Federal Transit Cluster – Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control ALN 20.507 and 20.526 U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Transit Administration Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.318(i), non-Federal entities must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of a procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Additionally, 2 CFR Part 180 requires that contracts be awarded only to responsible contractors. Verification of responsibility includes checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or obtaining certifications. Under Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, contracts made under federal awards must include specific provisions, including those related to termination, lobbying, and Buy America certifications, where applicable. Condition: In its procurement files, the Authority’s had missing documentation of procurement history, absence of required contract clauses, lack of evidence of contractor responsibility determination and missing lobbying and Buy America certifications. Cause: The Authority did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with federal procurement requirements, including documentation, contractor responsibility verification, and inclusion of required contract clauses and certifications. Effect: The absence of required documentation, verifications, and certifications opened the Authority to increased risk of noncompliance with federal procurement standards, potential ineligibility of costs, and exposure to audit disallowances or grant repayment. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: For one out of ten transactions tested exceeding the micro-purchase threshold, the Authority failed to maintain a complete record of the procurement history and its determination on the status of the contractor responsibility and was missing required clauses and certifications in the contract details. Recommendation: We recommend that the Authority implement comprehensive internal control procedures over procurement to ensure compliance with federal requirements. This should include maintaining complete procurement documentation, verifying contractor responsibility through SAM.gov or equivalent, including all required federal clauses and certifications in solicitations and contracts, and providing adequate training to procurement staff on federal requirements and documentation standards. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan
Federal Transit Cluster – Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control ALN 20.507 and 20.526 U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Transit Administration Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.318(i), non-Federal entities must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of a procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Additionally, 2 CFR Part 180 requires that contracts be awarded only to responsible contractors. Verification of responsibility includes checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or obtaining certifications. Under Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, contracts made under federal awards must include specific provisions, including those related to termination, lobbying, and Buy America certifications, where applicable. Condition: In its procurement files, the Authority’s had missing documentation of procurement history, absence of required contract clauses, lack of evidence of contractor responsibility determination and missing lobbying and Buy America certifications. Cause: The Authority did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with federal procurement requirements, including documentation, contractor responsibility verification, and inclusion of required contract clauses and certifications. Effect: The absence of required documentation, verifications, and certifications opened the Authority to increased risk of noncompliance with federal procurement standards, potential ineligibility of costs, and exposure to audit disallowances or grant repayment. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: For one out of ten transactions tested exceeding the micro-purchase threshold, the Authority failed to maintain a complete record of the procurement history and its determination on the status of the contractor responsibility and was missing required clauses and certifications in the contract details. Recommendation: We recommend that the Authority implement comprehensive internal control procedures over procurement to ensure compliance with federal requirements. This should include maintaining complete procurement documentation, verifying contractor responsibility through SAM.gov or equivalent, including all required federal clauses and certifications in solicitations and contracts, and providing adequate training to procurement staff on federal requirements and documentation standards. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan
Federal Transit Cluster – Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control ALN 20.507 and 20.526 U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal Transit Administration Criteria: Per 2 CFR § 200.318(i), non-Federal entities must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of a procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Additionally, 2 CFR Part 180 requires that contracts be awarded only to responsible contractors. Verification of responsibility includes checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or obtaining certifications. Under Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, contracts made under federal awards must include specific provisions, including those related to termination, lobbying, and Buy America certifications, where applicable. Condition: In its procurement files, the Authority’s had missing documentation of procurement history, absence of required contract clauses, lack of evidence of contractor responsibility determination and missing lobbying and Buy America certifications. Cause: The Authority did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with federal procurement requirements, including documentation, contractor responsibility verification, and inclusion of required contract clauses and certifications. Effect: The absence of required documentation, verifications, and certifications opened the Authority to increased risk of noncompliance with federal procurement standards, potential ineligibility of costs, and exposure to audit disallowances or grant repayment. Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: For one out of ten transactions tested exceeding the micro-purchase threshold, the Authority failed to maintain a complete record of the procurement history and its determination on the status of the contractor responsibility and was missing required clauses and certifications in the contract details. Recommendation: We recommend that the Authority implement comprehensive internal control procedures over procurement to ensure compliance with federal requirements. This should include maintaining complete procurement documentation, verifying contractor responsibility through SAM.gov or equivalent, including all required federal clauses and certifications in solicitations and contracts, and providing adequate training to procurement staff on federal requirements and documentation standards. Views of Responsible Officials: See Corrective Action Plan
2024-003 – Written Policies Required by the Uniform Grant Guidance Finding Type. Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Immaterial Noncompliance (Procurement and Suspension and Debarment) Program. COVID-19 State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Cluster (CFDA# 21.027); U.S. Department of Treasury; Passed through Lake County. Criteria. Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They 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. Condition. The District did not have documented procurement standards to comply with 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Cause. The District has drafted a policy for these areas in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, but it has not been finalized. Effect. As a result of this condition, the District did not fully comply with 2 CFR Part 200 applicable to the above noted grant. Questioned Costs. No costs have been questioned as a result of this finding. Recommendation. We recommend that the District develop a policy as soon as practical, but no later than the end of fiscal year 2025, to comply with 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. View of Responsible Officials. We agree with the recommendation and will develop procedures to comply with the Uniform Guidance applicable to grants Repeat finding. 2023-003
Prior Year Finding: 2023-004 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program: COVID 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Relief Fund Assistance Listing: 21.027 Pass-Through Entity: Maryland Department of Housing and Community Development Pass-Through Award Number and Period: (7/1/2023 6/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria or Specific Requirement: Control: Per 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in "Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government" issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the "Internal Control Integrated Framework", issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Compliance: Per 2 CFR section 200.318, a non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. Per 2 CFR section 200.319, all procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of this section and § 200.320. Per the Towns purchasing policy, goods or services costing $10,000 or more must be purchased from the lowest responsive bidder meeting specifications after advertising for bids. Condition/Context: The Town failed to provide documentation supporting compliance with required procurement processes for goods or services exceeding $10,000 for five out of five vendors tested. This includes a lack of evidence on how these vendors were selected and whether the procurement process ensured full and open competition. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Cause: The Town's internal controls were not sufficient to ensure that procurement policies were followed for purchases made for the program. Effect: Failure to adhere to procurement policies and procedures may result in obtaining goods or services under terms that are not in the best interest of the federal program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Town enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it verifies vendors are not suspended or debarred from business prior to all goods and services charged to the program. The Town should retain documentation of procurement suspension/debarment status verifications for its vendors audit purposes. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations §200.318 required that entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in §200.317 through §200.327. These procedures must include written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award and administration of contracts. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180 300). The Code of Federal Regulations (2 CFR 200.318(I)) requires that each non-Federal entity 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 does not have written procurement policies in accordance with procurement requirements contained within the Uniform Guidance including policies and procedures in place to ensure that before entering into a covered transaction the Organization perform the necessary verifications of suspended or debarred entities. The Organization did not maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions and maintain sufficient documentation of its procurement decisions. Cause: The Organization's federal funding significantly increased in the year ended June 30, 2024 and is the first year that the Organization was required to undergo an audit in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that included a procurement requirement. The Organization has existing purchasing and conflict of interest policies in place; however, it was not aware that its existing purchasing policies were required to be updated to explicitly comply with the standards in the Uniform Guidance. As well as, the Organization does not have procedures in place to ensure suspension and debarment checks are completed prior to entering into purchase or service agreements with vendors and updated on an annual basis. Evidence of actions taken to ensure proper suspension and debarment requirements were not being maintained by the Organization. Effect: In the absence of an appropriately written policy, it is more likely that the Organization's procurement practices will not comply with the Uniform Guidance. The Organization did not comply with the procurement standards concerning suspension and debarment and documentation of procurement activities. Recommendation: A written procurement policy in compliance with federal guidelines and a written standard of conduct should be established in accordance with procurement requirements contained in the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding; see corrective action plan.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
Information on the Federal Programs: United States Department of Education, both programs are passed through Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education CFDA Nos. 84.027 & 84.173; Special Education Cluster; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 CFDA Nos. 84.425 & 84.425D; ESSER Program; Grant Period Ending Fiscal Year End 2024 Condition: In the course of allowable costs and procurement testing (B-010), it was discovered that the client failed to check vendors for suspension/debarment prior to contracting; note I-002 email from client. Client does have appropriate policies/procedures in place for managing Federal awards, including this particular criteria; see Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards, however they were not being followed. Criteria: Non-Federal entities are required to follow procurement standards per 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318-326, Uniform Guidance, as well as their own documented procurement standards, which must reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations – whichever is stricter. Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. 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. 2 CFR Part 180 identifies two types of covered transactions: a transaction at the primary tier versus a transaction at the lower tier. A covered transaction at the primary tier is any transaction between a Federal agency and a person. A person can be an individual or business, federal agency or non-federal agency. A covered transaction at the lower tier is where a participant, such as a non-federal entity, in a covered transaction does business with another person. A “covered transaction” can be further defined as a non-procurement transaction or procurement transaction. A subaward, regardless of amount, qualifies as a non-procurement transaction, unless exempt by 2 CFR Part 180.215. A procurement transaction for goods or services that equals or exceeds $25,000 qualifies as a covered transaction, unless other criteria is met within 2 CFR Part 180.220. For example, a procurement transaction could be a covered transaction, regardless of amount, if the transaction requires approval by a Federal agency. Cause: Excerpt from client Policies & Procedures, MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension (p. 28) The District awards contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration will be given to such matters as contractor integrity, compliance with public policy, record of past performance, and financial and technical resources. The District may not subcontract with or award sub grants to any person or company who is debarred or suspended. For all contracts over $25,000 the District verifies that the vendor with whom the District intends to do business with is not excluded or disqualified. 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II (1) and 2 C.F.R. §§ 180.220 and 180.300. In this case, therefore, the proper control was in place but not followed. Effect or Possible Effect of the Condition: Non-compliance with 2 CFR 200 Section 180.995. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Isolated Instance or Systemic Problem: This appears to be an isolated problem as the controls over this compliance requirement are in place but were not being followed. Repeat of a Finding in the Immediately Prior Audit (with Prior Year Audit Finding Number (where applicable)): No Recommendation to Prevent Future Occurrence: It is recommended that the Town follow scrupulously its own MPS Grant Manual – Policies Over Federal Awards: Debarment and Suspension, which is fully compliant with 2 CFR 200 Uniform Guidance.
2024-005 - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Program Information: Department of Treasury - State & Local Fiscal Recovery Fund ALN - 21.027 - State & Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: The following CFR(s) apply to this finding: 2 CFR §200.318(a) Condition: During our testing we reviewed the procurement policy for the City and identified multiple provisions required were not included in the policy. Cause: The control lapse occurred because there was turnover in key positions and the policy has not been reviewed. Effect: Procurement activities conducted under this incomplete policy may not adhere to required federal standards, increasing the risk of noncompliance, unallowable costs or procurement practices that do not ensure fair and open competition. Identification of Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: The procurement policy in effect during the fiscal year was reviewed which is not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the City revise its procurement policy to fully incorporate all elements required by 2 CFR §200.317-200.327. Additionally, we suggest the City implement a regular policy review process to ensure continued compliance with federal regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Please see the Corrective Action Plan issued by the City.
2024-005 - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Program Information: Department of Treasury - State & Local Fiscal Recovery Fund ALN - 21.027 - State & Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: The following CFR(s) apply to this finding: 2 CFR §200.318(a) Condition: During our testing we reviewed the procurement policy for the City and identified multiple provisions required were not included in the policy. Cause: The control lapse occurred because there was turnover in key positions and the policy has not been reviewed. Effect: Procurement activities conducted under this incomplete policy may not adhere to required federal standards, increasing the risk of noncompliance, unallowable costs or procurement practices that do not ensure fair and open competition. Identification of Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: The procurement policy in effect during the fiscal year was reviewed which is not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the City revise its procurement policy to fully incorporate all elements required by 2 CFR §200.317-200.327. Additionally, we suggest the City implement a regular policy review process to ensure continued compliance with federal regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Please see the Corrective Action Plan issued by the City.
2024-005 - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Program Information: Department of Treasury - State & Local Fiscal Recovery Fund ALN - 21.027 - State & Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Criteria: The following CFR(s) apply to this finding: 2 CFR §200.318(a) Condition: During our testing we reviewed the procurement policy for the City and identified multiple provisions required were not included in the policy. Cause: The control lapse occurred because there was turnover in key positions and the policy has not been reviewed. Effect: Procurement activities conducted under this incomplete policy may not adhere to required federal standards, increasing the risk of noncompliance, unallowable costs or procurement practices that do not ensure fair and open competition. Identification of Questioned Costs: None identified. Context: The procurement policy in effect during the fiscal year was reviewed which is not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the City revise its procurement policy to fully incorporate all elements required by 2 CFR §200.317-200.327. Additionally, we suggest the City implement a regular policy review process to ensure continued compliance with federal regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Please see the Corrective Action Plan issued by the City.
FA 2024-001 Strengthen Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 10.553 – School Breakfast Program 10.555 – National School Lunch Program Federal Award Numbers: 245GA324N1199 (Year: 2024), 235GA32N1099 (Year: 2023) Questioned Costs: $7,388 Description: A review of expenditures charged to the Child Nutrition Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not operating appropriately to ensure that expenditures were reviewed and approved and that the School District’s procurement and suspension and debarment procedures were followed. Background Information: The Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) is comprised of various programs that are intended to assist states in administering and overseeing food service program operators that provide healthful, nutritious meals to eligible children in public and non-profit private schools, residential childcare institutions, and summer programs. This Cluster of programs also fosters healthy eating habits in children by providing fresh fruits and fresh vegetables to children attending elementary and secondary schools and encourages the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities. CNC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the various CNC programs. CNC funds totaling $1,087,437.24 were expended and reported on the Wilkinson County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 – Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that “costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity… (g) Be adequately documented…” Additionally, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 – General Procurement Standards state in part that “(a) the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and… (b) non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders.” In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.320 – Methods of Procurement to Be Followed provide guidance for procurement through small purchase procedures and state “If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources.” Condition: A sample of 39 expenditures was randomly selected for testing using a non-statistical sampling approach. These expenditures were reviewed to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. For eight of the 10 sample expenditures that were incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process, evidence of review and approval was not reflected within the voucher package. Additionally, auditor reviewed five of these same expenditures and a sample of 29 additional expenditures, which was randomly selected for testing using a non-statistical sampling approach, to determine if procurement transactions complied with the School District’s procurement procedures and proper oversight was maintained to ensure that contractors were performing according to their contracts. The following deficiencies were noted with expenditures incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process: • Evidence of review and approval was not reflected within the voucher package and/or purchase files for 17 additional expenditures. • The School District could not provide evidence that an adequate number of rate or price quotations were obtained from qualified sources for eight small purchase expenditures reviewed. Questioned Costs: Upon testing a sample of $14,237 in procurement transactions that were incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process, known questioned costs of $7,388 were identified for expenditures that did not follow the School District’s procurement procedures. Using the population of procurements that were incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process of $56,274, we project the likely questioned costs to be approximately $29,200. Cause: The School District did not follow its policies and procedures that govern the nonpersonal services expenditure process for federal programs. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance related to CNC. Failure to ensure that expenditures are appropriately approved and procedures to address procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirements are implemented exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds and could result in the expenditure of federal funds for unallowable purposes and/or with unqualified vendors. In addition, this deficiency could lead to the return of funding associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to CNC. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect evidence of review and approval, required procurement methods are properly identified and followed and required procurement and suspension and debarment documentation is properly identified, safeguarded, and retained. In addition, management should develop a monitoring process to ensure that these procedures are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
FA 2024-001 Strengthen Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 10.553 – School Breakfast Program 10.555 – National School Lunch Program Federal Award Numbers: 245GA324N1199 (Year: 2024), 235GA32N1099 (Year: 2023) Questioned Costs: $7,388 Description: A review of expenditures charged to the Child Nutrition Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not operating appropriately to ensure that expenditures were reviewed and approved and that the School District’s procurement and suspension and debarment procedures were followed. Background Information: The Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) is comprised of various programs that are intended to assist states in administering and overseeing food service program operators that provide healthful, nutritious meals to eligible children in public and non-profit private schools, residential childcare institutions, and summer programs. This Cluster of programs also fosters healthy eating habits in children by providing fresh fruits and fresh vegetables to children attending elementary and secondary schools and encourages the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities. CNC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the various CNC programs. CNC funds totaling $1,087,437.24 were expended and reported on the Wilkinson County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 – Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that “costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity… (g) Be adequately documented…” Additionally, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 – General Procurement Standards state in part that “(a) the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and… (b) non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders.” In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.320 – Methods of Procurement to Be Followed provide guidance for procurement through small purchase procedures and state “If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources.” Condition: A sample of 39 expenditures was randomly selected for testing using a non-statistical sampling approach. These expenditures were reviewed to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. For eight of the 10 sample expenditures that were incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process, evidence of review and approval was not reflected within the voucher package. Additionally, auditor reviewed five of these same expenditures and a sample of 29 additional expenditures, which was randomly selected for testing using a non-statistical sampling approach, to determine if procurement transactions complied with the School District’s procurement procedures and proper oversight was maintained to ensure that contractors were performing according to their contracts. The following deficiencies were noted with expenditures incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process: • Evidence of review and approval was not reflected within the voucher package and/or purchase files for 17 additional expenditures. • The School District could not provide evidence that an adequate number of rate or price quotations were obtained from qualified sources for eight small purchase expenditures reviewed. Questioned Costs: Upon testing a sample of $14,237 in procurement transactions that were incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process, known questioned costs of $7,388 were identified for expenditures that did not follow the School District’s procurement procedures. Using the population of procurements that were incurred outside of the School District’s Co-Op process of $56,274, we project the likely questioned costs to be approximately $29,200. Cause: The School District did not follow its policies and procedures that govern the nonpersonal services expenditure process for federal programs. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance related to CNC. Failure to ensure that expenditures are appropriately approved and procedures to address procurement and suspension and debarment compliance requirements are implemented exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds and could result in the expenditure of federal funds for unallowable purposes and/or with unqualified vendors. In addition, this deficiency could lead to the return of funding associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to CNC. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditures reflect evidence of review and approval, required procurement methods are properly identified and followed and required procurement and suspension and debarment documentation is properly identified, safeguarded, and retained. In addition, management should develop a monitoring process to ensure that these procedures are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
Finding 2024-002: Procurement Federal Program Information: Department of Housing and Urban Development Continuum of Care Program, Direct funding – AL No. 14.267, Grant No. CA1320L9T142208. CA1320L9T142309, CA1255L9T142208, CA0841L9T141908, CA0773L9T142214, CA0773L9T142315, CA1317L9T132106 and CA1403L9T132106 Condition: Wipfli, LLP obtained the supporting documentation for purchases of client furnishings, cleaning services, and pest control services. The documentation indicated these vendors were selected based on best price. Turning Point of Central California, Inc. was able to provide explanations for why the vendor were selected, but procurement records supporting the explanations were not available for the pest control vendor. In addition, Wipfli noted Turning Point of Central California, Inc.’s procurement policy included references to outdated federal regulations and did not comply with all of the procurement requirements in the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200). This is a repeat finding from the June 30, 2021, 2022 and 2023 audits. Criteria: The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2 CFR Part 200, section 318(i) (Uniform Guidance) states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. The records will include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contractor type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. In addition, the Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR Part 200, section 200.118 states that the non-Federal entity must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326 and must use their own documented procurement procedures that must conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Cause: Turning Point of Central California, Inc. did not retain procurement records to support its assertion that it is contracting with vendors that provide the best prices. Turning Point of Central California, Inc. has not updated its procurement policy to comply with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200). Effect: Due to the conditions noted above, Turning Point of Central California, Inc. was not in compliance with the procurement regulations and there exists a material weakness in internal controls over the procurement compliance requirement. Recommendation: We recommend Turning Point of Central California, Inc. implement controls to ensure the procurement decisions are properly documented in accordance with updated internal policies and procedures that conform to the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200). View of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and has submitted a corrective action plan.
Finding Number: 2024-002 Repeat Finding: Similar to prior year finding 2023-003 Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Indian School Equalization, Special Education Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 15.042, 84.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Education Federal Award Number: A23AV00811 Questioned Costs: None Type of Finding: Noncompliance, Material Weakness Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: Under 2 CFR §215.43 the School is required to implement certain procurement policies that adhere to the minimum federal requirements as outlined in 2 CFR §215.44. Non-federal entities other than States, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of States, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR §§200.318 through 200.326. They 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. Condition: The School did not always follow procurement standards as put forth in 2 CFR §200.318 through §200.326. Effect: Noncompliance with federal regulation that led to a qualified audit opinion over the listed federal programs as noted above. Cause: Management oversight. Context: For two of 25 vendors within the Simplified Acquisition Threshold tested, the School did not maintain documentation that appropriate procurement procedures were performed or provide documentation to support the School’s reasoning for a noncompetitive procurement. Recommendation: The School should review its procurement procedures to ensure that proper procurement procedures are performed documentation is maintained to support the procurement. Response: The School’s responses are presented in a separate document. Contact person: Dolores Silva, Chief Financial Officer
Finding Number: 2024-002 Repeat Finding: Similar to prior year finding 2023-003 Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Indian School Equalization, Special Education Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 15.042, 84.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Education Federal Award Number: A23AV00811 Questioned Costs: None Type of Finding: Noncompliance, Material Weakness Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: Under 2 CFR §215.43 the School is required to implement certain procurement policies that adhere to the minimum federal requirements as outlined in 2 CFR §215.44. Non-federal entities other than States, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of States, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR §§200.318 through 200.326. They 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. Condition: The School did not always follow procurement standards as put forth in 2 CFR §200.318 through §200.326. Effect: Noncompliance with federal regulation that led to a qualified audit opinion over the listed federal programs as noted above. Cause: Management oversight. Context: For two of 25 vendors within the Simplified Acquisition Threshold tested, the School did not maintain documentation that appropriate procurement procedures were performed or provide documentation to support the School’s reasoning for a noncompetitive procurement. Recommendation: The School should review its procurement procedures to ensure that proper procurement procedures are performed documentation is maintained to support the procurement. Response: The School’s responses are presented in a separate document. Contact person: Dolores Silva, Chief Financial Officer
2024-005 Improve Internal Controls Over Procurement Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Award Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Year: 2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 2 CFR 200.318–200.327 requires the City to follow documented procurement procedures consistent with applicable Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of their Federal award. The City must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement, including, but not limited to, the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Condition and Context During our testing of six procurement transactions under the SLFRF program, the City was unable to provide documentation supporting procurement policies and procedures were followed for one transaction. Specifically, the City did not provide evidence of procurement history, competitive selection, or justification for the selected vendor related to this expenditure. Invoices were provided to support the expenditure. Cause The City’s internal controls did not ensure that procurement documentation was adequately maintained and available to support all federally funded transactions as required by Uniform Guidance. Effect or Potential Effect Lack of supporting procurement documentation increases the risk of noncompliance with Federal procurement requirements. No questioned costs are reported, as the expenditure was below the questioned cost threshold. Recommendation We recommend that the City strengthen its controls to ensure all required procurement documentation is maintained and readily available for all federally funded transactions. The City should provide training to procurement and program staff on Federal documentation requirements and regularly review procurement files for completeness. Views of Responsible Official Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
Finding 2024-002 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund - AL No. 21.027 U.S. Department of Treasury Noncompliance and Material Weakness Related to Internal Control over Compliance of the Major Program Criteria: Non‐federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They 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. As governmental subrecipients of states they are also required to use the same state procurement policies and procedures for federal funds as for non‐federal funds, the Town is required to follow Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b). MGL 30(b) requires the solicitation of three written or oral quotes for procurements of supplies between $10,000 and $49,999 and sealed bids or proposals for procurements of supplies $50,000 and over. Management of the Town is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal program. However, a deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. Condition and Context: During fiscal year 2024, the Town did not comply with the required procurement policies and procedures in place as it related to expenses charged to the major program requiring procurement procedures. One of the expenses tested was for engineering services that would have been exempt under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b) (State Procurement Requirement), under federal statutes and procurement requirements for engineering services identified in 2 CFR Part 200, the Town would have been required to go out to bid for the services. Questioned Costs: $413,477.78 Cause: The noncompliance occurred because the organization mistakenly relied on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions, which govern state and local procurements, and did not recognize the need to comply with the more stringent federal procurement requirements for federal fund usage. Staff members were not sufficiently aware of the specific requirements under 2 CFR Part 200 and the precedence of federal procurement regulations over state law in this context. Effect or Potential Effect: There is risk that the amounts charged to the federal awards major program may not be in accordance with procurement, suspension, and debarment principles. Identification as a Repeat Finding: 2023-003 Recommendation: The Town of Bellingham should address the nocompliance and material weakness in internal controls noted above in order to ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with federal and state requirements. Management Response: We acknowledge the audit finding regarding our reliance on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions for procurement involving federal funds. We understand that federal procurement regulations under 2 CFR Part 200 take precedence over state law and that we failed fully to comply with federal requirements for competitive bidding, sole-source justification, and documentation. We are committed to addressing this issue by reviewing our procurement policies to clearly differentiate between state and federal requirements, ensuring that federal standards govern all procurement involving federal funds. We will provide additional training to staff, implement stronger documentation procedures, and review past procurement to ensure full compliance moving forward.
Federal Agency: Department of Transportation Federal Program: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction (HPC) Various awards State Agency: Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) Type of Finding: Internal Control (Significant Deficiency) and Nonmaterial Noncompliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment The MoDOT did not establish policies and procedures to monitor contractor and subrecipient compliance with Build America, Buy America (BABA) domestic preference provisions for Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)-funded projects of the HPC program. As a result, the MoDOT did not ensure contractors and subrecipients complied with these provisions. During the year ended June 30, 2024, the MoDOT expended approximately $922 million in IIJA funding for the HPC program, which represents approximately 68 percent of total program spending. The MoDOT is responsible for ensuring compliance with BABA domestic preference provisions for all IIJA-funded infrastructure projects. Section 70914(a) of the BABA Act, enacted as part of the IIJA, requires all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in IIJA-funded infrastructure projects to be produced in the United States. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.318(a) requires the MoDOT to maintain documented procurement procedures, and 2 CFR Section 200.318(b) requires the MoDOT to monitor contractor and subrecipient compliance with the terms and conditions of project agreements, including BABA provisions. The MoDOT includes BABA provisions in every contractor and subrecipient project agreement, including IIJA-funded projects. However, the MoDOT did not develop monitoring policies and procedures and did not verify contractors and subrecipients complied with these provisions. MoDOT officials stated specific monitoring procedures had not yet been developed because the requirements were relatively new and took effect in May 2022. In addition to noncompliance with federal requirements, without adequate monitoring policies and procedures, the MoDOT lacks assurance its contractors and subrecipients are in compliance with BABA requirements. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.303(a) requires the non-federal entity to "[e]stablish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award." Recommendation The MoDOT implement and enforce policies and procedures to monitor HPC program IIJA-funded projects to ensure contractor and subrecipient compliance with BABA domestic preference provisions, as required. Auditee's Response We agree with the auditor's finding. Our Corrective Action Plan includes our planned actions to address the finding.
2024-003: Suspension and Debarment Verification Assistance Listing Number (ALN) and Title: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Passed-through: Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Award Identification Numbers and Years: Finding is applicable to all 20.205 awards on the SEFA for 2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Prior Year Audit Finding: No Criteria: 2 CFR 200.214 prohibits non-federal entities from contracting with or making subawards to parties listed on the governmentwide suspension and debarment list. 2 CFR 200.318(h) requires non-federal entities to verify that vendors are not suspended or debarred before entering into covered transactions (e.g., procurements expected to equal or exceed $25,000). This verification is typically done by checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or collecting a certification from the entity. Prudent practice and effective internal control require documentation of these verification procedures and results. Condition: LCOG did not maintain documentation to demonstrate that it verified whether certain vendors paid with ALN 20.205 funds were excluded or disqualified under the suspension and debarment rules. While management stated they performed reviews of the SAM.gov listing prior to expenditure, no evidence (such as dated screenshots, search results printouts, or certifications) was available to support that the required verifications were performed for tested vendors. Questioned Costs: None. Context: During compliance testing for ALN 20.205, we selected a sample of two covered transactions. No other covered transactions were procured during FY 2024. LCOG could not provide documentation of its verification process for one the vendors in these transactions. Subsequent review of SAM.gov performed during the audit did not indicate the vendor had been suspended or debarred. Cause: LCOG has not implemented formal procedures requiring the retention of documentation demonstrating suspension and debarment checks for vendors paid with federal funds. Effect: Without documented verification, LCOG cannot demonstrate compliance with federal suspension and debarment requirements. While no ineligible vendors were identified in our sample, the lack of documented procedures and evidence represents a failure in the design or operation of internal controls, increasing the risk that LCOG could inadvertently contract with a suspended or debarred party using federal funds in the future. Recommendation: We recommend LCOG establish and implement formal, documented procedures for verifying that vendors are not suspended or debarred before entering into covered transactions paid with federal funds. These procedures should specify the method of verification (e.g., checking SAM.gov) and require retention of evidence (e.g., dated printouts or screenshots of the search results) within the procurement or vendor files. Auditee Views: The suspension and debarment check during the procurement process is one of the steps completed by the Procurement Officer for any covered transaction that is not the subject of a formal procurement. The Executive Director completed this check. For the one vendor referenced above, a sole source contract was to be awarded and the check for suspension and debarment of the vendor was completed by reviewing entity records in SAM.gov. The review of SAM.gov records did not disclose any suspensions or debarments of the vendor. In the future, we will take a screen shot of the result and place it in the procurement file. This will become part of the process immediately for any procurements that are not formal RFPs. Formal RFPs require vendors to certify that they are not suspended or debarred.
FA 2024-001 Strengthen Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Internal Control Impact: Material Weakness Compliance Impact: Material Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 10.553 – School Breakfast Program 10.555 – National School Lunch Program Federal Award Numbers: 235GA324N1099 (Year: 2024), 245GA324N1199 (Year: 2024) Questioned Costs: $46,877.67 Description: A review of expenditures charged to the Child Nutrition Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not operating appropriately to ensure that the School District’s procurement procedures were followed. Background Information: The Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) is comprised of various programs that are intended to assist states in administering and overseeing food service program operators that provide healthful, nutritious meals to eligible children in public and non-profit private schools, residential child care institutions, and summer programs. This Cluster of programs also fosters healthy eating habits in children by providing fresh fruits and fresh vegetables to children attending elementary and secondary schools and encourages the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities. CNC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the various CNC programs. CNC funds totaling $1,204,722 were expended and reported on the Terrell County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Additionally, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.318 – General Procurement Standards state in part that “(a) the non-Federal entity must use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and… (b) non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders.” In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.320 – Methods of Procurement to Be Followed provide guidance for procurement through small purchase procedures and state “If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources.” Condition: A sample of 47 procurement transactions was randomly selected for testing using a non-statistical sampling approach. These transactions were reviewed to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. The School District could not provide evidence that an adequate number of rate or price quotations were obtained from qualified sources for 18 small purchase expenditures reviewed. Questioned Costs: Upon testing a sample of $192,188.67 in procurement transactions, known questioned costs of $46,877.67 were identified for expenditures that did not follow the School District’s procurement procedures. Using the total population of $681,669.21 in procurement transactions, we project the likely questioned costs to be approximately $166,269.24. The following Assistance Listing Numbers were affected by known and likely questioned costs: 10.553 and 10.555. Cause: When discussing the issues noted with management, they indicated that School District personnel did not maintain sufficient documentation to support that multiple quotations were obtained. Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance and GaDOE guidance. Failure to appropriately implement procedures to address procurement compliance requirements exposes the School District to unnecessary risk of error and misuse of federal funds and could result in the expenditure of federal funds with unqualified vendors. In addition, this deficiency could lead to the return of funding associated with unallowable expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should evaluate and improve internal control procedures to ensure that required procurement methods are properly identified and followed. In addition, management should develop a monitoring process to ensure that these procedures are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.