Findings Citing § 200.320

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

FINDING 2025-005 Subject: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) - Condition of Records Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Programs: Special Education Grants to States, COVID-19 - Special Education Grants to States, Special Education Preschool Grants, COVID-19 - Special Education Preschool Grants Assistance Listings Numbers: 84.027, 84.027X, 84.173, 84.173X Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): 23611-051-PN01,24611-051-PN01, 22611-051-ARP, 23619-051-PN01, 25619-051-PN01, 22619-051-ARP Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking; Period of Performance; Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context The School Corporation received reimbursements totaling $12,668,761 from the Special Education Cluster (IDEA) federal awards during the audit period. The reimbursements were associated with six separate federal awards, each of which was required to be accounted for in a separate fund within the School Corporation's financial management system. Expenditures were to be made in accordance with the approved grant applications and budgets, with reimbursement requests subsequently submitted to the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE). The School Corporation was responsible for maintaining detailed disbursement ledgers for each grant fund to support the amounts claimed for reimbursement. As is typical with reimbursement-based grants, the ending cash and investment balances of each grant fund were expected to reflect overdrawn balances until the subsequent reimbursements were received from the IDOE. The $12,668,761 received in the Special Education Cluster (IDEA) funds during the audit period was based on 23 reimbursement requests for expenditures incurred. Based on our review of grant fund records and inquiry with management, we identified the following deficiencies:  The reimbursement requests for the reimbursements received during the audit period included dates of July 1, 2021 to March 31, 2025. It was not easily determined what was requested for reimbursement for the earlier dates due to the School Corporation including in the "Dates Included in this Request" section descriptions such as "Entire Grant Period" and "Start to March 21, 2025". The supporting documentation with the reimbursement requests did not always have detail or specifically state which disbursements were included in the amount for the request. Several had documentation that showed detail for a period of time then a calculation was done to subtract what was previously requested for reimbursement. The total received in reimbursements was $12,668,761. The total detailed disbursement ledgers for the population that could be determined reflected total expenditures of $15,894,839. This resulted in $3,226,078 in disbursements in excess of what the School Corporation requested for reimbursement.  Of the six federal awards reported on the Schedule Expenditures of Awards, four reached the award's performance end date, and of those four, three reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement on the last Reimbursement Form. o Grant 23619-051-PN01 reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement of $1,367 on February 26, 2024. The dates included in this final request were "01/01/24 - 01/31/24." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 29 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) o Grant 22611-051-ARP reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement of $55,581 on December 15, 2023. The dates included in this final request were "06/01/23 - 09/30/23." o Grant 22619-051-ARP reported a Grant Balance After Reimbursement of $82,677 on December 13, 2023. The dates included in this final request were "Entire Grant Period."  Of the 23 reimbursement requests submitted, only 10 were supported by detailed disbursement ledgers that agreed with the dates and amounts claimed. The remaining 13 reimbursement requests could not be directly reconciled to the supporting documentation provided. Upon further inquiry with management, additional information was provided; however, these records lacked sufficient detail, such as transactions, reasons for overspending, and which transactions were not requested for reimbursement due to overspending. Due to the deficiencies noted above, the School Corporation was unable to provide sufficient appropriate evidence for us to determine populations, and, therefore, audit and base an opinion on the compliance requirements subject to audit that were determined to have a direct and material effect on the program. As a result, the $12,668,761 in reimbursements received during the audit period were considered questioned costs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were material and systemic throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.302 states in part: "(a) . . . the other non-Federal entity's financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. See also § 200.450. (b) The financial management system of each non-Federal entity must provide for the following (see §§ 200.334, 200.335, 200.336, and 200.337): INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 30 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (1) Identification, in its accounts, of all Federal awards received and expended and the Federal programs under which they were received. Federal program and Federal award identification must include, as applicable, the Assistance Listings title and number, Federal award identification number and year, name of the Federal agency, and name of the pass-through entity, if any. (2) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial results of each Federal award or program in accordance with the reporting requirements set forth in §§ 200.328 and 200.329. . . . (3) Records that identify adequately the source and application of funds for federallyfunded activities. These records must contain information pertaining to Federal awards, authorizations, financial obligations, unobligated balances, assets, expenditures, income, and interest and be supported by source documentation. (4) Effective control over, and accountability, for all funds, property, and assets. The non- Federal entity must adequately safeguard all assets and ensure that they are used solely for authorized purposes. See § 200.303. (5) Comparison of expenditures with budget amounts for each Federal award. (6) Written procedures to implement the requirements of § 200.305. (7) Written procedures for determining the allowability of costs in accordance with subpart E of this part and the terms and conditions of the Federal award." 2 CFR 200.1 states in part: "Questioned cost means a cost that is questioned by the auditor because of an audit finding: (1) Which resulted from a violation or possible violation of a statute, regulation, or the terms and conditions of a Federal award, including for funds used to match Federal funds; (2) Where the costs, at the time of the audit, are not supported by adequate documentation; or (3) Where the costs incurred appear unreasonable and do not reflect the actions a prudent person would take in the circumstances. (4) Questioned costs are not an improper payment until reviewed and confirmed to be improper as defined in OMB Circular A-123 appendix C. (See also the definition of Improper payment in this section)." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 31 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.1 states in part: ". . . Financial obligations, when referencing a recipient's or subrecipient's use of funds under a Federal award, means orders placed for property and services, contracts and subawards made, and similar transactions that require payment. Period of performance means the total estimated time interval between the start of an initial Federal award and the planned end date, which may include one or more funded portions, or budget periods. Identification of the period of performance in the Federal award per § 200.211(b)(5) does not commit the awarding agency to fund the award beyond the currently approved budget period. Unliquidated financial obligations means, for financial reports prepared on a cash basis, financial obligations incurred by the non-Federal entity that have not been paid (liquidated). . . ." 2 CFR 200.309 states: "If a Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity approves an extension, or if a recipient extends under § 200.308(e)(2), the Period of Performance will be amended to end at the completion of the extension. If termination occurs, the Period of Performance will be amended to end upon the effective date of termination. If a renewal award is issued, a distinct Period of Performance will begin." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 32 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 511 IAC 7-34-7(b) states: "The public agency, in providing special education and related services to students in nonpublic schools must expend at least an amount that is the same proportion of the public agency total subgrant under 20 U.S.C. 1411(f) as the number of nonpublic school students with disabilities, who are enrolled by their parents in nonpublic schools within its boundaries, is to the total number of students with disabilities of the same age range." Cause The School Corporation experienced turnover in key personnel over the federal program which contributed to the lack of appropriate supporting records. A proper system of internal controls was not designed to ensure continuity of policies, procedures, and records when personnel transitions occurred. Effect Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirements could result in the repayment of federal funds. Questioned Costs We identified $12,668,761 in questioned costs as noted in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management develop policies and procedures to ensure continuity of school records during a personnel change, and that all reimbursement requests are properly supported by detailed records. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.

FINDING 2025-013 Subject: Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs Assistance Listings Number: 84.334 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): P334A210080 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-Federal entity. As Indiana Code has set a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds. Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micropurchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure it complied with the procurement compliance requirement for small purchase and simplified acquisition procurement methods. During the audit period, the School Corporation paid 40 vendors from the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) that fell into the small purchase threshold. Of those 40 vendors 3 vendors were tested. All 3 vendors did not have any rate quotes from qualified sources. The total dollar amount paid to these three vendors was $156,175. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 47 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The School Corporation had two vendors during the audit period, which exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold that were paid from the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). Both vendors were tested and it was determined that the School Corporation did not follow the formal procurement method of sealed bids or competitive proposals, nor was a circumstance documented that would have allowed for noncompetitive procurement for the purchases. The total dollar amount paid to these vendors was $724,290. In addition, the School Corporation did not follow its own purchasing policy #6325, in which the School Corporation had set a threshold of $3,500 for small purchases. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 48 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (ii) Simplified acquisition thresholds. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not implemented by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to affect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper design or implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, procurement procedures for goods and services were not adhered to for vendors that fell within the small purchase and the exceeded simplified acquisition thresholds. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish and implement an effective internal control system over small purchases and purchases exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements. Appropriate documentation should be maintained to ensure the procurement methods are being followed. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 49 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.

FINDING 2025-018 Subject: Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) Assistance Listings Number: 84.374 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): S374A200039 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a non-Federal entity. As Indiana Code has set a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds. Micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micro-purchase threshold, but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. When the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require adherence to documented procedures and formal methods such as sealed bids or proposals. The School Corporation did not have internal controls in place to ensure it complied with the procurement requirement for small purchase and simplified acquisition procurement methods. During the audit period, the School Corporation paid 22 vendors with Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) that fell into the small purchase threshold. There were 4 vendors were tested. For all 4 vendors tested, the School Corporation could not provide the procurement history or the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of vendors, and basis for price. The total dollar amount paid to these four vendors was $206,756. The School Corporation had 1 vendor during the audit period which exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold that was paid from Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund). This vendor was tested and it was determined that formal procurement methods were not followed. The total amount paid to this vendor was $305,034. In addition, the School Corporation did not follow their own purchasing policy #6325, in which the School Corporation had set a threshold of $3,500 for small purchases. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 58 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with federal award funds, recipients are required to verify that such contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the SAMs exclusions, collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. We identified 11 transactions during the audit period that equaled or exceeded $25,000 and were therefore determined to be covered transactions. Of the 11 transactions, 4 were selected for testing. The School Corporation was unable to provide current documentation that the vendor's suspension and debarment status was verified for 2 of these transactions. The total dollar amount spent with these 2 vendors was $82,105. There were multiple Directors over the Teacher and School Leader Incentive Grants (formerly the Teacher Incentive Fund) during the audit period. At the time the audit was performed, no previous Directors were employed with the School Corporation and there were no current employees that were knowledgeable of the grant and its requirements. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and §§ 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in § 200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: . . . INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 59 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Small purchases— (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. (ii) Simplified acquisition thresholds. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. . . . (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or costreimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 60 SOUTH BEND COMMUNITY SCHOOL CORPORATION SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause A proper system of internal controls was not implemented by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to affect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. As a result, the School Corporation did not comply with the simplified acquisition or small purchase procurement requirements or the suspension and debarment requirements of the federal award. By not properly completing the procurement process, the School Corporation could have overpaid for the goods or services that were procured. Additionally, the School Corporation could have made payment to a vendor that was suspended or debarred. Payments to such vendors are unallowable. Noncompliance with the grant agreement and the compliance requirement could result in the loss of future federal funds to the School Corporation. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management develop policies and procedures to ensure continuity of school records during a personnel change. We also recommend that the School Corporation establish and implement an effective internal control system over procurement and suspension and debarment to ensure compliance with federal grant requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.

Finding 2025-006 – Procurement and Suspension and Debarment: Inadequate Documentation of Competitive Bidding Procedures – Noncompliance and Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance; Agencies – Department of Health and Human Services, National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Department of Agriculture; Assistance Listing Numbers (ALN) - 93.859, 47.083, 47.050, 93.310, 43.008, 10.699, 47.078; Program Name - Research and Development Cluster; Award Year / Award Number – FY 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020 / Awards ANTHC- 23-U-396186; 5U24GM146576-02; 2049596; 2243258; ICER 2040729, Subaward 15660316; FIAN 2220560; ICER 1928230; Subaward 1558528; ICER 2052107; 2127346; 2309480; 80NSSC20M0070; 80NSSXC20M0070; 80NSSC24M0179, 24-MIRO-0054;1333MF4P0220; 18-JV-11261944-100; 2325081; 2419971, subaward 24-S37; Criteria or Specific Requirement – 2 CFR 200.318 and 2 CFR 200.320 require recipients of federal awards to maintain sufficient records to document the history of procurement transactions, including the procurement method used, bids or proposals received, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for contract price, as applicable.; Condition – For one procurement tested, APU did not retain documentation showing that bids were solicited, received, and evaluated before vendor selection. As a result, we could not determine whether the appropriate procurement method was used or whether adequate competition was obtained for that transaction.; Cause – Management did not have formal procurement policies and procedures requiring documentation of competitive bidding and vendor selection to be retained in the procurement file for all applicable transactions.; Effect or Potential Effect – Without sufficient procurement documentation, management may not be able to demonstrate that the appropriate procurement method was used or that adequate competition was obtained for covered transactions.; Questioned Costs - None reported.; Context – We selected three procurements totaling $267,870 out of a total of 5 procurements totaling $369,307 made during the year. We identified one exception totaling $18,000.; Repeat Finding – This is not a repeat finding.; Recommendation - We recommend that management strengthen procurement procedures to require documentation of the procurement method used, bids or proposals received, evaluation of vendor responses, and vendor selection rationale to be retained in the procurement file.; Views of Responsible Officials – Management concurs with the finding and is strengthening procedures to ensure bidding and vendor selection documentation is retained.

Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations require that for acquisitions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the nonfederal entity must use one of the following procurement methods: the sealed bid method if the acquisition meets the criteria in 2 CFR 200.320(b)(1); the competitive proposals method under the conditions specified in 2 CFR 200.320(b)(2); or the noncompetitive proposals method (i.e., solicit a proposal from only one source), but only when one or more of five circumstances are met in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c). Condition: For one of the four contracts tested, the Organization followed its internal policy allowing for preferred vendor selection, which states frequently used vendors can be vetted in advance of use and can eliminate the need for bids; however, the contract exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold and must follow formal procurement methods. Formal procurement methods are competitive and require public notice. The Organization did not meet the criteria in 2 CFR 200.320(c) for noncompetitive procurement. Context: Of the ten vendors that had expenditures greater than $25,000, we selected four vendors for procurement testing. One of the four vendors had a contract that exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold. The total value of the contract award is $663,190 over three years and the questioned costs during the year ended June 30, 2025 totaled $221,063. Effect: The Organization awarded a contract to a vendor that exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold. This project did not follow the required formal procurement process. Cause: There were ineffective controls in place during the period, along with lack of management oversight. Repeat finding: Yes, this is a repeat finding of 2024-002 from the prior year’s audit. The prior corrective action plan was not fully implemented. As the prior year audit was completed subsequent to June 30, 2025 the Organization did not have time to implement the corrective action. Recommendation: The Organization should ensure that all contracts exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold follow procurement methods outlined in 2 CFR 200.320. Additionally, the Organization should implement controls to verify and maintain documentation of contract approvals to ensure compliance with federal regulations under 2 CFR 200.320. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the auditor recommendation

Finding 2025-001 – Procurement (Material Weakness) Repeat Finding: No Federal Agency – National Science Foundation; National Institute of Health Research and Development Cluster Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences – Passed through New York University: 47.075, Mathematical and Physical Sciences – Passed through Loyola University of Chicago: 47.049, Biological Sciences: 47.074, Allergy and Infectious Disease Research: 93.855 Federal Award Years: Year Ended May 31, 2025 Condition The College's procurement policy does not reflect all applicable state and local laws and federal regulations. For two out of three (67%) small purchase procurements, there was not sufficient evidence to support that documentation of the noncompetitive procurement method selected was provided at the time of purchase. Criteria Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. In accordance with 2 CFR sections 200.319 and 200.320(f), price quotations should be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources for procurements that meet the small purchase procurement threshold or require documentation in support of the rationale to limit competition in those cases where competition was limited. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires nonfederal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls deigned to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Effective internal controls should include procedures to ensure the College has a procurement policy that meets the all applicable state and local laws and regulations. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs related to this finding. Cause The College does not have a procurement policy that follows the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327. Context Two out of three vendors tested. Expenditures totaled $100,553. Effect Lack of a documented procurement policy that meets applicable state and local laws and federal regulations can result in improper procurement of goods and services which can lead to loss of future funding. Recommendation We recommend the College implement a procurement policy that conforms to federal regulations. We also recommend that the College implement policies and procedures around documentation of noncompetitive bidding. Views of Responsible Officials We agree with this finding. See corrective action plan.

CFDA Number: 93.224 Federal Program or Cluster: Health Center Program Cluster Grantor Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Award Identification: H8FCS41177 Compliance Requirements: Procurement and Suspension or Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Questioned Costs: None Criteria: The Organization's Financial Policies and Procedures Manual, under Requisitioning, Purchasing, and Receiving Policies & Procedures, states: "If the purchase order is for any goods or service that will be paid for directly from Federal dollars then the purchasing follows Office of Management and Budget Circular 2 CFR CHAPTER I, CHAPTER II, PART 200, ET AL. guidelines. One of the following methods will be used when purchasing goods or services with federal dollars: Micro-purchase for items up to $10,000, small purchase for items up to $150,000, sealed bids for items over $150,000, competitive proposal, or non-competitive proposal. All procurements directly attributable to the federal award will be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition and will only include costs allowable, consistent with Federal Cost Principles 45 CFR Part 75 Subpart E: Cost Principles." 45 CFR Part 75, Section 75.329 Procurement procedures, states: "The non-Federal entity must use one of the following methods of procurement. (b) Procurement by small purchase procedures. Small purchase procedures are those relatively simple and informal procurement methods for securing services, supplies, or other property that do not cost more than the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources . Condition: Organization staff and management appear to be applying their procurement policies that require bids for all purchases in general that exceed $25,000, but not the additional policies and procedures that apply to purchases that will be paid from Federal dollars, that apply for procurements greater than $10,000 but less than $150,000. Cause: Organization staff and management do not appear to be knowledgeable of the Organization's procurement policies and procedures. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organization could make procurements that do not comply with the requirements of 45 CFR Part 75 Section 75.329 and 2 CFR Part 200, Section 200.320 Procurement methods. Context: We requested documentation to support that the Organization followed its procurement policies and procedures, we were told that no individual items were purchased with federal grant funds during the year that exceeded their $25,000 requirement for a bid. None of the transactions for the procurements we selected for testing occurred within the period of performance for the federal awards. Repeat finding? No Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization provide grants management training to all its financial staff and management covering the Uniform Guidance/OMB Guidance for Federal Financial Assistance, as well as the Organization's Financial Policies and Procedures Manual. We also recommend that the Organization develop and implement policies and procedures that proper monitoring of its procurements is being done to ensure the Organization's policies and procedures are being followed. Views of Responsible Officials: We agree with the finding. We have never received proper training. See Corrective Action Plan for Reference 2025-006.

Federal Agency: Department of the Interior Federal Program Name: Boston Harbor Islands Partnership - World's End Carriage Road Restoration Assistance Listing Number: 15.947 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: N/A Pass-Through Agency: National Park Service Pass-Through Number(s): P24AC02282 - 2023 Award Period: 10/01/2023 – 09/30/2025 Type of Finding: - Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance - Other Matter Criteria or specific requirement: Procurement methods used must be in compliance with conditions specified in 2 CFR section 200.320. Condition: For the acquisition of small purchases of which the aggregate dollar amount is higher than the micro-purchase threshold ($10,000) but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold ($250,000), price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Questioned costs: None. Context: Documentation over price or rate quotations was not maintained for 2 (of 5) testing selections. Cause: Documentation over price or rate quotations was not maintained, which prohibited the auditors from successfully perform testing over these transactions. Effect: Noncompliance with Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Repeat Finding: N/A. Recommendation: We recommend documentation over price or rate quotations be maintained for all vendors with procurements that could potentially exceed the micro-purchase threshold ($10,000), rather than only those with an original purchase price exceeding $10,000, as the procurement policy is currently written. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.

Federal Program: 93.493 – Congressional Directives, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FAIN CE152180 passed through the Health Resources & Services Administration Criteria or Specific Requirement: Procurement, Suspension & Debarment, 2 CFR 200.320 Condition: The Company paid funds to a vendor that qualified under sole source procurement requirements. In the vendor’s contract with the Company, the vendor confirmed it was not suspended or debarred. The Company did not document its process for determining sole source procurement or document its search to confirm the vendor was not suspended or debarred. Cause: The Company does not have policies in place that comply with federal procurement, suspension and debarment requirements. Effect: The Company’s internal controls did not ensure proper documentation that the vendor materially complied with the federal procurement requirements. Questioned Costs: None Context: Federal procurement standards require entities that receive federal awards to have specific policies that comply with 2 CFR Section 200.318-320. The requirements specify that policies must establish thresholds and procedures for micro-purchases, simplified acquisitions, and formal purchases. When vendors are selected, federal funds are prohibited from going to certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from receiving or participating in federal awards (2 CFR 200.214). The Company did not have policies in place to ensure compliance with these federal procurement guidelines. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: The Company has policies for vendor qualification in place surrounding critical vendors. We recommend considering all vendors that are awarded contracts to be paid with federal awards critical or otherwise amending the Company’s contracting review process or critical vendor policy to incorporate specific procedures when federal funds are used. These procedures should include a documented search of Sam.gov for suspension and debarment of the vendor. The Company should establish procurement thresholds and specific procedures for those thresholds as outlined in 2 CFR Section 200.318-320. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – Management agrees with the finding. See attached corrective action plan.

2025-003 Procurement Program Information Federal Organizations U.S Department of Health and Human Services U.S Department of Agriculture (passed through California Department of Public Health) Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster 10.557 WIC Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children Award Numbers H80CS00540-23, H8GCS48292, H8LCS51370, 22-10237 A05 Criteria Entities receiving federal awards must have and use their documented procurement policies. Title 2 CFR 200.320 outlines the acceptable methods of procurement and establishes the maximum thresholds allowed. Purchases below the simplified acquisition threshold, but above the micro-purchase threshold, require price or rate quotations to be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Condition The Organization did not maintain documentation that competitive price quotations or bids performed, as required by policy and the Uniform Guidance for purchases above the micro purchase threshold. This finding appears to be a systemic issue. Cause Management did not follow its established procurement policy and documentation was not maintained evidencing its compliance with the policy. Effect The Organization may overpay for goods and services due to selecting vendors without appropriate consideration of the competitive bids and cost analysis. Questioned Costs $0. Although the auditee did not retain documentation of required competition (such as bids or price quotes) for contracts, as required under the entity’s written procurement procedures and the Uniform Guidance procurement standards in 2 CFR part 200, our testing indicated that the costs charged to the federal program under this contract were otherwise allowable under the applicable cost principles, adequately supported by other documentation, and reasonable in amount. Context We tested procurement transactions from each program. Of these transactions, four of thirteen tested under assistance listing numbers 93.224 and 93.527, and six of twenty-five tested under assistance listing number 10.557, were missing evidence of proper competitive procurement procedures being performed. Recommendation We recommend the Organization retain supporting documentation of competitive procurement for all transactions greater than the micro-purchase threshold when the expenditures will be charged to a federal award. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.

Health Center Program Cluster – Assistance Listing Nos. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. 6 C16CS50476-01-03 Program Year 2025 Criteria or Specific Requirement – Procurement, Suspension, & Debarment – 2 CFR 200.320 and 2 CFR 180. Condition – The Organization completed purchases exceeding the small purchase threshold for which bid solicitation, evaluation, and selection documents were not completed. The Organization’s Procurement Policy does not explicitly identify all purchase types included in 2 CFR 200.320 and 2 CFR 180. Cause – The Procurement Policy is not consistent with Federal regulations and was not properly applied during the year. Effect or Potential Effect – Purchases were made without adhering to Federal procurement requirements. Questioned Costs – Unknown. Context – A sample of two purchases were tested from a population of eleven transactions subject to procurement requirements, representing $606,467 in federal expenditures. The sample was not, and is not intended to be, statistically valid. Of the two purchases tested, neither transaction, totaling $211,018, was documented in accordance with Federal procurement requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable – Not a repeat finding. Recommendation – The Organization should revise its Procurement Policy to reflect the purchase types included in 2 CFR 200.320 and 2 CFR 180. Finance department staff should be trained on the revised policy and procedure with a system of internal controls developed to improve compliance.

Finding 2024-003: Significant Deficiency - Internal Control Over Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Program Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Federal Agency U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Listing Number 10.760 Repeat of Prior Year Finding 2023-003 Criteria: For federal awards after January 1, 2018, guidance provided in 2 CFR part 200.318 requires nonfederal entities to establish and follow their own documented procurement procedures that conform to applicable federal law and standards. 2 CFR part 200.320 includes different allowable methods of procurement. There are also requirements to verify the vendors are not suspended or debarred. Condition/Context: During our testing for this program in the prior year, we noted that the City did not have a written procurement policy to conform with Uniform Guidance requirements. The City contracted with a third-party administrator who provided the services related to procurement for this grant program. No additional contracts were procured with federal funds in 2024. Cause: The City was made aware of the requirement of requiring a procurement policy but has not implemented a policy at this time. Effect: Without an adequate policy in place, procurement procedures may not adhere to requirements of federal awards. Questioned Costs: None noted. Recommendation: Program personnel should become familiar with the procurement, suspension and debarment rules for Federal programs and implement a formal written policy to conform with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding and will make efforts to implement a formal procurement policy.

2024-004 – Procurement Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP0135 – 2021 Pass-Through Agency: Wisconsin Department of Administration Pass-Through Number(s): ARPA-NIF-072 Award Period: March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024 Type of Finding: • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Other Matter Criteria or Specific Requirement: 2 CFR 200.320 Methods of Procurement state that if the small purchases method is used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The City should have internal controls designed to ensure compliance with those provisions. Condition: The City did not follow controls related to ensuring procurement policies were followed. Questioned Costs: None Context: During our testing, it was noted on one of the two items tested that the City was not following the requirements under the adopted procurement policies. Cause: The City did not follow the requirements under the adopted procurement policies. Effect: The County is not in compliance with procurement requirements. Contracts for construction, non- construction related procurements, and those over the simplified acquisition threshold may not be in compliance with the Uniform Guidance. Repeat Finding: The finding is a repeat of a finding in the immediately prior year. Prior year finding number was 2023-004. Recommendation: We recommend the City design controls to ensure an adequate review process is in place to review potential contractors to determine they are not suspended or debarred. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.

2024-004 – Procurement Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP0135 – 2021 Pass-Through Agency: Wisconsin Department of Administration Pass-Through Number(s): ARPA-NIF-072 Award Period: March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024 Type of Finding: • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Other Matter Criteria or Specific Requirement: 2 CFR 200.320 Methods of Procurement state that if the small purchases method is used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. The City should have internal controls designed to ensure compliance with those provisions. Condition: The City did not follow controls related to ensuring procurement policies were followed. Questioned Costs: None Context: During our testing, it was noted on one of the two items tested that the City was not following the requirements under the adopted procurement policies. Cause: The City did not follow the requirements under the adopted procurement policies. Effect: The County is not in compliance with procurement requirements. Contracts for construction, non- construction related procurements, and those over the simplified acquisition threshold may not be in compliance with the Uniform Guidance. Repeat Finding: The finding is a repeat of a finding in the immediately prior year. Prior year finding number was 2023-004. Recommendation: We recommend the City design controls to ensure an adequate review process is in place to review potential contractors to determine they are not suspended or debarred. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.

Finding No. 2024-003 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Environmental Protection Agency Federal Program Name: Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water State Revolving Funds Assistance Listing Number: 66.468 Federal Award Notification Number and Year: 4896-13 - 2024 Award Period: January 1, 2024 – December 31, 2024 Compliance Requirement Affected: Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or Specific Requirement: 2 CFR 200.320 Methods of Procurement state that when a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. Condition: During our testing, we noted the Village did not have adequate internal controls designed to ensure vendors were not suspended or debarred. Questioned Costs: None Context: During our testing, it was noted that the Village was not reviewing vendors prior to entering into a contract with a vendor to ensure the vendor was not on the suspended or debarred vendor list maintained by the General Services Administration. Cause: The Village does not have controls related to ensuring suspension and debarment are verified prior to entering into contract with vendors. Effect: The auditor noted no instances noncompliance with the provisions of procurement, suspension, and debarment; however, the lack of internal ocntrols over these compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend the Village evaluate its existing policies and procedures to determine where additional enhancements should be made or new policies created. Views of Responsible Officials: There is no disagreement with the finding.

Federal Program AL# 93.526 - Health Center Infrastructure Support - Significant Deficiency in internal control over federal award program and Noncompliance - Procurement Criteria - According to the Center’s procurement policy they will adhere to the procurement standards and requirements of 45 CFR Part 75, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards” Condition - During our testing of procurement transactions, we noted that the Center did not follow the Small Purchase Procedures or the Simplified Acquisition Method as required for procurements within the applicable threshold established in its own procurement policy. Specifically, transactions falling within this cost range were processed without the appropriate level of competition or documentation required under the Center’s procedures and 2 CFR § 200.320(b). Questioned Costs - 562735 Context- During our testing of procurement transactions, the Center did not provide adequate documentation to demonstrate that proper procurement procedures were followed in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320. Specifically, the documentation provided did not clearly support the method of procurement used, nor did it include evidence of efforts to ensure full and open competition, justification for non-competitive purchases, or verification of cost or price reasonableness where applicable. As a result, we were unable to verify compliance with the federal procurement standards required for recipients of federal awards. Potential Effect - As a result of not following the prescribed procurement procedures, the Center increases the risk of noncompliance with federal regulations, specifically 2 CFR § 200.320. This may lead to unallowable costs being charged to the federal program, reduced assurance that goods and services were procured at fair and reasonable prices, and potential disallowance of expenditures during a federal review or audit. Additionally, failure to maintain appropriate procurement documentation may impair transparency and weaken internal controls over federal funds. Cause - The personnel responsible for procurement did not adhere to the Center’s established procurement procedures. Instead of evaluating purchases based on their aggregate cost, as required by both internal policy and federal guideline, they assessed each transaction individually. This practice resulted in the improper application of procurement methods for transactions that cumulatively exceeded the applicable thresholds. Recommendation - We recommend that management reinforce adherence to the Center’s procurement policy by providing periodic training to all staff involved in the purchasing process, with a focus on the appropriate application of procurement methods in accordance with 2 CFR § 200.320. Additionally, management should implement a formal review and oversight mechanism to ensure that all procurement transactions exceeding established thresholds are properly evaluated on an aggregate basis, fully documented, and compliant with both internal policies and federal regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions - Management concurs with the finding. The Center acknowledges that procurement activities were evaluated on a per-transaction basis rather than in aggregate, as required under both its internal procurement policy and 2 CFR § 200.320. To address this issue, the Center will conduct training for all relevant staff on the proper application of procurement thresholds and documentation requirements.

Reference Number: 2024-001 Program Name: 14.267 Continuum of Care Description: Procurement Criteria: 2 CFR 200.320 Methods of Procurement state that if the small purchases method is used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources (at least 2). The Organization’s procurement policy also states that purchases ranging from $2,500-$24,999 require a minimum of three written bids. Condition: During our testing of procurement transactions, we sampled two purchases over $2,500 and neither of them had price quotes as required by the Organization’s procurement policy. Questioned Costs: Immaterial. Cause: The Organization did not follow their Federal Funds Procurement policy related to the appropriate methods of procurement. Effect: Obtaining price quotes or proposals from an adequate number of vendors allows the Organization to use federal funds in the most fiscally responsible way. The lack of quotes and proposals may cause the Organization to overpay for supplies or services. Identification of a Repeat Finding: This is not repeat finding. Auditors’ Recommendation: We recommend the Organization review their procurement policy and either amend it to coincide with increased thresholds or adhere to current policy. Views of Responsible Officials: See attachment for the Organization’s corrective action plan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Criteria or Specific Requirement – Under 2 CFR §200.320(a), micro-purchase procedures may be used for procurements up to the micro-purchase threshold (currently $10,000). Purchases must be distributed equitably among qualified suppliers when practical, and the price must be reasonable. Entities must follow their internal controls and maintain documentation supporting the rationale for the purchase and vendor selection. Conditions – Bids for some vendors was not performed. Context – During our testing of procurement, we sampled nine expenditures. Of the nine selections three selections did not have required bids. Cause – The Association lacks formal procedures to ensure micro-purchase requirements are met, and staff were not aware of the requirement to document price reasonableness or distribute purchases equitably among vendors. Effect – Higher than necessary costs may be have expensed.Recommendation – We recommend that management revise policies to ensure proper vendor compliance in the future. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions – Procurement Policy was updated and documentation will be maintained to support vendor verification in the future.

Finding 2024-002 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Grantor: United States Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing No.: 93.817 Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) Ebola Preparedness and Response Activities Criteria or specific requirement (including statutory, regulatory, or other citation): 2 CFR 200.303 requires that 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 and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).” Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Section 200.320 (a)(2) states regarding the applicability of simplified acquisition procedures: “The aggregate dollar amount of the procurement transaction is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If simplified acquisition procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Unless specified by the Federal agency, the recipient or subrecipient may exercise judgment in determining what number is adequate. “ Section V.A.1.a.ii of the procurement policy of Fairview Health Services requires that for procurements by small purchase ($10,000–$249,000), where the aggregate dollar amount is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, price or rate quotations must be obtained from three qualified sources. If three separate qualified sources cannot be obtained the reason needs to be formally documented. Condition: For one procurement transaction tested, we noted that Fairview Health Services did not complete a sole-source justification form timely to support the vendor that was selected. Cause: Management does not have sufficient internal controls in place to ensure that Fairview Health Services’ procurement policies are followed for all procurement transactions prior to entering the procurement. Effect or potential effect: Fairview Health Services entered into a procurement that did not go through a competitive solicitation process. Questioned costs: None Context: Total Federal expenditures subject to procurement for HPP were $616,107 for the year ended December 31, 2024. Total expenditures related to the procurement at issue were $29,041. Total Federal expenditures were $1,656,727 for the year ended December 31, 2024. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: The finding is not a repeat finding from the prior year. Recommendation: Management should review its policies and procedures to ensure all procurement transactions are in accordance with Fairview Health Services’ procurement policies and have the appropriate supporting documentation. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and has developed a plan to correct the finding. Fairview updated its internal control processes to better retain and document sole source procurement justification before entering vendor agreements. A standard form for sole source justification will be implemented to enhance documentation.

Finding 2024-003 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Identification of the federal program: Federal Grantor: United States Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing No.: 93.817 Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) Ebola Preparedness and Response Activities Criteria or specific requirement (including statutory, regulatory, or other citation): 2 CFR 200.303 requires that 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 and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).” Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Section 200.320 (a)(2) states regarding the applicability of simplified acquisition procedures: “The aggregate dollar amount of the procurement transaction is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If simplified acquisition procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Unless specified by the Federal agency, the recipient or subrecipient may exercise judgment in determining what number is adequate. “ Section V.A.1.a.ii of the procurement policy of Fairview Health Services requires that for procurements by small purchase ($10,000-$249,000), where the aggregate dollar amount is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, price or rate quotations must be obtained from three qualified sources. If three separate qualified sources cannot be obtained the reason needs to be formally documented. Condition: The data used in evaluating the vendors for suspension and debarment was not reviewed and approved. Cause: Management does not have internal controls in place to require the review and approval of the data used in evaluation of vendors for suspension and debarment. Effect or potential effect: Suspension and debarment results may not be accurate. As a result, federal funds may be used to pay a contractor that is suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: Total Federal expenditures subject to suspension and debarment were $947,686, representing 57% of total federal expenditures of $1,656,727 for the year ended December 31, 2024. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: The finding is not a repeat finding from the prior year. Recommendation: Management should implement internal controls over the review and approval of the data used in suspension and debarment analysis. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and has developed a plan to correct the finding. Starting June 2025, the monthly suspension and debarment file will be reviewed. A signed statement confirming its accuracy will be included post-review. The accounts payable standard work document will be updated accordingly.

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.