Findings Citing § 200.317

(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.

FINDING 2025-003 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Special Education Grants to States Assistance Listings Number: 84.027 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other identifying Numbers): 22611-133-PN01, 23611-133-PN01, 24611-133-PN01 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 LEWIS CASS SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The internal control system in place at the School Corporation was not effective in ensuring compliance with requirements related to the grant agreement and the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Procurement - Small Purchases 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, the informal procurement method is 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. A total of two vendors were determined to require small purchase procedures, totaling $123,078. For the two vendors tested, the School Corporation did not obtain price or rate quotations. Additionally, documentation detailing the history of procurement, which must include the reason for the procurement method used, was absent for those two vendors. 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 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. A population of two covered transactions for goods or services totaling $123,078, both of which equaled or exceeded the $25,000 threshold paid from the special education funds during the audit period, were identified and selected for testing. For both transactions, the School Corporation did not verify that the vendor was not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from or eligible for participation in federal assistance programs or activities prior to issuing payment. 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: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 LEWIS CASS 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 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 200.214 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 200.320 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. . . ." Cause The School Corporation did not have adequate internal controls to ensure compliance with procurement and suspension and debarment requirements. 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. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 LEWIS CASS SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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. Recommendation We recommended that the management of the School Corporation develop policies and procedures to ensure there are appropriate procurement procedures for goods and services and 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 2025-003: Inadequate Procurement Documentation Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, §§200.317-200.327, requires non-federal entities receiving federal awards to maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award or subaward. In addition, Oregon Revised Statute 279A generally requires Oregon corporations to comply with the procurement guidance set forth in 2 CFR 200 §§200.317-200.327. Condition and Context: Management was unable to provide documentation in support of proper procurement procedures, to include a bid process and checks for vendor suspension or debarment. Questioned Costs: None noted. Cause: Ineffective design and implementation of an Organization procurement policy. Effect or Potential Effect: An effective procurement policy prevents or detects and corrects potential conflicts of interest and lack of competition in the bidding process. An ineffective procurement policy can potentially result in misuse or misappropriation of federal and state funds. Repeat Finding: Repeat of finding 2024-007. Recommendations: The Organization should continue to design and implement a procurement policy that is effective for the Organization and its structure. The Organization should document the policy, have it reviewed and approved by the Board of Directors, and disseminate the policy to employees with responsibility for finding and overseeing contractors. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: See Corrective Action Plan.

FINDING REFERENCE NUMBER 2025-008 FEDERAL PROGRAMS (ALN – 84.027) SPECIAL EDUCATION – GRANTS TO STATES (IDEA, PART B) – SPECIAL EDUCATION CLUSTER (IDEA) (ALN – 84.173) SPECIAL EDUCATION – PRESCHOOL GRANTS (IDEA PRESCHOOL) – SPECIAL EDUCATION CLUSTER (IDEA) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AWARD NUMBERS H027A230003 (07/01/2023 – 09/30/2024); H027A240003 (07/01/2024 – 09/30/2025); H173A230003 (07/01/2023 – 09/30/2024); H173A240003 (07/01/2024 – 09/30/2025); COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT PROCUREMENT AND SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT TYPE OF FINDING INTERNAL CONTROL AND COMPLIANCE – MATERIAL WEAKNESS AND MATERIAL NONCOMPLIANCE CRITERIA 2 CFR Section 200.317, establishes that when conducting procurement transactions under a Federal award, a State or Indian Tribe must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. 2 CFR §200.318(a)(i) establishes that 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. 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. STATEMENT OF CONDITION As part of our audit procedures over procurement process, we requested a list of all procurement procedures performed related to professional services and direct services to participants. No information was provided related to procurement procedures. In relation to quotation process, we selected a sample of forty (40) transactions for which a quotation process should have been performed. We found the following deficiencies: 1. In one quotation process, we were not provided with the document listing the bidders, evidence of the bidder selection, and the reasons for that selection. 2. In another quotation process, the requisition specifying the goods for which quotations were requested did not correspond to the fiscal year and made no reference to the quotations submitted. In addition, we requested a detailed list of all contracts formalized during the year and financed with IDEA funds. When selecting a sample of twenty-five (25) contracts, we were informed that several were financed with State funds. We requested the list of IDEA program contracts again, but it was not provided. This constitutes a scope limitation. QUESTIONED COSTS None. PERSPECTIVE INFORMATION After we requested all the supporting information related to procurement processes and contracts, the PRDE was not able to provide the basic documentation for the procurement performed and a list of contracts with IDEA funding during a reasonable period of time. This is a systemic deficiency that should properly be corrected, and the information should be available for audit process. The samples were statistically valid samples. STATEMENT OF CAUSE The IDEA program performs a procurement process related to specific services for which no evidence of the procurement performed was provided. The PRDE does not maintain a detail of contracts financed with IDEA funding. In addition, quotations for some purchases are performed through the Purchase Department of the PRDE, and no proper controls over the documentation are maintained POSSIBLE ASSERTED EFFECT Due to the lack of filing documentation related to the procurements performed and formalized contracts, we were unable to ascertain compliance with the procurement and suspension and debarment process. In relation to the quotation process, PRDE is not maintaining proper documentation to demonstrate compliance with procurement. IDENTIFICATION OF REPEAT FINDING This is a repeat finding (Finding Reference Number 2024-009). RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the PRDE review its internal control procedures for filings to ensure that all procurement documentation is readily available to any auditor or entity tasked with assessing the procurement process.

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.

FINDING 2025-005 – Noncompliance with Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Requirements Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program: Maternal Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Assistance Listing Number: 93.870 Compliance Requirements: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria The Uniform Guidance requires recipients and subrecipients to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award or subaward, including the acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with applicable state, local, and tribal laws and regulations, as well as the federal procurement standards included in 2 CFR §§ 200.317 through 200.327. In addition, recipients and subrecipients are required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards to provide reasonable assurance that the federal award is managed in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Audit findings are required to be reported for significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal control over major programs and for material noncompliance related to major programs. Condition During our audit of the federal program identified above, we noted the entity did not have documented procurement procedures in place as required by the applicable Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Specifically, management was unable to provide written procurement policies and procedures addressing procurement transactions charged to federal awards. The entity’s procedures did not document the required procurement methods, approval requirements, documentation standards, conflict-of-interest considerations, or suspension and debarment verification procedures applicable to federally funded purchases. As a result, the entity was not in compliance with the requirement to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award. Cause The condition appears to have resulted from the entity not formally updating or adopting written procurement procedures to address federal procurement requirements. While management may have followed informal purchasing practices, those practices were not formally documented, approved, or consistently communicated to personnel responsible for procurement activities under federal awards. Additionally, responsible personnel may not have been sufficiently familiar with the federal procurement documentation requirements applicable to federal awards. Effect or Potential Effect Failure to maintain documented procurement procedures increases the risk that procurement transactions charged to federal awards may not be performed in accordance with federal requirements. This could result in purchases that are not properly authorized, not adequately supported, not subject to required competition, or made with vendors that should have been excluded from participation in federal programs. The lack of documented procedures also increases the risk that suspension and debarment verification procedures may not be consistently performed or retained, which could result in federal funds being used for transactions with suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded parties. Although no questioned costs were identified as a result of this finding, the absence of documented procurement procedures represents noncompliance with federal procurement requirements and a deficiency in internal control over compliance. Questioned Costs None noted Context The federal program was audited as a major program for the year ended June 30, 2025. During our procedures over the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement, we requested the entity’s written procurement policies and procedures applicable to federal awards. Management was unable to provide documented procurement procedures that addressed the required federal procurement standards. Accordingly, the entity did not demonstrate compliance with the requirement to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for federally funded procurement transactions. Repeat Finding This is not a repeat finding. Sampling Method Not applicable Recommendation We recommend management develop, formally approve, and implement written procurement policies and procedures applicable to federal awards. At a minimum, the procedures should address: • The procurement methods allowed under federal requirements. • Required documentation for procurement decisions. • Approval levels and responsibilities for federally funded purchases. • Competition and price/cost analysis requirements, when applicable. • Conflict-of-interest standards for employees involved in procurement. • Required suspension and debarment verification procedures. • Documentation retention requirements for procurement files. • Periodic review procedures to ensure procurement practices comply with federal requirements. We also recommend management provide training to employees responsible for initiating, approving, and documenting procurement transactions charged to federal awards.

Finding Type: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Major Programs Assistance Listing #: 84.116Z Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education Award Year: July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025 Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327, non-Federal entities must maintain and follow documented procurement procedures that conform to applicable Federal law and standards. Specifically, 2 CFR 200.320 requires entities to obtain price or rate quotations from an adequate number of qualified sources for purchases falling under the simplified acquisition threshold (small purchases). Additionally, under 2 CFR 180.220 and 2 CFR 180.300, non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. For procurement contracts, a covered transaction is any contract expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Entities must verify that the vendor is not excluded or disqualified by checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) Exclusions, collecting a certification, or adding a clause to the covered transaction. Condition: During our testing of Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment, we noted the following deficiencies: 1. Procurement: The University’s procurement policies and practices did not meet minimum federal requirements. The University failed to obtain or document an adequate number of quotes for small purchases exceeding the micro-purchase threshold. 2. Suspension and Debarment: The University did not have controls in place to verify the suspension and debarment status of vendors. Management did not check the SAM.gov exclusions list, obtain vendor certifications, or include required clauses in contracts for covered transactions exceeding $25,000. Cause: Internal controls over Procurement and Suspension and Debarment were not properly designed or implemented. Management was unaware of the specific federal requirements regarding small purchase quotation documentation and the mandate to verify vendor exclusion status for contracts over $25,000. Effect or Potential Effect: By failing to obtain adequate quotes, the University cannot ensure that federal funds were used to obtain the most advantageous pricing, potentially resulting in overpayments for goods and services. By failing to verify suspension and debarment status, the University is at high risk of entering into covered transactions with federally excluded or debarred parties. Questioned Costs: $526,874 represents the total sum of federal funds disbursed to vendors in our sample where required procurement procedures and/or suspension and debarment verifications were not performed.

FINDING 2025-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Condition of Records 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): 23611-051-PN01,24611-051-PN01, 22611-051-ARP, 23619-051-PN01, 25619-051-PN01, 22619-051-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking; Period of Performance; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation received reimbursements totaling $12,668,761 from the Special Education Cluster (IDEA) federal awards during the audit period. The reimbursements were associated with six separate federal awards, each of which was required to be accounted for in a separate fund within the School Corporation's financial management system. Expenditures were to be made in accordance with the approved grant applications and budgets, with reimbursement requests subsequently submitted to the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE). The School Corporation was responsible for maintaining detailed disbursement ledgers for each grant fund to support the amounts claimed for reimbursement. As is typical with reimbursement-based grants, the ending cash and investment balances of each grant fund were expected to reflect overdrawn balances until the subsequent reimbursements were received from the IDOE. The $12,668,761 received in the Special Education Cluster (IDEA) funds during the audit period was based on 23 reimbursement requests for expenditures incurred. Based on our review of grant fund records and inquiry with management, we identified the following deficiencies:  The reimbursement requests for the reimbursements received during the audit period included dates of July 1, 2021 to March 31, 2025. It was not easily determined what was requested for reimbursement for the earlier dates due to the School Corporation including in the "Dates Included in this Request" section descriptions such as "Entire Grant Period" and "Start to March 21, 2025". The supporting documentation with the reimbursement requests did not always have detail or specifically state which disbursements were included in the amount for the request. Several had documentation that showed detail for a period of time then a calculation was done to subtract what was previously requested for reimbursement. The total received in reimbursements was $12,668,761. The total detailed disbursement ledgers for the population that could be determined reflected total expenditures of $15,894,839. This resulted in $3,226,078 in disbursements in excess of what the School Corporation requested for reimbursement.  Of the six federal awards reported on the Schedule Expenditures of Awards, four reached the award's performance end date, and of those four, three reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement on the last Reimbursement Form. o Grant 23619-051-PN01 reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement of $1,367 on February 26, 2024. The dates included in this final request were "01/01/24 - 01/31/24." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 29 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) o Grant 22611-051-ARP reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement of $55,581 on December 15, 2023. The dates included in this final request were "06/01/23 - 09/30/23." o Grant 22619-051-ARP reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement of $82,677 on December 13, 2023. The dates included in this final request were "Entire Grant Period."  Of the 23 reimbursement requests submitted, only 10 were supported by detailed disbursement ledgers that agreed with the dates and amounts claimed. The remaining 13 reimbursement requests could not be directly reconciled to the supporting documentation provided. Upon further inquiry with management, additional information was provided; however, these records lacked sufficient detail, such as transactions, reasons for overspending, and which transactions were not requested for reimbursement due to overspending. Due to the deficiencies noted above, the School Corporation was unable to provide sufficient appropriate evidence for us to determine populations, and, therefore, audit and base an opinion on the compliance requirements subject to audit that were determined to have a direct and material effect on the program. As a result, the $12,668,761 in reimbursements received during the audit period were considered questioned costs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were material and systemic 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 200.302 states in part: "(a) . . . the other non-Federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. See also § 200.450. (b) The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following (see §§ 200.334, 200.335, 200.336, and 200.337): INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 30 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (1) Identification, in its accounts, of all Federal awards received and expended and the Federal programs under which they were received. Federal program and Federal award identification must include, as applicable, the Assistance Listings title and number, Federal award identification number and year, name of the Federal agency, and name of the pass-through entity, if any. (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . . (3) Records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federallyfunded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, financial obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income, and interest and be supported by source documentation. (4) Effective control over, and accountability, for all funds, property, and assets. The non- Federal entity must adequately safeguard all assets and ensure that they are used solely for authorized purposes. See § 200.303. (5) Comparison of expenditures with budget amounts for each Federal award. (6) Written procedures to implement the requirements of § 200.305. (7) Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award." 2 CFR 200.1 states in part: "Questioned cost means a cost that is questioned by the auditor because of an audit finding: (1) Which resulted from a violation or possible violation of a statute, regulation, or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, including for funds used to match Federal funds; (2) Where the costs, at the time of the audit, are not supported by adequate documentation; or (3) Where the costs incurred appear unreasonable and do not reflect the actions a prudent person would take in the circumstances. (4) Questioned costs are not an improper payment until reviewed and confirmed to be improper as defined in OMB Circular A-123 appendix C. (See also the definition of Improper payment in this section)." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 31 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.1 states in part: ". . . Financial obligations, when referencing a recipient's or subrecipient's use of funds under a Federal award, means orders placed for property and services, contracts and subawards made, and similar transactions that require payment. Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per § 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. Unliquidated financial obligations means, for financial reports prepared on a cash basis, financial obligations incurred by the non-Federal entity that have not been paid (liquidated). . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under § 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." 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. . . ." 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 32 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The School Corporation experienced turnover in key personnel over the federal program which contributed to the lack of appropriate supporting records. A proper system of internal controls was not designed to ensure continuity of policies, procedures, and records when personnel transitions occurred. Effect Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements could result in the repayment of federal funds. Questioned Costs We identified $12,668,761 in questioned costs as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management develop policies and procedures to ensure continuity of school records during a personnel change, and that all reimbursement requests are properly supported by detailed records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.

FINDING 2025-013 Subject: Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs Assistance Listings Number: 84.334 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): P334A210080 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context 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. When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure it complied with the procurement compliance requirement for small purchase and simplified acquisition procurement methods. During the audit period, the School Corporation paid 40 vendors from the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) that fell into the small purchase threshold. Of those 40 vendors 3 vendors were tested. All 3 vendors did not have any rate quotes from qualified sources. The total dollar amount paid to these three vendors was $156,175. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 47 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation had two vendors during the audit period, which exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold that were paid from the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). Both vendors were tested and it was determined that the School Corporation did not follow the formal procurement method of sealed bids or competitive proposals, nor was a circumstance documented that would have allowed for noncompetitive procurement for the purchases. The total dollar amount paid to these vendors was $724,290. In addition, the School Corporation did not follow its own purchasing policy #6325, in which the School Corporation had set a threshold of $3,500 for small 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 200.320 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 48 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (ii) Simplified acquisition thresholds. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. (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. . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not implemented by management of the School Corporation. 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 design or 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 vendors that fell within the small purchase and the exceeded simplified acquisition thresholds. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement an effective internal control system over small purchases and purchases exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements. Appropriate documentation should be maintained to ensure the procurement methods are being followed. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 49 SOUTH BEND 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 2025-018 Subject: Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) Assistance Listings Number: 84.374 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): S374A200039 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and 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 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. When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure it complied with the procurement requirement for small purchase and simplified acquisition procurement methods. During the audit period, the School Corporation paid 22 vendors with Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) that fell into the small purchase threshold. There were 4 vendors were tested. For all 4 vendors tested, the School Corporation could not provide the procurement history or the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of vendors, and basis for price. The total dollar amount paid to these four vendors was $206,756. The School Corporation had 1 vendor during the audit period which exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold that was paid from Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund). This vendor was tested and it was determined that formal procurement methods were not followed. The total amount paid to this vendor was $305,034. In addition, the School Corporation did not follow their own purchasing policy #6325, in which the School Corporation had set a threshold of $3,500 for small purchases. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 58 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY 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. We identified 11 transactions during the audit period that equaled or exceeded $25,000 and were therefore determined to be covered transactions. Of the 11 transactions, 4 were selected for testing. The School Corporation was unable to provide current documentation that the vendor's suspension and debarment status was verified for 2 of these transactions. The total dollar amount spent with these 2 vendors was $82,105. There were multiple Directors over the Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) during the audit period. At the time the audit was performed, no previous Directors were employed with the School Corporation and there were no current employees that were knowledgeable of the grant and its requirements. 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 200.320 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 59 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY 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. (ii) Simplified acquisition thresholds. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. (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 60 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause A proper system of internal controls was not implemented by management of the School Corporation. 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 preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. As a result, the School Corporation did not comply with the simplified acquisition or small purchase procurement requirements or the suspension and debarment requirements of the federal award. By not properly completing the procurement process, the School Corporation could have overpaid for the goods or services that were procured. Additionally, the School Corporation could have made payment to a vendor that was suspended or debarred. Payments to such vendors are unallowable. 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. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management develop policies and procedures to ensure continuity of school records during a personnel change. We also recommend that the School Corporation establish and implement an effective internal control system over procurement and suspension and debarment to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.

FINDING 2025-206 The Commission is not following Idaho Administrative Rules for Purchasing as required for compliance with the requirements applicable to the Rehabilitation Services -Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States program. Related to Prior Finding: 2024-203 Type of Finding: Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance Assistance Listing Title: Rehabilitation Services – Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States Assistance Listing Number: 84.126 Federal Award Number: H126A230016; H126A240016; H126A250016 Program Year: October 1, 2022 - September 30, 2024; October 1, 2023 - September 30, 2025; October 1, 2024 - September 30, 2025 Federal Agency: Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services Administration Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Questioned Costs: $30,000 Known Criteria: The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) contains guidance that nonfederal entities must follow as a condition of receiving federal awards. This guidance in 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a nonfederal entity receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal controls that provide reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions in the federal award. The Internal Control Integrated Framework published by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) identifies control activities that help ensure management directives are carried out and risks are mitigated. These activities include approvals, authorizations, verifications, reconciliations, and segregation of duties. The CFR procurement standards at 2 CFR 200.317 state that, when procuring property and services under a federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements from its nonfederal funds. The state of Idaho purchasing rules within the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) contain the following provisions: IDAPA 38.05.01.32. Total Cost: The acquisition cost of property, including all components, options, and add-ons available under the contract, related services, and, in the case of ongoing services, the cost of the full term of the contract, including all authorized renewals. Unless a different total term is provided in the contract, the term used for purposes of total cost is five (5) years. IDAPA 38.05.01.041. Acquisition Procedures: • Small Purchases: Services with less than $25,000 total cost; software with less than $15,000 total cost; property with less than $15,000 total cost; a mix of property and services less than $15,000. o Small purchases do not require acquisition through competitive solicitation. Agencies must comply with the division’s small purchase policy. Property available under single agency or open contracts shall be purchased under such contracts and are not a small purchase under this rule unless otherwise authorized by the administrator. • Informal Purchases: Acquisition of property with a total cost exceeding the dollar limits established in this rule for a small purchase and less than the formal sealed procedure limit are informal purchases. o Informal Purchases may be made using:  An informal solicitation issued through e-procurement, unless exempted by the administrator; or  The formal sealed procedure, when the purchasing authority makes a written determination that using a formal solicitation is in the best interest of the state, including where selection based solely on cost is not appropriate. o Agencies procuring property under this rule shall maintain a purchasing file containing:  The solicitation document posted and quotes received. If the acquisition was not publicly posted, the agency shall include a statement describing the justification for determining that posting was impractical or impossible, along with the administrator’s authorization.  If not using e-procurement, the agency shall document the quotes received (or its attempt to obtain quotes) from at least three (3) vendors having a significant Idaho economic presence as defined in Section 67-2349, Idaho Code. • Formal Sealed Procedure: o The sealed procedure limit is one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). o Purchases of property in excess of the sealed procedure limit are made using the formal sealed procedure, unless exempted by these rules or the administrator. IDAPA 38.05.01.042.01. Exceptions Requiring Written Administrator Approval. The administrator may exempt the following purchases from the requirement for competitive solicitation by issuing a written determination to the purchasing authority. • Rehabilitation Agency Acquisitions. Acquisitions of property that is provided by non-profit corporations and public agencies operating rehabilitation facilities serving the handicapped and disadvantaged and that is offered for sale at fair market price as determined by the administrator in accordance with these rules. The buyer must submit a written request to the administrator to purchase from a rehabilitation agency and a written approval from the administrator. The purchase must comply with the division’s policy for rehabilitation agency acquisitions. Condition: We identified two vendors that the Commission paid more than $25,000 in total expenditures in fiscal year 2025 and would be subject to compliance with procurement requirements. We tested payments to those vendors for compliance with procurement policies and found that the Commission could not provide documentation to show that State procurement policies were followed for one of the two vendors. Cause: The Commission erroneously believed that the exemption for rehabilitation agencies applied to more vendors than just not-for-profit entities and public agencies. The Commission also believed that the State purchasing policies did not apply to vendors with many small purchases that are individually below, but collectively exceed, the purchasing thresholds. The Commission has control procedures in place to ensure that grant expenditures are for allowable activities and costs at the transactional level but did not have control procedures to ensure that State procurement rules were followed. Effect: The State’s purchasing policies are designed to ensure that State and federal funds are expended efficiently to meet the goals of State and federal programs. By not following these policies, the Commission could be overpaying for products and services. Recommendation: We recommend that the Commission design and implement procedures to ensure that State purchasing policies are followed. We further recommend that the Commission design and implement procedures to ensure that appropriate documentation is retained to demonstrate compliance and internal controls were operating as intended. Management’s View: The agency agrees with the finding. ICBVI understands the state thresholds and has processes in place for creating contracts when needed. ICBVI believes this finding is ready to be closed. Corrective Action: However, we have since corrected this finding, as it was found on the previous year’s audit. In December of 2025, we received training from the Department of Purchasing. Based on that training ICBVI’s management team worked with DOP to create contracts for current and future purchases. ICBVI asked Laura Cortazar to take the lead on the development of contracts for the agency. ICBVI created a procurement checklist and documentation template, which was added to internal controls to support purchases subject to state policy. In August of 2026, all staff who make any purchases were trained using the new guidelines, which ensure compliance with state procurement requirements. In addition, ICBVI worked with DOP’s process to request purchasing exemptions for working with community rehabilitation programs, universities and with a temporary staffing agency. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: We thank the Commission for its cooperation and assistance throughout the audit. We appreciate the information about action taken after the fiscal year under audit was completed, but those actions have not been reviewed for the fiscal year 2025 Single Audit. We will review those actions as part of the fiscal year 2026 Single Audit to determine if they were effective in correcting the errors.

FINDING 2025-228 The Division is not following Idaho Administrative Rules for Purchasing as required. Related to Prior Finding: 2024-240 Type of Finding: Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance Assistance Listing Title: Rehabilitation Services - Vocational Rehabilitation Grants to States Assistance Listing Number: 84.126 Federal Award Number: H126A230016; H126A240016; H126A250016 Program Year: October 1, 2022 - September 30, 2024; October 1, 2023 - September 30, 2025; October 1, 2024 - September 30, 2025 Federal Agency: Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services Administration Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Questioned Costs: $51,400 Known; $442,200 Projected Criteria: The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) contains guidance that nonfederal entities must follow as a condition of receiving federal awards. This guidance in 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a nonfederal entity receiving federal awards establish and maintain internal controls that provide reasonable assurance that the nonfederal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions in the federal award. The Internal Control Integrated Framework published by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) identifies control activities that help ensure management directives are carried out and risks are mitigated. These activities include approvals, authorizations, verifications, reconciliations, and segregation of duties. The CFR procurement standards at 2 CFR 200.317 states that, when procuring property and services under a federal award, a state must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements from its nonfederal funds. The state of Idaho purchasing rules within the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) contain the following provisions: IDAPA 38.05.01.32. Total Cost: The acquisition cost of property, including all components, options, and add-ons available under the contract, related services, and, in the case of ongoing services, the cost of the full term of the contract, including all authorized renewals. Unless a different total term is provided in the contract, the term used for purposes of total cost is five (5) years. IDAPA 38.05.01.041. Acquisition Procedures: • Small Purchases: Services with less than $25,000 total cost; software with less than $15,000 total cost; property with less than $15,000 total cost; a mix of property and services less than $15,000. o Small purchases do not require acquisition through competitive solicitation. Agencies must comply with the division’s small purchase policy. Property available under single agency or open contracts shall be purchased under such contracts and are not a small purchase under this rule unless otherwise authorized by the administrator. • Informal Purchases: Acquisition of property with a total cost exceeding the dollar limits established in this rule for a small purchase and less than the formal sealed procedure limit are informal purchases. o Informal Purchases may be made using:  An informal solicitation issued through e-procurement, unless exempted by the administrator; or  The formal sealed procedure, when the purchasing authority makes a written determination that using a formal solicitation is in the best interest of the state, including where selection based solely on cost is not appropriate. o Agencies procuring property under this rule shall maintain a purchasing file containing:  The solicitation document posted and quotes received. If the acquisition was not publicly posted, the agency shall include a statement describing the justification for determining that posting was impractical or impossible, along with the administrator’s authorization.  If not using e-procurement, the agency shall document the quotes received (or its attempt to obtain quotes) from at least three (3) vendors having a significant Idaho economic presence as defined in Section 67-2349, Idaho Code. • Formal Sealed Procedure: o The sealed procedure limit is one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). o Purchases of property in excess of the sealed procedure limit are made using the formal sealed procedure, unless exempted by these rules or the administrator. IDAPA 38.05.01.042.01. Exceptions Requiring Written Administrator approval. The administrator may exempt the following purchases from the requirement for competitive solicitation by issuing a written determination to the purchasing authority. • Rehabilitation Agency Acquisitions. Acquisitions of property that is provided by non-profit corporations and public agencies operating rehabilitation facilities serving the handicapped and disadvantaged and that is offered for sale at fair market price as determined by the administrator in accordance with these rules. The buyer must submit a written request to the administrator to purchase from a rehabilitation agency and a written approval from the administrator. The purchase must comply with the division’s policy for rehabilitation agency acquisitions. Condition: We identified a population of 50 vendors that were paid more than $25,000 in fiscal year 2025 by the Division. The total value of that population was $6,512,395. We identified one vendor that received total payments large enough to be considered individually significant based on materiality. We reviewed that vendor and selected a random sample of 5 vendors from the remaining 49 vendors in our population to arrive at a total testing group of 6 vendors. We evaluated internal controls to determine if they were in place and effective and also assessed if the Division was in compliance with procurement policies. The main internal control that the Division relies on to ensure compliance is that appropriate personnel review the procurement documents and approve the contract or purchase made prior to payment. Our testing found that the Division could not provide evidence that the review and approval occurred for 1 of the 5 (or 20 percent) of the randomly sampled vendors and could not provide documentation to show that State procurement policies were followed for that vendor. Cause: The Division misunderstood several critical purchasing requirements. It believed that an exemption for rehabilitation agencies applied to more vendors than just not-for-profit entities and public agencies. The Division also believed that the State purchasing policies did not apply to vendors with many small purchases that are individually below, but collectively exceed, the purchasing thresholds. This misunderstanding led to noncompliance with purchasing requirements. Effect: The State’s purchasing policies are designed to ensure that State and federal funds are expended efficiently to meet the goals of State and federal programs. By not following these policies, the Division could be overpaying for products and services and is not in compliance with federal grant requirements. Projected questioned costs were determined using the calculation: (Dollar Value of the Sampling Population/ Total Dollar Value of the Items Sampled) X Dollar Value of Questioned Costs Identified in Sample = ($4,936,396/ $573,792) X $51,400 = $442,200. Recommendation: We recommend that the Division design and implement procedures to ensure that State purchasing policies are followed. This should include training to ensure that staff understand what purchases require additional procedures. We further recommend that the Division design and implement procedures to ensure that appropriate documentation is retained to demonstrate compliance and internal controls were operating as intended. Management’s View: The agency agrees with this finding. IDVR acknowledges that procurement practices during the audit period did not fully align with state procurement requirements. Corrective Action: IDVR has worked directly with the Division of Purchasing to revise IDVR procurement-related Policy Directive and is currently finalizing updates to align Agency procedures with state procurement requirements. Additionally, IDVR has developed draft procurement policies, procedures, and internal controls designed to strengthen compliance with both state and federal requirements. These materials have been reviewed with the Vocational Rehabilitation Technical Assistance Center and are currently undergoing RSA review. While awaiting final approval, IDVR has already begun strengthening procurement oversight and monitoring practices. Upon completion of the review process, IDVR will conduct agency-wide training and formally implement the updated policies and procedures. Additionally, IDVR will be developing monitoring dashboards that will provide leadership with enhanced visibility into purchasing activity and spending thresholds to support ongoing compliance with procurement requirements. These efforts reflect IDVR's commitment to establishing sustainable procurement controls that not only address the finding but also enhance transparency and accountability in purchasing activities. IDVR has also developed contracts for CRP services for both the General and Pre-ETS programs that have been approved by RSA for implementation. The Division is currently working on rolling out new CRP contracts with anticipated start date of 02/01/2027 to assure compliance with contracts for procurements for these services that are anticipated to exceed the $150,000 each state fiscal year and would not be covered under the updated policy directive due to this anticipated annual spend based on historical spending analysis for these services. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: We thank the Division for its cooperation and assistance throughout the audit. We will review those improvements that were in place during fiscal year 2026 during the completion of the 2026 Single Audit.

Material weakness in internal controls over compliance and instances of noncompliance related to procurement. Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Program Titles: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Number: EL-23-AR-47-048; HCS-24-AR-2107-048 Project Period: July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2026 Criteria Under 2 CFR § 200.318, a recipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award or subaward that are consistent with the standards identified under Uniform Guidance. In addition, recipient 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. Condition/Context for Evaluation During the audit for the year ending June 30, 2025, it was noted that the Agency's procurement policy was not in compliance with Uniform Guidance. In addition, there were two selections out of four selections when the Agency was not following its own procurement policy. This is not considered a statistical sample. Cause Housing Hope's procurement policy did not include all the requirements outlined in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. Effect or Potential Effect The Agency did not fully comply with the requirements regarding procurement. Questioned Costs Not applicable as finding relates to a policy not being in compliant. Repeat Finding Not applicable Recommendation We recommend that the Agency update their procurement policy to ensure procurement requirements are in line with Uniform Guidance and that proper documentation is retained for all procurements. Views of Responsible Officials of Auditee Management concurs with the finding and has provided the accompanying management corrective action.

(#2025-002) Policy Updates for Uniform Guidance – CFDA No. 10.766 – Community Facilities Loans and Grants Year Ended – May 31, 2025 Direct Program Federal Agency – U.S. Department of Agriculture Criteria – the Village’s procurement policy must incorporate federal award activity within the process and procedures followed by the Village in accordance with the Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), sections 200.112, 200.317-200.326. Under the Uniform Guidance, the procurement requirements were required to be implemented by January 1, 2018 for federal award recipients. Condition – The Village’s code of ethics, conflict of interest and procurement policies have not been updated to comply with the requirements in the Uniform Guidance. Cause – The control environment related to the requirements of the Uniform Guidance has not be reviewed and incorporated into the Village’s control activities through the updating and documentation of the Village’s policies noted above. Effect – The Village was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.112, Conflict of Interest and Sections 200.317-200.326, Procurement Standards. Questioned Costs – There were no questioned costs noted related to this finding. Context – This finding was identified during inquiries of management in regards to the control environment over the requirements of the Uniform Guidance and through the review of the related policies noted above. Recommendation – We recommend the Village review their policies and establish/update such policies to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance. Village’s Response – The Village Mayor will provide an updated policy to be approved by the Village Board in 2026.

Noncompliant Procurement Policy Federal Program Information: Funding agency: U.S. Environmental Agency Title: Drinking Water State Revolving Funds AL number: 66.468 Criteria or Specific Requirement: According to 2 CFR §200.318(a), non-Federal entities must use their own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in 2 CFR §200.317 through 2 CFR §200.326. Condition: The Village has a written procurement policy; however, the policy has not been updated to align with the procurement standards under 2 CFR §200.317 through 2 CFR §200.326. Context: We reviewed the procurement policy and compared it to federal requirements. Questioned Costs: None Effect: The use of a noncompliant policy increases the risk that the Village may face sanctions, including, repayment of funds or termination of awards. Cause: Management did not adopt a procurement policy that conforms with the Uniform Guidance requirements. Repeat: No Auditor's Recommendation: We recommend the Village review and update its procurement policy to ensure full compliance with 2 CFR §200.317 through 2 CFR §200.32 View of Responsible Officials: Management acknowledges the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.

Finding 2025-003 Identification of the Federal Program: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: AL 14.267 – Continuum of Care Program Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303(a) of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 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 conditions of the federal award. The nonfederal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200 Appendix II requires certain provisions be included in contracts if criteria are met. As outlined in 2 CFR 180, recipients must not utilize any contractor which is suspended or debarred or is otherwise excluded from the central contractor registry. Statement of condition and cause The Organization’s procurement policy did not include all the required elements as outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the Organization did not retain documentation to support the procedures performed to ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements. Effect Lack of complete procurement, suspension, and debarment policies and not retaining documentation to support compliance with suspension and debarment requirements could result in noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs N/A Repeat Finding No Recommendation We recommend that management develop a written procurement policy that conforms with the Uniform Guidance. In addition, we recommend that management implement procedures and control processes to retain documentation supporting compliance with major federal program compliance requirements regarding suspension and debarment. Management response See Corrective Action Plan

Finding 2025-003 Identification of the Federal Program: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: AL 14.267 – Continuum of Care Program Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303(a) of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 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 conditions of the federal award. The nonfederal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200 Appendix II requires certain provisions be included in contracts if criteria are met. As outlined in 2 CFR 180, recipients must not utilize any contractor which is suspended or debarred or is otherwise excluded from the central contractor registry. Statement of condition and cause The Organization’s procurement policy did not include all the required elements as outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the Organization did not retain documentation to support the procedures performed to ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements. Effect Lack of complete procurement, suspension, and debarment policies and not retaining documentation to support compliance with suspension and debarment requirements could result in noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs N/A Repeat Finding No Recommendation We recommend that management develop a written procurement policy that conforms with the Uniform Guidance. In addition, we recommend that management implement procedures and control processes to retain documentation supporting compliance with major federal program compliance requirements regarding suspension and debarment. Management response See Corrective Action Plan

2024-005 Assistance Listing Number 66.468 Drinking Water State Revolving Fund United States Environmental Protection Agency North Dakota Public Finance Authority Procurement Suspension & Debarment 2 CFR Part 200.318 Criteria 2 CFR Part 200.318 states that a non-Federal entity must have and use documented procedures, consistent with state, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of 2 CFR part 200.317 through 200.327. Condition District does not have a written procurement policy in place. Cause The District has not approved a written procurement policy. Effect Non-compliance with Procurement Suspension & Debarment compliance requirements. Questioned Costs Not Applicable Repeat Finding See 2023-005. Recommendation We recommend for the board of the District to create and implement a procurement policy that adheres to state and local regulations as well as 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions The District will create and approve a procurement policy that adheres to state and local regulations as well as 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327.

Finding 2024-002 – AL 21.027 – Significant Deficiency/Non-compliance – Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: The District should have in place written procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Condition: The District does not have written procurement standards that are in accordance with the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: The District’s purchasing policy has not been updated to incorporate the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Effect: The District is not in compliance with the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Recommendation: We recommend the District adopt a written purchasing policy to ensure the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance are incorporated. Management’s Response: North Nelson Water District has made every effort to comply with purchasing requirements. In addition to these efforts, North Nelson Water District will be adopting a formal procurement policy.

Finding 2024-002 – AL 21.027 – Significant Deficiency/Non-compliance – Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: The District should have in place written procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Condition: The District does not have written procurement standards that are in accordance with the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: The District’s purchasing policy has not been updated to incorporate the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Effect: The District is not in compliance with the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Recommendation: We recommend the District adopt a written purchasing policy to ensure the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance are incorporated. Management’s Response: North Nelson Water District has made every effort to comply with purchasing requirements. In addition to these efforts, North Nelson Water District will be adopting a formal procurement policy.

Finding 2024-002 – AL 21.027 – Significant Deficiency/Non-compliance – Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: The District should have in place written procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Condition: The District does not have written procurement standards that are in accordance with the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: The District’s purchasing policy has not been updated to incorporate the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Effect: The District is not in compliance with the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Recommendation: We recommend the District adopt a written purchasing policy to ensure the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance are incorporated. Management’s Response: North Nelson Water District has made every effort to comply with purchasing requirements. In addition to these efforts, North Nelson Water District will be adopting a formal procurement policy.

2024-001 Procurement Policies and Procedures Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: ISA-ARPA-ADWR-123022-01 - 2023 Pass-Through Agency: State of Arizona Governor’s Office Pass-Through Number(s): ERMT-20-002 Award Period: January 1, 2023 through January 1, 2026 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Under the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200, Uniform Administrative requires certain elements to be part of the District’s procurement standards. The general procurement standards require the District to have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in § 200.317 through 200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. The details of this requirements can be found in Title 2, Part 200, CFR Section 318(a). Condition: During our testing, we noted the District did not have adequate internal controls designed to ensure procurement procedures that conform to Uniform Guidance were followed, or designed to ensure vendors were not suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, it was noted that the District was not following their federal procurement policy #2023-05 to ensure compliance with CFR, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Subparts D and E when entering into vendor contracts. Also noted the District was not reviewing vendors prior to entering into a contract to ensure the vendor was not on the suspended or debarred vendor list maintained by the General Services Administration. Cause: The District does not have effective internal controls in place to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance procurement rules and procedures. Effect: The lack of internal controls over the provisions of procurement, suspension, and debarment compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: Repeat of prior year finding 2023-001. Recommendation: We recommend the District design controls to ensure an adequate review process is in place to review potential contractors to determine compliance with the Uniform Guidance procurement rules and procedures. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs with the finding, and as reported in the corrective action plan, District policies will be updated and approved to conform to federal guidance.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement Information on the Federal Programs: 93.421 Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, paragraph 318 “General Procurement Standards” states that the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards. Furthermore, paragraph 319 “Competition” states that all procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with these standards. Condition: We noted that BCHC does not have a written procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200. We also noted that although certain vendors were included in award proposals by BCHC, full and open competition was not documented for certain purchases using Federal funds. Cause: BCHC does not have a procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and is therefore not following the procedures required within 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: BCHC could incur disallowed costs for not properly procuring goods and services. Questioned Costs: $200,000 Context: BCHC is at risk of entering into contracts for goods or services under Federal awards that were not adequately procured based on the regulations in the Uniform Guidance and the awarding agency or pass-through entity could disallow the costs paid for the goods or services. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that BCHC develop and implement a formal procurement policy that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317–200.327), specifically addressing requirements for full and open competition, documentation of procurement procedures, and selection criteria for vendors. The policy should establish thresholds for the different procurement methods (e.g., micro-purchases, small purchases, sealed bids, competitive proposals, and noncompetitive proposals) and clearly outline the circumstances under which non-competitive procurement is permissible. These exceptions include sole source availability, public exigency or emergency, explicit authorization by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity, or inadequate competition despite solicitation efforts should be defined in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320(c). Additionally, the policy should require that all purchases using Federal funds are supported by appropriate documentation of the procurement process and justification for the selected method.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement Information on the Federal Programs: 93.421 Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, paragraph 318 “General Procurement Standards” states that the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards. Furthermore, paragraph 319 “Competition” states that all procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with these standards. Condition: We noted that BCHC does not have a written procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200. We also noted that although certain vendors were included in award proposals by BCHC, full and open competition was not documented for certain purchases using Federal funds. Cause: BCHC does not have a procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and is therefore not following the procedures required within 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: BCHC could incur disallowed costs for not properly procuring goods and services. Questioned Costs: $200,000 Context: BCHC is at risk of entering into contracts for goods or services under Federal awards that were not adequately procured based on the regulations in the Uniform Guidance and the awarding agency or pass-through entity could disallow the costs paid for the goods or services. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that BCHC develop and implement a formal procurement policy that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317–200.327), specifically addressing requirements for full and open competition, documentation of procurement procedures, and selection criteria for vendors. The policy should establish thresholds for the different procurement methods (e.g., micro-purchases, small purchases, sealed bids, competitive proposals, and noncompetitive proposals) and clearly outline the circumstances under which non-competitive procurement is permissible. These exceptions include sole source availability, public exigency or emergency, explicit authorization by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity, or inadequate competition despite solicitation efforts should be defined in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320(c). Additionally, the policy should require that all purchases using Federal funds are supported by appropriate documentation of the procurement process and justification for the selected method.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement Information on the Federal Programs: 93.421 Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, paragraph 318 “General Procurement Standards” states that the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards. Furthermore, paragraph 319 “Competition” states that all procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with these standards. Condition: We noted that BCHC does not have a written procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200. We also noted that although certain vendors were included in award proposals by BCHC, full and open competition was not documented for certain purchases using Federal funds. Cause: BCHC does not have a procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and is therefore not following the procedures required within 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: BCHC could incur disallowed costs for not properly procuring goods and services. Questioned Costs: $200,000 Context: BCHC is at risk of entering into contracts for goods or services under Federal awards that were not adequately procured based on the regulations in the Uniform Guidance and the awarding agency or pass-through entity could disallow the costs paid for the goods or services. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that BCHC develop and implement a formal procurement policy that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317–200.327), specifically addressing requirements for full and open competition, documentation of procurement procedures, and selection criteria for vendors. The policy should establish thresholds for the different procurement methods (e.g., micro-purchases, small purchases, sealed bids, competitive proposals, and noncompetitive proposals) and clearly outline the circumstances under which non-competitive procurement is permissible. These exceptions include sole source availability, public exigency or emergency, explicit authorization by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity, or inadequate competition despite solicitation efforts should be defined in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320(c). Additionally, the policy should require that all purchases using Federal funds are supported by appropriate documentation of the procurement process and justification for the selected method.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement Information on the Federal Programs: 93.421 Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, paragraph 318 “General Procurement Standards” states that the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards. Furthermore, paragraph 319 “Competition” states that all procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with these standards. Condition: We noted that BCHC does not have a written procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200. We also noted that although certain vendors were included in award proposals by BCHC, full and open competition was not documented for certain purchases using Federal funds. Cause: BCHC does not have a procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and is therefore not following the procedures required within 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: BCHC could incur disallowed costs for not properly procuring goods and services. Questioned Costs: $200,000 Context: BCHC is at risk of entering into contracts for goods or services under Federal awards that were not adequately procured based on the regulations in the Uniform Guidance and the awarding agency or pass-through entity could disallow the costs paid for the goods or services. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that BCHC develop and implement a formal procurement policy that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317–200.327), specifically addressing requirements for full and open competition, documentation of procurement procedures, and selection criteria for vendors. The policy should establish thresholds for the different procurement methods (e.g., micro-purchases, small purchases, sealed bids, competitive proposals, and noncompetitive proposals) and clearly outline the circumstances under which non-competitive procurement is permissible. These exceptions include sole source availability, public exigency or emergency, explicit authorization by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity, or inadequate competition despite solicitation efforts should be defined in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320(c). Additionally, the policy should require that all purchases using Federal funds are supported by appropriate documentation of the procurement process and justification for the selected method.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement Information on the Federal Programs: 93.421 Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, paragraph 318 “General Procurement Standards” states that the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards. Furthermore, paragraph 319 “Competition” states that all procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with these standards. Condition: We noted that BCHC does not have a written procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200. We also noted that although certain vendors were included in award proposals by BCHC, full and open competition was not documented for certain purchases using Federal funds. Cause: BCHC does not have a procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and is therefore not following the procedures required within 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: BCHC could incur disallowed costs for not properly procuring goods and services. Questioned Costs: $200,000 Context: BCHC is at risk of entering into contracts for goods or services under Federal awards that were not adequately procured based on the regulations in the Uniform Guidance and the awarding agency or pass-through entity could disallow the costs paid for the goods or services. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that BCHC develop and implement a formal procurement policy that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317–200.327), specifically addressing requirements for full and open competition, documentation of procurement procedures, and selection criteria for vendors. The policy should establish thresholds for the different procurement methods (e.g., micro-purchases, small purchases, sealed bids, competitive proposals, and noncompetitive proposals) and clearly outline the circumstances under which non-competitive procurement is permissible. These exceptions include sole source availability, public exigency or emergency, explicit authorization by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity, or inadequate competition despite solicitation efforts should be defined in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320(c). Additionally, the policy should require that all purchases using Federal funds are supported by appropriate documentation of the procurement process and justification for the selected method.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement Information on the Federal Programs: 93.421 Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, paragraph 318 “General Procurement Standards” states that the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards. Furthermore, paragraph 319 “Competition” states that all procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with these standards. Condition: We noted that BCHC does not have a written procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200. We also noted that although certain vendors were included in award proposals by BCHC, full and open competition was not documented for certain purchases using Federal funds. Cause: BCHC does not have a procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and is therefore not following the procedures required within 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: BCHC could incur disallowed costs for not properly procuring goods and services. Questioned Costs: $200,000 Context: BCHC is at risk of entering into contracts for goods or services under Federal awards that were not adequately procured based on the regulations in the Uniform Guidance and the awarding agency or pass-through entity could disallow the costs paid for the goods or services. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that BCHC develop and implement a formal procurement policy that complies with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317–200.327), specifically addressing requirements for full and open competition, documentation of procurement procedures, and selection criteria for vendors. The policy should establish thresholds for the different procurement methods (e.g., micro-purchases, small purchases, sealed bids, competitive proposals, and noncompetitive proposals) and clearly outline the circumstances under which non-competitive procurement is permissible. These exceptions include sole source availability, public exigency or emergency, explicit authorization by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity, or inadequate competition despite solicitation efforts should be defined in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320(c). Additionally, the policy should require that all purchases using Federal funds are supported by appropriate documentation of the procurement process and justification for the selected method.

Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Program: Continuation of the National Evaluations System for Health Technology Coordinating Center Assistance listing number: 93.103 Federal award identification number and year: • 2U01FD006292-06 2024 • 3U01FD006292-06S1 2023 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.318 states non-federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200.214 states non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Order 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 requires adequate documentation of compliance with 2 CFR 200.214. Condition and context: The Organization established policies and procedures over suspension and debarment, including checking all vendors against the government suspension and debarment listing. The policies and procedures for suspension and debarment were being followed however the evidence of the search on sam.gov was not retained. A sample of five vendors with a total contract value of $8,528,526 was selected from a population of twelve. Cause: The Organization’s management did not retain evidence of compliance with the above criteria regarding suspension and debarment due to oversight. Effect: The Organization’s documentation was lacking evidence of tracking vendors for suspension and debarment. Questioned costs: None Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend management updates its policies and procedures to ensure adequate supporting documentation of suspension and debarment verification is maintained. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan.