Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Information on the Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Furthermore: §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, states that procurement by noncompetitive proposals is procurement through solicitation of a proposal from only one source and may be used only when certain requirements have been met. Additionally, §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award states that non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. These regulations restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The non-Federal entity must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified, by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) collecting a certification from that person; (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our audit, we noted that while FASEB has formal procurement policies under §200.318(i) and §200.320(f), it did not provide sufficient records detailing the procurement history or justification for noncompetitive selections in our sample. Additionally, FASEB lacks formal policies on suspension and debarment, and SAM exclusion screening documentation was not provided for the sampled contracts and vendors. Cause: FASEB’s procedures did not provide for the formalization and retention of procurement records and vendor screenings consistent with the expectations outlined in 2 CFR 200. Effect or Potential Effect: Purchases of goods and services could be made above the prevailing market rates if the prescribed procurement procedures are not adhered to. Finally, FASEB could inadvertently enter into a contractual relationship with an entity that is suspended, debarred or otherwise included on the US Federal sanction list. Questioned Costs: N/A. Context: Our audit work in this area consisted of internal control testwork over a random sample of expenditures. We consider our samples to be representative of the respective populations, and thus, are statistically valid samples. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We then recommend that FASEB develop and adhere to formal policies (as applicable) related to § 200.318 (i) General procurement standards, §200.320 (f) Methods of procurement to be followed, as well as §200.213 Reporting a determination that a non-Federal entity is not qualified for a Federal award. All procurement actions and SAM exclusion screenings should be clearly documented in writing and maintained in the vendor or contractor files.
Finding 2024-001 Federal Program: Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit Assistance Listing Number: 20.509 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria: Per 2 CFR §200.318(i), non-Federal entities must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement and the basis for contractor selection. For sole source procurements, 2 CFR §200.320(c) outlines specific conditions under which noncompetitive procurement is allowable and requires written justification. Additionally, 2 CFR §200.303 requires non-Federal entities to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: During our review of procurement procedures, we noted that the entity selected a sole source vendor but did not maintain documentation supporting the justification for the noncompetitive procurement. While the procurement itself did not violate Uniform Guidance requirements, the absence of supporting documentation indicates a weakness in internal controls over procurement recordkeeping. Cause: Although the entity has established procedures for documenting sole source procurement decisions, those procedures were not followed in this instance. This appears to have been an isolated oversight rather than a systemic issue. Effect: Although the procurement may have met the criteria for a sole source, the lack of documentation limits transparency and may hinder the entity’s ability to demonstrate compliance in future audits. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No Recommendation: We recommend that management strengthen internal controls over procurement documentation by implementing procedures to ensure that all sole source procurements are supported by written justifications and retained in accordance with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-002. Condition and Context As part of sound management of the federal award, the Town was responsible for implementing a system of internal controls that would ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. The Town had not properly designed or implemented such a system, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The Town entered into contracts with three vendors in a prior year to provide goods and services for the duration of the Town's wastewater plant construction project. The total contract expenditures for all three vendors fell under the simplified acquisition threshold. The Town paid all three vendors with grant funds during the audit period, and all three were selected for testing accordingly. For two of the vendors, the Town properly procured the goods and services through the bidding process. For the third vendor, with disbursements totaling $106,269 in 2024, the Town was unable to provide any documentation that the procurement method used was appropriate or that the procurement provided full and open competition or rationale to support the determination to limit competition. Additionally, the history of the procurement, including rationale for the method of procurement, selection of the vendor, and the basis for the price, was not adequately documented. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to one vendor throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: ". . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance awards exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. (i) In order for sealed bidding to be feasible, the following conditions should be present: (A) A complete, adequate, and realistic specification or purchase description is available; (B) Two or more responsible bidders are willing and able to compete effectively for the business; and (C) The procurement lends itself to a firm fixed price contract and the selection of the successful bidder can be made principally on the basis of price. (ii) If sealed bids are used, the following requirements apply: (A) Bids must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified sources, providing them sufficient response time prior to the date set for opening the bids, for local, and tribal governments, the invitation for bids must be publicly advertised; (B) The invitation for bids, which will include any specifications and pertinent attachments, must define the items or services in order for the bidder to properly respond; (C) All bids will be opened at the time and place prescribed in the invitation for bids, and for local and tribal governments, the bids must be opened publicly; (D) A firm fixed price contract award will be made in writing to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Where specified in bidding documents, factors such as discounts, transportation cost, and life cycle costs must be considered in determining which bid is lowest. Payment discounts will only be used to determine the low bid when prior experience indicates that such discounts are usually taken advantage of; and (E) Any or all bids may be rejected if there is a sound documented reason. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. They are awarded in accordance with the following requirements: (i) Requests for proposals must be publicized and identify all evaluation factors and their relative importance. Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified offerors. Any response to publicized requests for proposals must be considered to the maximum extent practical; (ii) The non-Federal entity must have a written method for conducting technical evaluations of the proposals received and making selections; (iii) Contracts must be awarded to the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the non-Federal entity, with price and other factors considered; and (iv) The non-Federal entity may use competitive proposal procedures for qualifications based procurement of architectural/engineering (A/E) professional services whereby offeror's qualifications are evaluated and the most qualified offeror is selected, subject to negotiation of fair and reasonable compensation. The method, where price is not used as a selection factor, can only be used in procurement of A/E professional services. It cannot be used to purchase other types of services though A/E firms that are a potential source to perform the proposed effort. (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate." Cause The vendor in question was an engineering firm that the Town has utilized for various projects over the course of many years. For continuity purposes, the Town chose to limit competition when awarding the contract but was unaware of the requirements necessary to do so. Since this was a multi-year award for which the Town entered into the contract in a prior year, the Town was unable to correct the noncompliance for the current audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, noncompliance remained undetected. As a result, proper procurement procedures were not adhered to for all vendors. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Town could be overpaying for services. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funds to the Town. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Town's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure expenditures made from federal awards use the appropriate procurement method and retain the documentation to support the procurement methods used in order to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the federal award. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2024-002: Reportable Finding Considered a Significant Deficiency – Procurement Compliance Program Name: STEM Education and NSF Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships Assistance Listing #: 47.076 and 47.084 Program Year: 2024 Federal Awarding Agency: National Science Foundation Compliance Requirement: Procurements Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c), noncompetitive procurement may only be used under limited circumstances such as: the procurement does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold, the item is only available from a single source, an emergency or public exigency prevents a delay, the federal agency or pass-through entity provides prior written approval for noncompetitive procurement or after solicitation of multiple sources, competition is deemed inadequate. Unless one of these situations applies, the Organization is required to provide full and open competition in line with their established procurement policies. Condition: During our testing, we noted the procurement policies and standards were not followed for both of the two procurements selected for testing. Cause: The procurement policies were not followed due to the Organization believing they had met the criteria for noncompetitive procurement. For one selection, the Organization included the vendor in their original proposal and budget, believing this constituted prior approval. However, the regulation requires a specific written request and written approval from the federal agency, which was not obtained. For the other, the Organization believed the procurement was under the micro-purchase threshold, however the contract totaled $24,300. Although individual charges were allocated to separate grants and coded as amounts under the $10,000 micro-purchase threshold, the full contract amount exceeded that threshold and under 2 CFR 200.320, procurements must be considered in aggregate. Effect: The Organization did not obtain price quotations or bids for purchases from two vendors exceeding the micro-purchase threshold as required by 2 CFR 200.320. Questioned Costs: None. Repeat finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization revisit its procurement policy to include these clarifications and ensure all staff involved in the acquisition of property or services charged to federal grants are aware of and re-trained on the relevant procurement requirements. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action (unaudited): See Corrective Action Plan.