Congressional Grants - Procurement: Information on Federal Program: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Congressional Grant (Federal Assistance Listing Number 14.251). Criteria: CFR Section 200.318 stipulates that a 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 identified in Part 200 Subpart D. Statement of Condition: During our discussions with management, we noted that the Organization does not have documented procurement procedures in place. Statement of Cause: The Organization did not review compliance requirements related to procurement outlined in 2 CFR Section 200.318. Statement of Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with 2 CFR Section 200.218. The Organization does not have documented procedures and is therefore not performing required procedures that would be standard for all purchases over a given threshold. Questioned Costs: None. Perspective Information: As part of the required procurement testing, inquiries are made of the Organization’s management as to any procurement policies that the Organization has. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization review the requirements of 2 CFR Section 200.318 to develop procurement policies to be followed. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: The Capital District YMCA will develop and implement a written procurement policy in accordance with CFR Section 200.318. We will have this in place by July 31, 2025.
2025-005 - Procurement Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR Section 200.319(d), non-federal entities must have their own written policies for procurement transactions. The policy should incorporate all requirements within 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Condition: As of March 31, 2025, the Township did not have their own written procurement policy as required by 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.326 of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance). Cause: The Township was unaware of the requirement. Effect: The Township is not in compliance with the procurement policy requirements identified in 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.326 which could jeopardize federal funding. Questioned Costs: This finding does not result in questioned costs. Recommendation: The Township should create a procurement policy that meets all the requirements of 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.326. View of Responsible Officials: Management is in agreement and will create a procurement policy that meets all the requirements of 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.326.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Health Center Program Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 93.224/93.527 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: H80CS00758 / 2025 Award Period: April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Compliance Criteria: Federal regulations (2 CFR §§ 200.212 and 200.318(h); 2 CFR § 180.300; 48 CFR § 52.209-6) require that entities entering into covered transactions with federal award recipients be verified as not debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal programs. This verification must be performed annually and prior to entering into any transaction exceeding the applicable threshold. Condition: We identified one instance in which the agency did not perform timely suspension and debarment verification for a vendor prior to entering into a covered transaction. Questioned costs: None Context: The vendor in question had a long-standing relationship with the agency and was considered reputable by management. Due to this familiarity, verification procedures were not followed as required, resulting in a lapse in compliance. Cause: The agency relied on the vendors history and reputation, assuming compliance without conducting the required verification. Effect: The agencys failure to consistently perform timely suspension and debarment verifications resulted in noncompliance with federal procurement requirements. Although the vendor in question was ultimately eligible, without a reliable and documented verification process, the Agency risks unintentionally engaging with ineligible vendors in future transactions. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend management implement suspension and debarment verification process for all covered vendors, regardless of their history or reputation, to ensure compliance with federal regulations. Views of the Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management agrees with the finding and acknowledges that timely suspension and debarment verification was not consistently performed across all vendors. To address this deficiency, the agency is implementing a standardized process to ensure suspension and debarment checks are conducted prior to entering into any covered transaction, regardless of vendor history. This process will include documented verification steps, annual review protocols, and staff training to reinforce compliance with federal procurement regulations.
2025-002 - Lack of Written Federal Program Policies. Type: Material Weakness. Condition: The Village does not have documented policies and procedures specific to the administration of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program. This includes the absence of written guidance on key compliance areas such as payments, procurement, allowability of costs charged to federal programs, compensation, and travel costs under Uniform Guidance. Criteria: Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance, non-federal entities are required to establish and maintain effective internal controls and written policies to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. These policies should be tailored to the specific requirements of each federal program. Cause: The entity has not developed formal written policies and procedures for the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program, possibly due to reliance on informal practices or general administrative policies that do not address federal-specific requirements. Effect: Without documented policies, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with federal requirements, inconsistent program administration, and lack of accountability. This may result in questioned costs, audit findings, or potential repayment of federal funds. Recommendation: We recommend that the Village develop and implement written policies and procedures specific to the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds program. These should include: - Payments in accordance with §200.302 (6), - Procurement in accordance with §200.318, - Allowability of costs charged to federal programs in accordance with §200.302 (7), - Compensation in accordance with §200.430 and §200.431, - Travel costs in accordance with §200.474. Training should also be provided to staff responsible for administering the program to ensure consistent application of these policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management acknowledges the auditor’s finding regarding the absence of formally documented federal program policies. We recognize the importance of maintaining written procedures to ensure consistent compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements and to strengthen internal controls over federal awards. While informal practices have historically guided our federal program administration, we agree that formalizing these policies will enhance transparency, accountability, and operational efficiency. Management is currently in the process of developing written policies covering key areas such as procurement, allowable costs, subrecipient monitoring, and cash management. We anticipate completing this documentation and implementing the policies by February 28, 2026. We are committed to continuous improvement and appreciate the auditor’s recommendations as part of our efforts to maintain strong compliance and stewardship of federal funds.
Federal Program: 93.493 – Congressional Directives, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FAIN CE152180 passed through the Health Resources & Services Administration Criteria or Specific Requirement: Procurement, Suspension & Debarment, 2 CFR 200.320 Condition: The Company paid funds to a vendor that qualified under sole source procurement requirements. In the vendor’s contract with the Company, the vendor confirmed it was not suspended or debarred. The Company did not document its process for determining sole source procurement or document its search to confirm the vendor was not suspended or debarred. Cause: The Company does not have policies in place that comply with federal procurement, suspension and debarment requirements. Effect: The Company’s internal controls did not ensure proper documentation that the vendor materially complied with the federal procurement requirements. Questioned Costs: None Context: Federal procurement standards require entities that receive federal awards to have specific policies that comply with 2 CFR Section 200.318-320. The requirements specify that policies must establish thresholds and procedures for micro-purchases, simplified acquisitions, and formal purchases. When vendors are selected, federal funds are prohibited from going to certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from receiving or participating in federal awards (2 CFR 200.214). The Company did not have policies in place to ensure compliance with these federal procurement guidelines. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: The Company has policies for vendor qualification in place surrounding critical vendors. We recommend considering all vendors that are awarded contracts to be paid with federal awards critical or otherwise amending the Company’s contracting review process or critical vendor policy to incorporate specific procedures when federal funds are used. These procedures should include a documented search of Sam.gov for suspension and debarment of the vendor. The Company should establish procurement thresholds and specific procedures for those thresholds as outlined in 2 CFR Section 200.318-320. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.
2025-003 - Lack of Written Federal Program Policies. Type: Material Weakness. Condition: The Village does not have documented policies and procedures specific to the administration of the Water and Waste Disposal for Rural Communities program. This includes the absence of written guidance on key compliance areas such as procurement, subrecipient monitoring, allowable costs, and reporting requirements under Uniform Guidance. Criteria: Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance, non-federal entities are required to establish and maintain effective internal controls and written policies to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. These policies should be tailored to the specific requirements of each federal program. Cause: The entity has not developed formal written policies and procedures for the Water and Waste Disposal for Rural Communities program, possibly due to reliance on informal practices or general administrative policies that do not address federal-specific requirements. Effect: Without documented policies, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with federal requirements, inconsistent program administration, and lack of accountability. This may result in questioned costs, audit findings, or potential repayment of federal funds. Questioned Costs: n/a. Recommendation: We recommend that the Village develop and implement written policies and procedures specific to the Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural communities program. These should include: - Procurement standards in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318 – 200.327. - Subrecipient monitoring protocols. - Guidelines for allowable costs and cost principles. - Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. - Internal control procedures to ensure compliance. Training should also be provided to staff responsible for administering the program to ensure consistent application of these policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management acknowledges the auditor’s finding regarding the absence of formally documented federal program policies. We recognize the importance of maintaining written procedures to ensure consistent compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements and to strengthen internal controls over federal awards. While informal practices have historically guided our federal program administration, we agree that formalizing these policies will enhance transparency, accountability, and operational efficiency. Management is currently in the process of developing written policies covering key areas such as procurement, allowable costs, subrecipient monitoring, and cash management. We anticipate completing this documentation and implementing the policies by February 28, 2026. We are committed to continuous improvement and appreciate the auditor’s recommendations as part of our efforts to maintain strong compliance and stewardship of federal funds.
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 2024-003: Significant Deficiency - Internal Control Over Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Program Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Federal Agency U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number 10.760 Repeat of Prior Year Finding 2023-003 Criteria: For federal awards after January 1, 2018, guidance provided in 2 CFR part 200.318 requires nonfederal entities to establish and follow their own documented procurement procedures that conform to applicable federal law and standards. 2 CFR part 200.320 includes different allowable methods of procurement. There are also requirements to verify the vendors are not suspended or debarred. Condition/Context: During our testing for this program in the prior year, we noted that the City did not have a written procurement policy to conform with Uniform Guidance requirements. The City contracted with a third-party administrator who provided the services related to procurement for this grant program. No additional contracts were procured with federal funds in 2024. Cause: The City was made aware of the requirement of requiring a procurement policy but has not implemented a policy at this time. Effect: Without an adequate policy in place, procurement procedures may not adhere to requirements of federal awards. Questioned Costs: None noted. Recommendation: Program personnel should become familiar with the procurement, suspension and debarment rules for Federal programs and implement a formal written policy to conform with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will make efforts to implement a formal procurement policy.
Environmental Protection Agency, passed through State of North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality Federal Financial Assistance Listing #66.468 Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria - Uniform Guidance and 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326 set forth the procurement standards non-federal entities other than states must follow when operating federal programs and the procurement procedures required. Condition - During the course of our engagement, it was identified that the District did not have a written policy on procurement that satisfied the requirements of 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Cause - Lack of oversight, awareness, or understanding of all of the specific requirements under the Uniform Guidance and applicable CFR sections, and controls were not adequately designed to ensure compliance with all of these requirements. Effect - A lack of documented policies increase the overall risk that employees are not aware of the specific requirements with of procurement, suspension, and debarment. Questioned Costs – None reported Context/Sampling - Overall procurement policy. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s) – Yes, prior year finding 2023-006 Recommendation - We recommend that management establish a written policy that addresses all of the procurement requirements for federal programs as identified in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326 and maintain adequate supporting documentation and records to document history and methods of procurement and the procedures performed to comply with these CFR sections. Views of Responsible Officials - There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
to align with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.318 and are expecting to be a low-risk auditee during the 2025 fiscal year.
Criteria or Specific Requirement Procurement: Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. Suspension and Debarment: Part 2 CFR Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition Procurement: The Organization has a documented procurement policy. However, we were unable to view records detailing the history of the Organization’s two procurement transactions and that steps required by the Organization’s procurement were completed for the transactions. Suspension and Debarment: We were unable to see evidence that the Organization verified two vendors with which it entered a covered transaction were not suspended and debarred before the date it entered the transaction with such vendors. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendors were not suspended and debarred.Questioned Costs: None Context: Procurement: Two instances were noted during testing of eight transactions above the Organization’s micro purchase threshold. Suspension and Debarment: Two instances were noted during testing of two coveredtransactions. Cause: We were unable to view evidence that the Organization's documented procurement, and suspension and debarment policies were followed. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to documented procurement, and suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of: its completion of the required steps of its procurement policy for applicable transactions, and suspension and debarment checks and procedures the Organization performs over vendors.Documentation and evidence of these procedures should be maintained to help show that the Organization in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: Management partially agrees with this finding. Regarding suspension and debarment, CLS agrees on improving the documentation to comply and demonstrate compliance with this requirement, though CLS disagrees with the characterization of material weakness. Regarding the two procurement transactions, CLS disagrees strongly that these transactions were procurements subject to the CLS accounting manual procurement section. CLS provided documentation to the auditors demonstrating that these were not procurements but were, in fact, required by existing leases. In one instance, our Denver landlord required us to pay a “catch-up” payment for operating expenses it had underbilled us previously; this cannot conceivably have been a procurement as we did not have discretion not to pay it and it was required by an existing lease. The second instance was a payment related to the expansion of leased office space in Colorado Springs; that also was not a procurement as there was no alternative but to pay the existing landlord for increased space, and it could not conceivably have been conducive to third-party bidding etc. We understand that the auditors may prefer to have a sole source letter in these instances, but we disagree with any finding that this is required by our accounting manual and the auditors have pointed to no specific language in the accounting manual for this requirement. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: Management’s response did not persuade the auditor to revise the finding. Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. We were unable to see evidence of the federally required documentation. The Organization’s accounting manual states that leases of office buildings and office storage space and contracted services are considered procurements.
Criteria or Specific Requirement Procurement: Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. Suspension and Debarment: Part 2 CFR Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition Procurement: The Organization has a documented procurement policy. However, we were unable to view records detailing the history of the Organization’s two procurement transactions and that steps required by the Organization’s procurement were completed for the transactions. Suspension and Debarment: We were unable to see evidence that the Organization verified two vendors with which it entered a covered transaction were not suspended and debarred before the date it entered the transaction with such vendors. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendors were not suspended and debarred.Questioned Costs: None Context: Procurement: Two instances were noted during testing of eight transactions above the Organization’s micro purchase threshold. Suspension and Debarment: Two instances were noted during testing of two coveredtransactions. Cause: We were unable to view evidence that the Organization's documented procurement, and suspension and debarment policies were followed. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to documented procurement, and suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of: its completion of the required steps of its procurement policy for applicable transactions, and suspension and debarment checks and procedures the Organization performs over vendors.Documentation and evidence of these procedures should be maintained to help show that the Organization in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: Management partially agrees with this finding. Regarding suspension and debarment, CLS agrees on improving the documentation to comply and demonstrate compliance with this requirement, though CLS disagrees with the characterization of material weakness. Regarding the two procurement transactions, CLS disagrees strongly that these transactions were procurements subject to the CLS accounting manual procurement section. CLS provided documentation to the auditors demonstrating that these were not procurements but were, in fact, required by existing leases. In one instance, our Denver landlord required us to pay a “catch-up” payment for operating expenses it had underbilled us previously; this cannot conceivably have been a procurement as we did not have discretion not to pay it and it was required by an existing lease. The second instance was a payment related to the expansion of leased office space in Colorado Springs; that also was not a procurement as there was no alternative but to pay the existing landlord for increased space, and it could not conceivably have been conducive to third-party bidding etc. We understand that the auditors may prefer to have a sole source letter in these instances, but we disagree with any finding that this is required by our accounting manual and the auditors have pointed to no specific language in the accounting manual for this requirement. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: Management’s response did not persuade the auditor to revise the finding. Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. We were unable to see evidence of the federally required documentation. The Organization’s accounting manual states that leases of office buildings and office storage space and contracted services are considered procurements.
Criteria or Specific Requirement Procurement: Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. Suspension and Debarment: Part 2 CFR Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition Procurement: The Organization has a documented procurement policy. However, we were unable to view records detailing the history of the Organization’s two procurement transactions and that steps required by the Organization’s procurement were completed for the transactions. Suspension and Debarment: We were unable to see evidence that the Organization verified two vendors with which it entered a covered transaction were not suspended and debarred before the date it entered the transaction with such vendors. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendors were not suspended and debarred.Questioned Costs: None Context: Procurement: Two instances were noted during testing of eight transactions above the Organization’s micro purchase threshold. Suspension and Debarment: Two instances were noted during testing of two coveredtransactions. Cause: We were unable to view evidence that the Organization's documented procurement, and suspension and debarment policies were followed. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to documented procurement, and suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of: its completion of the required steps of its procurement policy for applicable transactions, and suspension and debarment checks and procedures the Organization performs over vendors.Documentation and evidence of these procedures should be maintained to help show that the Organization in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: Management partially agrees with this finding. Regarding suspension and debarment, CLS agrees on improving the documentation to comply and demonstrate compliance with this requirement, though CLS disagrees with the characterization of material weakness. Regarding the two procurement transactions, CLS disagrees strongly that these transactions were procurements subject to the CLS accounting manual procurement section. CLS provided documentation to the auditors demonstrating that these were not procurements but were, in fact, required by existing leases. In one instance, our Denver landlord required us to pay a “catch-up” payment for operating expenses it had underbilled us previously; this cannot conceivably have been a procurement as we did not have discretion not to pay it and it was required by an existing lease. The second instance was a payment related to the expansion of leased office space in Colorado Springs; that also was not a procurement as there was no alternative but to pay the existing landlord for increased space, and it could not conceivably have been conducive to third-party bidding etc. We understand that the auditors may prefer to have a sole source letter in these instances, but we disagree with any finding that this is required by our accounting manual and the auditors have pointed to no specific language in the accounting manual for this requirement. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: Management’s response did not persuade the auditor to revise the finding. Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. We were unable to see evidence of the federally required documentation. The Organization’s accounting manual states that leases of office buildings and office storage space and contracted services are considered procurements.
Criteria or Specific Requirement Procurement: Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. Suspension and Debarment: Part 2 CFR Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition Procurement: The Organization has a documented procurement policy. However, we were unable to view records detailing the history of the Organization’s two procurement transactions and that steps required by the Organization’s procurement were completed for the transactions. Suspension and Debarment: We were unable to see evidence that the Organization verified two vendors with which it entered a covered transaction were not suspended and debarred before the date it entered the transaction with such vendors. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendors were not suspended and debarred.Questioned Costs: None Context: Procurement: Two instances were noted during testing of eight transactions above the Organization’s micro purchase threshold. Suspension and Debarment: Two instances were noted during testing of two coveredtransactions. Cause: We were unable to view evidence that the Organization's documented procurement, and suspension and debarment policies were followed. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to documented procurement, and suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of: its completion of the required steps of its procurement policy for applicable transactions, and suspension and debarment checks and procedures the Organization performs over vendors.Documentation and evidence of these procedures should be maintained to help show that the Organization in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: Management partially agrees with this finding. Regarding suspension and debarment, CLS agrees on improving the documentation to comply and demonstrate compliance with this requirement, though CLS disagrees with the characterization of material weakness. Regarding the two procurement transactions, CLS disagrees strongly that these transactions were procurements subject to the CLS accounting manual procurement section. CLS provided documentation to the auditors demonstrating that these were not procurements but were, in fact, required by existing leases. In one instance, our Denver landlord required us to pay a “catch-up” payment for operating expenses it had underbilled us previously; this cannot conceivably have been a procurement as we did not have discretion not to pay it and it was required by an existing lease. The second instance was a payment related to the expansion of leased office space in Colorado Springs; that also was not a procurement as there was no alternative but to pay the existing landlord for increased space, and it could not conceivably have been conducive to third-party bidding etc. We understand that the auditors may prefer to have a sole source letter in these instances, but we disagree with any finding that this is required by our accounting manual and the auditors have pointed to no specific language in the accounting manual for this requirement. Auditor’s Concluding Remarks: Management’s response did not persuade the auditor to revise the finding. Part 2 CFR Section 200.318 requires that recipients and subrecipients maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under federal awards and subawards, including for acquisition of property or services. It also requires that recipients and subrecipients 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 type. We were unable to see evidence of the federally required documentation. The Organization’s accounting manual states that leases of office buildings and office storage space and contracted services are considered procurements.
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.
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.
Criteria: The Foundation is responsible for implementing policies, including internal controls, that are designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of the following objectives: effectiveness and efficiency of operations, reliability of reporting for internal and external use; and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Per 2 CFR 180.300 and 200.318-200.326, the Foundation is responsible for implementing policies and procedures before entering into covered transactions with vendors as well as performing competitive bidding procedures for vendors used in federal award spending. Condition: The overall process for tracking federal funds spent and the reimbursement process is a manual process performed by one department. For majority of the year the Foundation lacked formal policies for reimbursement, procurement and timely review of calculations throughout the year. Cause: The Foundation saw increased levels of federal funding during the previous year and did not have the process in place to ensure compliance until majority of the way through the year. Effect: The lack of process documentation and review process limited the Foundation’s ability to design and implement the necessary internal controls over compliance with federal awards. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. Context: The finding represents a systematic deficiency in the Foundation’s process surrounding federal funds. This finding cannot be quantified in terms of dollar value. Repeat Finding: This is partially a repeat finding as the Foundation implemented the required policies during the year ended December 31, 2024. Recommendation: We recommend increased training in federal grant compliance and specific grant requirements. Additionally, the Foundation should continue to review and implement formal processes surrounding federal funds and the review of reimbursement requests. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the finding and implemented a comprehensive procurement policy in October 2024 compliant with federal regulations under the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200), with full staff training completed and internal monitoring controls established.
2024-001: Internal Controls over Compliance for Procurement Suspension & Debarment U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – ALN 21.027 Criteria: Per 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327, [entities] must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Further, when a non-federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal 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. Condition: The City did not follow its Grant Standard Operating procedures for validating that a contractor was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. Cause: The contract agreement was finalized without validation that all proper procurement procedures had been followed. Effect: By not following the City’s procedures in place, it puts the City at risk of doing business with companies who are suspended, debarred or otherwise excluded from doing business with the federal government. Questioned Costs: $0 Context: The auditor tested one procurement transaction entered into during 2024 using COVID- 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. The City’s Grant Standard Operating procedures over suspension and debarment were not followed for this one procurement. Identification of Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the City perform a separate individual check of contract files to ensure the City’s Grant Standard Operating procedures are followed and documented prior to entering into a contract agreement with covered contractors. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this finding and is in the process of developing internal controls to ensure timely and appropriate actions are taken on the deficiency noted. Additional details can be found in the City of Bloomington’s Corrective Action Plan.
2024-003: Lack of Procurement Policy – Significant Deficiency AL 66.468 Base Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water State Revolving Funds 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 The City does not have a written procurement policy in place. Cause The City has not written and approved a procurement policy. Effect Non-compliance with Procurement Suspension & Debarment compliance requirements. Questioned Costs $0 Recommendation We recommend for the City 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 A procurement policy will be developed and approved by the City Council. Repeat Finding This is a new finding.
2024-003 Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Compliance over Major Programs Funding Agency: Department of Treasury ALN: 21.027 Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.214, non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with parties that are suspended or debarred. 2 CFR 200.318(i) also states that "subrecipients 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 The Organization has a procurement policy in place; however, the Organization neglected to document their suspension and debarment verification process for one of four procurement transactions tested. The Organization is also required by the Washington State Department of Agriculture ("WSDA") to receive prior approval for any equipment purchase or equipment repairs over $5,000. One of the four transactions tested did not receive prior approval from WSDA to make the purchase. There was no documentation that could support approval was received from WSDA after the purchase had been made. Cause The Organization claimed the suspension and debarment check occurred prior to entering into the transaction but neglected to retain documentation. The Organization also did not properly follow its procurement policy, nor the policy required by WSDA, requiring prior approval for any equipment purchase or repair over $5,000. Effect Payments may have been made to suspended or debarred vendors and gone undetected by the Organization. The Organization could have also made an equipment purchase or equipment repair that would not be refunded by WSDA (the pass-through entity). Repeat Finding No. Auditor's Recommendation The Organization should ensure the employee responsible for conducting a suspension and debarment check is (1) aware of the necessity to document the verification was done and (2) capable of documenting the verification. The Organization should also reevaluate its internal controls over procurements with WSDA funding to ensure that the Organization is receiving approval from the WSDA prior to making the purchase. Employees tasked responsible for making procurement transactions should be educated on the proper procurement procedures. Management should be checking for the WSDA approval prior to signing off on cash disbursements for equipment purchases or equipment repairs.
2024-003 Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Compliance over Major Programs Funding Agency: Department of Treasury ALN: 21.027 Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.214, non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with parties that are suspended or debarred. 2 CFR 200.318(i) also states that "subrecipients 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 The Organization has a procurement policy in place; however, the Organization neglected to document their suspension and debarment verification process for one of four procurement transactions tested. The Organization is also required by the Washington State Department of Agriculture ("WSDA") to receive prior approval for any equipment purchase or equipment repairs over $5,000. One of the four transactions tested did not receive prior approval from WSDA to make the purchase. There was no documentation that could support approval was received from WSDA after the purchase had been made. Cause The Organization claimed the suspension and debarment check occurred prior to entering into the transaction but neglected to retain documentation. The Organization also did not properly follow its procurement policy, nor the policy required by WSDA, requiring prior approval for any equipment purchase or repair over $5,000. Effect Payments may have been made to suspended or debarred vendors and gone undetected by the Organization. The Organization could have also made an equipment purchase or equipment repair that would not be refunded by WSDA (the pass-through entity). Repeat Finding No. Auditor's Recommendation The Organization should ensure the employee responsible for conducting a suspension and debarment check is (1) aware of the necessity to document the verification was done and (2) capable of documenting the verification. The Organization should also reevaluate its internal controls over procurements with WSDA funding to ensure that the Organization is receiving approval from the WSDA prior to making the purchase. Employees tasked responsible for making procurement transactions should be educated on the proper procurement procedures. Management should be checking for the WSDA approval prior to signing off on cash disbursements for equipment purchases or equipment repairs.
2024-003 Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Compliance over Major Programs Funding Agency: Department of Treasury ALN: 21.027 Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.214, non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with parties that are suspended or debarred. 2 CFR 200.318(i) also states that "subrecipients 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 The Organization has a procurement policy in place; however, the Organization neglected to document their suspension and debarment verification process for one of four procurement transactions tested. The Organization is also required by the Washington State Department of Agriculture ("WSDA") to receive prior approval for any equipment purchase or equipment repairs over $5,000. One of the four transactions tested did not receive prior approval from WSDA to make the purchase. There was no documentation that could support approval was received from WSDA after the purchase had been made. Cause The Organization claimed the suspension and debarment check occurred prior to entering into the transaction but neglected to retain documentation. The Organization also did not properly follow its procurement policy, nor the policy required by WSDA, requiring prior approval for any equipment purchase or repair over $5,000. Effect Payments may have been made to suspended or debarred vendors and gone undetected by the Organization. The Organization could have also made an equipment purchase or equipment repair that would not be refunded by WSDA (the pass-through entity). Repeat Finding No. Auditor's Recommendation The Organization should ensure the employee responsible for conducting a suspension and debarment check is (1) aware of the necessity to document the verification was done and (2) capable of documenting the verification. The Organization should also reevaluate its internal controls over procurements with WSDA funding to ensure that the Organization is receiving approval from the WSDA prior to making the purchase. Employees tasked responsible for making procurement transactions should be educated on the proper procurement procedures. Management should be checking for the WSDA approval prior to signing off on cash disbursements for equipment purchases or equipment repairs.
2024-003 Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Compliance over Major Programs Funding Agency: Department of Treasury ALN: 21.027 Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.214, non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with parties that are suspended or debarred. 2 CFR 200.318(i) also states that "subrecipients 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 The Organization has a procurement policy in place; however, the Organization neglected to document their suspension and debarment verification process for one of four procurement transactions tested. The Organization is also required by the Washington State Department of Agriculture ("WSDA") to receive prior approval for any equipment purchase or equipment repairs over $5,000. One of the four transactions tested did not receive prior approval from WSDA to make the purchase. There was no documentation that could support approval was received from WSDA after the purchase had been made. Cause The Organization claimed the suspension and debarment check occurred prior to entering into the transaction but neglected to retain documentation. The Organization also did not properly follow its procurement policy, nor the policy required by WSDA, requiring prior approval for any equipment purchase or repair over $5,000. Effect Payments may have been made to suspended or debarred vendors and gone undetected by the Organization. The Organization could have also made an equipment purchase or equipment repair that would not be refunded by WSDA (the pass-through entity). Repeat Finding No. Auditor's Recommendation The Organization should ensure the employee responsible for conducting a suspension and debarment check is (1) aware of the necessity to document the verification was done and (2) capable of documenting the verification. The Organization should also reevaluate its internal controls over procurements with WSDA funding to ensure that the Organization is receiving approval from the WSDA prior to making the purchase. Employees tasked responsible for making procurement transactions should be educated on the proper procurement procedures. Management should be checking for the WSDA approval prior to signing off on cash disbursements for equipment purchases or equipment repairs.
2024-003 Significant Deficiency in Internal Control and Compliance over Major Programs Funding Agency: Department of Treasury ALN: 21.027 Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.214, non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with parties that are suspended or debarred. 2 CFR 200.318(i) also states that "subrecipients 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 The Organization has a procurement policy in place; however, the Organization neglected to document their suspension and debarment verification process for one of four procurement transactions tested. The Organization is also required by the Washington State Department of Agriculture ("WSDA") to receive prior approval for any equipment purchase or equipment repairs over $5,000. One of the four transactions tested did not receive prior approval from WSDA to make the purchase. There was no documentation that could support approval was received from WSDA after the purchase had been made. Cause The Organization claimed the suspension and debarment check occurred prior to entering into the transaction but neglected to retain documentation. The Organization also did not properly follow its procurement policy, nor the policy required by WSDA, requiring prior approval for any equipment purchase or repair over $5,000. Effect Payments may have been made to suspended or debarred vendors and gone undetected by the Organization. The Organization could have also made an equipment purchase or equipment repair that would not be refunded by WSDA (the pass-through entity). Repeat Finding No. Auditor's Recommendation The Organization should ensure the employee responsible for conducting a suspension and debarment check is (1) aware of the necessity to document the verification was done and (2) capable of documenting the verification. The Organization should also reevaluate its internal controls over procurements with WSDA funding to ensure that the Organization is receiving approval from the WSDA prior to making the purchase. Employees tasked responsible for making procurement transactions should be educated on the proper procurement procedures. Management should be checking for the WSDA approval prior to signing off on cash disbursements for equipment purchases or equipment repairs.
Criteria Uniform Guidance requires non-federal entities to follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. The Organization is required to adopt and maintain a written procurement policy in accordance with Uniform Guidance procurement standards and perform and document suspended and debarment searches for potential vendors prior to procuring services from the contractor. If bids are not obtained in accordance with the Organization’s procurement procedures due to using the noncompetitive procurement method, documentation must be prepared and retained including justification for sole-source procurement. Condition and Context The Organization does not have a documented procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200. We noted four contractors that had total 2024 purchases over $10,000 and selected two for testing. We noted the following deficiencies in our testing: - For the two contractors tested, the Organization had no documentation to support that its suspension and debarment verification procedures were performed prior to procuring services from contractors. Therefore, we have concluded that such verifications were not timely performed. - The two contractors tested were selected using the noncompetitive procurement method. When the Organization relied on sole-source justification to procure services, the Organization did not document its sole-source justification prior to procuring services from the contractor. Cause The Organization assumed that following the procurement standards in 2 CFR Part 200 was a sufficient procurement policy and the Organization was not aware that a documented procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200 was required. Further, the Organization was not aware of the necessity to document its suspension and debarment search procedures and justification for sole-source procurements prior to procuring services from contractors. Effect Without a formal procurement policy, or abidance of the documentation requirements of 2 CFR Part 200, there is an increased risk that procurement activities may not be conducted in compliance with federal requirements, potentially leading to unallowable costs or questioned costs. Questioned Cost: None due to auditor agreeing with verbal justification of sole-source procurements. Recommendation We recommend that management develop and implement a formal procurement policy that aligns with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. We recommend that management ensure all procurement policy requirements are performed and documented prior to entering into procurement transactions. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions See Correction Action Plan.
Criteria Uniform Guidance requires non-federal entities to follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. The Organization is required to adopt and maintain a written procurement policy in accordance with Uniform Guidance procurement standards and perform and document suspended and debarment searches for potential vendors prior to procuring services from the contractor. If bids are not obtained in accordance with the Organization’s procurement procedures due to using the noncompetitive procurement method, documentation must be prepared and retained including justification for sole-source procurement. Condition and Context The Organization does not have a documented procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200. We noted four contractors that had total 2024 purchases over $10,000 and selected two for testing. We noted the following deficiencies in our testing: - For the two contractors tested, the Organization had no documentation to support that its suspension and debarment verification procedures were performed prior to procuring services from contractors. Therefore, we have concluded that such verifications were not timely performed. - The two contractors tested were selected using the noncompetitive procurement method. When the Organization relied on sole-source justification to procure services, the Organization did not document its sole-source justification prior to procuring services from the contractor. Cause The Organization assumed that following the procurement standards in 2 CFR Part 200 was a sufficient procurement policy and the Organization was not aware that a documented procurement policy in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200 was required. Further, the Organization was not aware of the necessity to document its suspension and debarment search procedures and justification for sole-source procurements prior to procuring services from contractors. Effect Without a formal procurement policy, or abidance of the documentation requirements of 2 CFR Part 200, there is an increased risk that procurement activities may not be conducted in compliance with federal requirements, potentially leading to unallowable costs or questioned costs. Questioned Cost: None due to auditor agreeing with verbal justification of sole-source procurements. Recommendation We recommend that management develop and implement a formal procurement policy that aligns with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. We recommend that management ensure all procurement policy requirements are performed and documented prior to entering into procurement transactions. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions See Correction Action Plan.
Federal agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal program title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 State Agency: Wisconsin Department Workforce Development State Number(s): Not applicable Award Period: December 14, 2021 – June 30, 2025 Type of Finding: • Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: 2 CFR Part 200 sections 200.318-327 outline the required general procurement standards, competition, and methods of procurement to be followed. These elements must be incorporated into an organization’s procurement policies and must be followed to ensure procurements are supported and covered transactions are only entered into with entities that are not federally suspended or debarred. The Organization should be updated to reflect all procurement policy requirements outlined by Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the Organization should implement policies to ensure it is not entering into a covered transaction with an entity that has been suspended or debarred, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995. Condition: Procurement and suspension and debarment policies are not in compliance with Uniform Guidance. Therefore, the Organization did not have procedures in place for verifying that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded. However, per review of SAM.gov during audit testing, it was determined that no tested vendors were suspended nor debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: CLA completed procurement and suspension and debarment testing and it was noted that the Organization's related policies were not in accordance with Uniform Guidance. Additionally, CLA tested suspension and debarment procedures over the sole covered transaction to determine whether the Organization complied with the requirements for charging costs to grants passed through the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development. There was no documentation to show that a suspension and debarment check was performed prior to entering into the covered transaction, however the Organization did perform a check via SAM.gov at a subsequent date and determined the contractor was not suspended nor debarred. Cause: The Organization was not aware of policy and documentation requirements under Uniform Guidance for procurement and suspension and debarment. Effect: Noncompliant policies can lead to selecting vendors that are suspended and debarred and could result in the procurement of goods and services that are unideal for programs. When not approved by the granting agency, not following suspension and debarment procedures is considered a form of noncompliance with the grant provision. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: CLA recommends the Organization review their procurement and suspension and debarment policies to ensure they are compliant with Uniform Guidance requirements. CLA also recommends emphasizing the importance of following those standards and established policies with all authorized purchasers within the Organization, including verifying that suspension and debarment checks are performed and documented prior to entering into covered transactions. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that 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. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations 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. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.