost to a recipient or subrecipient is the sum of: (i) The actual cost of materials; and (ii) Direct labor hours charged at fixed hourly rates that reflect wages, general and administrative expenses, and profit. (2) Because this formula generates an open-ended contract price, a time-and-materials contract provides no positive profit incentive to the contractor for cost control or labor efficiency. Therefore, each contract must set a ceiling price that the contractor exceeds at its own risk. Further, the recipient or subrecipient awarding such a contract must assert a high degree of oversight to obtain reasonable assurance that the contractor is using efficient methods and effective cost controls.
2 C.F.R. § 3474.1 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Education for 2 C.F.R. § 200. 2 C.F.R. § 200.318(a) requires that the recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under the Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. 2 C.F.R. § 200.318(i) requires that the recipient or subrecipient must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of each procurement transaction. These records must include the rationale for the procurement method, contract type selection, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. 2 C.F.R § 200.320 provides three types of procurement methods: informal procurement methods (for micro-purchases and simplified acquisitions); formal procurement methods (through sealed bids or proposals); and noncompetitive procurement methods. For any of these methods, the recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procurement procedures. 2 C.F.R. § 200.320(a)(2) provides the requirements for simplified acquisitions. The aggregate dollar amount of the procurement transaction is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If simplified acquisition procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. New Philadelphia City School District Federal Purchasing Procedures documents small purchases are those from $10,001 to $25,000. The policy stipulates that quotes for small purchases must be obtained from at least two vendors. Quotes may be obtained in writing, verbally, or from a website. Documentation of all quotes must be maintained. While price must be a consideration, other criteria such as quality, availability, service and expertise must also be considered. The rational for the recommended vendor must be documented on the Rubric. The School District did not have the proper internal controls in place to maintain supporting documentation for the procurement history for one of the three selected vendors. During fiscal year 2025 the School District made one procurement falling within the simplified acquisition dollar threshold (formerly referred to as a small purchase) which was for the renewal of a contract for individualized education instruction (IEP) software. However, documentation was not available to support the procurement process for this fiscal year 2025 purchase. Failing to have appropriate controls in place may result in the School District not entering procurement transactions with the most appropriate vendor. The School District should review their policies and procedures and take steps necessary to ensure that procurement procedures are properly followed. The School District should also ensure they comply with the applicable Uniform Guidance requirements, ensuring open competition through procurement.
2025-033 Improve Controls over the Procurement Process Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Pass-Through Entity: None AL Number and Title: 21.027 – COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Award Number: SLFRP1029 (Year: 2023) Questioned Costs: None Identified Repeat of Prior Year Finding: 2024-037 Description: The Georgia Department of Human Services should improve internal controls to ensure that they are complying with the State of Georgia’s Procurement Policy. Background Information: The Coronavirus State Fiscal Recovery Fund, (CSLFRF), provides direct payments to states, US territories, Tribal governments, metropolitan cities, counties, and non-entitlement units of local government to: 1. Respond to the public health emergency with respect to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) or its negative economic impacts, including by providing assistance to households, small businesses, nonprofits, and impacted industries, such as tourism, travel, and hospitality; 2. Respond to workers performing essential work during the COVID-19 public health emergency by providing premium pay to eligible workers of the recipient that perform essential work or by providing grants to eligible employees that have eligible workers who are performing essential work; 3. Provide government services, to the extent of the reduction in revenue of the eligible entities due to the COVID-19 public health emergency relative to revenues collected in the most recent full fiscal year of the eligible entities prior to the emergency; and 4. Make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure. In August 2022, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget (OPB) dedicated more than $1 billion of CSLFRF federal funds to the Department of Human Services (DHS) to establish the Cash Assistance program. The Cash Assistance program provided one-time cash assistance of up to $350 for active enrollees of the Medicaid, PeachCare for Kids, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and/or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families government benefit programs in response to the negative economic impacts of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the DHS is required to establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. The DHS is also required to comply with the procurement standards set forth in 2 CFR 200.317 through 2 CFR 200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Pursuant to 2 CFR 200.317, “When conducting procurement transactions under a Federal award, a State… must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds.” As a state agency, the DHS adheres to the State of Georgia Procurement Manual issued by the Department of Administrative Services (DOAS). Per the State of Georgia Procurement Manual, all contract extensions must occur in writing and require the supplier’s consent. The State Procurement Department’s (SPD) prior consent to the contract extension may also be required depending on the type of extension. Condition: Our examination of compliance with Procurement and Suspension and Debarment regulations for the Cash Assistance program revealed that the DHS did not follow the State of Georgia’s ongoing contract management process for the continuation of services. The DHS was also unable to provide a written notice of extension or amendment to continue services and was unable to provide documentation of written permission from the SPD. Cause: Through discussion with the DHS management, the DHS relied on the contractor to replace cash assistance cards that were lost or undeliverable in the prior year under the original terms of the contract rather than extending or amending the contract. Effect: Without a valid contract extension or amendment, federal funds may be used in a manner that is not in compliance with federal provisions and the Georgia Procurement Manual. Recommendation: The DHS should improve internal controls as they relate to the procurement and contracting processes to ensure that all contract extensions or amendments follow the processes established in the Georgia Procurement Manual. Views of Responsible Officials: DHS concurs with the finding.
Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Consultant Payments Program Name: Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (Assistance Listing 20.326) Federal Award Agency: Department of Transportation Award Years: Federal Fiscal Years 2024 and 2025 Federal Award Number: 69A36524520310FSPCT Background The Department of Transportation (DOT) Consultant Design Administration Manual defines extra work as work the department orders beyond the scope of the agreement when such work is not reflected in the fee payments specified in the agreement. Criteria Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200.317 requires that when conducting procurement transactions under a federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-federal funds. Title 2 CFR Part 200.403(c) and (g) provides that to be allowable under federal awards, costs must be consistent with established policies and procedures and adequately documented. The DOT Consultant Design Administration Manual requires consultants to obtain written authorization from the department before they begin any extra work; otherwise, DOT is not obligated to compensate the consultant for that work. Condition Our review of 11 transactions totaling $46,543,994 disclosed that DOT made a $47,870 payment for extra work performed by a consultant that it did not authorize before work began. Context During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, non-payroll expenditures totaled $105,024,824. We randomly selected ten payments to review, as well as one manual journal adjustment. The sample was not statistically valid. Questioned Costs $47,870 Effect Failure to comply with DOT’s policies regarding extra work performed by consultants may result in unauthorized costs. Cause A lack of management oversight contributed to this condition. Prior Audit Finding We have not previously reported this finding. Recommendation The Department of Transportation should strengthen internal controls over consultant payments for extra work. Views of Responsible Officials “We agree with this finding.”
Criteria: The Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Part 200.318 requires that the Agency have documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward. Condition: The Agency has a procurement policy in place; however, it is not fully aligned with the procurement standards set forth in 2 CFR Part 200.317–200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Specifically, the policy does not incorporate all required procurement methods or procedures, such as competitive bidding (sealed bids), even though no purchases during the audit period met the threshold requiring formal bidding. Cause: The Agency's current policy has not been updated to fully address the specific requirements of 2 CFR Part 200.317–200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Effect: The Agency is not in compliance with 2 CFR Part 200.317–200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context: Not applicable. Repeat Finding: Not applicable. Recommendation: Although there were no purchases in the audit period meeting the threshold for competitive bidding, we recommend that the Agency review and revise its procurement policy to ensure compliance. This should include procedures for all procurement methods including sealed bids. View of Responsible Officials: Refer to management’s corrective action plan.
2025-001 U.S. Department of Education, Assistance Listing #84.027/84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Program and U.S. Department of Treasury, Assistance Listing #21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF) Program for the period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025 Criteria: Uniform Guidance section 2 CFR §200.317-200.327 Procurement Standards, requires purchases exceeding the micro-purchase threshold of $10,000 to follow small purchase procedures, which require obtaining price or rate quotations from an adequate number of qualified sources (§200.320) prior to entering into a contract. In addition, 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR §200.214 require non-federal entities to verify if contractors are suspended or debarred (e.g., Sam.gov check or certification) and include appropriate contract clauses in applicable contracts. Condition: The School Department did not obtain price or rate quotations for two projects that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Additionally, the Department did not perform, or document required suspension and debarment procedures for the contractor (e.g., verification against SAM.gov, obtaining certifications, or including contract clauses). The City did not perform, or document required suspension and debarment procedures for the contractor (e.g., verification against SAM.gov, obtaining certifications, or including contract clauses) for three of the six contracts tested. Cause: School staff were not aware the projects would be funded with federal funds and did not ensure compliance with federal requirements for competitive pricing and suspension/debarment verification. City staff were not aware projects covered under the SLRF definition of “revenue replacement”, which excludes most procurement requirements, are still required to follow 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR §200.214. Effect: Failure to obtain competitive quotes and verify contractor eligibility to receive Federal funds increases the risk of noncompliance, inefficient use of federal funds, and potential disallowance of costs. Known Questioned Costs: $61,891 for #84.027/84.173; $51,750 for #21.027 Likely Questioned Costs: $12,799 for #21.027 Recommendation: We recommend training staff on procurement and suspension/debarment requirements and implementing a pre-award compliance checklist. We also recommend increasing communication between grant personnel and facilities management personnel so all parties are aware which projects will be funded with federal funds.