CONDITION: The School District contracted with MHY Family Services for professional services. The contract exceeded the threshold for competitive procurement. The District was unable to provide documentation to verify that the third-party procurement contract was competitively procured, such as a bid evaluation and public solicitation. In addition, the District did not conduct a cost or price analysis for this procurement, which was in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000. CRITERIA: Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance specifies that the School District 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. In addition, Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance requires the performance of a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. CAUSE: It was not readily determinable as to why the District did not adhere to its Procurement Policy for Federal Programs (#626.5) which addresses the issue of competitive procurement as outlined in Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) and Section 2 CFR 200.324(a). EFFECT: The School District did not comply with the requirements of Sections 2 CFR 200.318(i) and 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance with regard to maintaining sufficient records to detail the history of procurement and conducting a cost or price analysis for procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. QUESTIONED COST: $242,703 RECOMMENDATION: I am recommending that the management of the School District review and update as necessary its procurement policies to ensure retention of the appropriate procurement documentation, in all instances, so as to comply with all applicable sections of the Uniform Guidance, specifically, Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance. In addition, I recommend that the School District conduct a cost or price analysis for all procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000 before receiving bids or proposals in accordance with Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: The School District concurs with the above noted finding and addresses this issue in the ‘Corrective Action Plan’ included within this report.
CONDITION: The School District contracted with MHY Family Services for professional services. The contract exceeded the threshold for competitive procurement. The District was unable to provide documentation to verify that the third-party procurement contract was competitively procured, such as a bid evaluation and public solicitation. In addition, the District did not conduct a cost or price analysis for this procurement, which was in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000. CRITERIA: Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance specifies that the School District 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. In addition, Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance requires the performance of a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. CAUSE: It was not readily determinable as to why the District did not adhere to its Procurement Policy for Federal Programs (#626.5) which addresses the issue of competitive procurement as outlined in Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) and Section 2 CFR 200.324(a). EFFECT: The School District did not comply with the requirements of Sections 2 CFR 200.318(i) and 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance with regard to maintaining sufficient records to detail the history of procurement and conducting a cost or price analysis for procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. QUESTIONED COST: $242,703 RECOMMENDATION: I am recommending that the management of the School District review and update as necessary its procurement policies to ensure retention of the appropriate procurement documentation, in all instances, so as to comply with all applicable sections of the Uniform Guidance, specifically, Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance. In addition, I recommend that the School District conduct a cost or price analysis for all procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000 before receiving bids or proposals in accordance with Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: The School District concurs with the above noted finding and addresses this issue in the ‘Corrective Action Plan’ included within this report.
CONDITION: The School District contracted with MHY Family Services for professional services. The contract exceeded the threshold for competitive procurement. The District was unable to provide documentation to verify that the third-party procurement contract was competitively procured, such as a bid evaluation and public solicitation. In addition, the District did not conduct a cost or price analysis for this procurement, which was in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000. CRITERIA: Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance specifies that the School District 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. In addition, Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance requires the performance of a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. CAUSE: It was not readily determinable as to why the District did not adhere to its Procurement Policy for Federal Programs (#626.5) which addresses the issue of competitive procurement as outlined in Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) and Section 2 CFR 200.324(a). EFFECT: The School District did not comply with the requirements of Sections 2 CFR 200.318(i) and 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance with regard to maintaining sufficient records to detail the history of procurement and conducting a cost or price analysis for procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. QUESTIONED COST: $242,703 RECOMMENDATION: I am recommending that the management of the School District review and update as necessary its procurement policies to ensure retention of the appropriate procurement documentation, in all instances, so as to comply with all applicable sections of the Uniform Guidance, specifically, Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance. In addition, I recommend that the School District conduct a cost or price analysis for all procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000 before receiving bids or proposals in accordance with Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: The School District concurs with the above noted finding and addresses this issue in the ‘Corrective Action Plan’ included within this report.
CONDITION: The School District contracted with MHY Family Services for professional services. The contract exceeded the threshold for competitive procurement. The District was unable to provide documentation to verify that the third-party procurement contract was competitively procured, such as a bid evaluation and public solicitation. In addition, the District did not conduct a cost or price analysis for this procurement, which was in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000. CRITERIA: Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance specifies that the School District 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. In addition, Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance requires the performance of a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. CAUSE: It was not readily determinable as to why the District did not adhere to its Procurement Policy for Federal Programs (#626.5) which addresses the issue of competitive procurement as outlined in Section 2 CFR 200. 318(i) and Section 2 CFR 200.324(a). EFFECT: The School District did not comply with the requirements of Sections 2 CFR 200.318(i) and 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance with regard to maintaining sufficient records to detail the history of procurement and conducting a cost or price analysis for procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. QUESTIONED COST: $242,703 RECOMMENDATION: I am recommending that the management of the School District review and update as necessary its procurement policies to ensure retention of the appropriate procurement documentation, in all instances, so as to comply with all applicable sections of the Uniform Guidance, specifically, Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance. In addition, I recommend that the School District conduct a cost or price analysis for all procurement in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold of $250,000 before receiving bids or proposals in accordance with Section 2 CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance. VIEWS OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: The School District concurs with the above noted finding and addresses this issue in the ‘Corrective Action Plan’ included within this report.
CONDITION: During my review of Aliquippa School District’s compliance with the requirements of the Public School Code and the Uniform Guidance for procurement of goods and services, the District was unable to provide documentation or other evidence that 1) competitive bidding was performed for the purchases of goods or services over $22,500 and 2) a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000), or 3) the vendor met the requirements of a ‘sole source provider’ with documentation to support such designation, for the following vendor –– Beaver Valley Intermediate Unit ($332,200). This is a repeat procurement finding from (2023-005) from the previous fiscal year.CRITERIA: As specified in 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance, the District 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. In addition, small purchase procedures per 2 CFR 200.320(a)(2)(i) for acquisitions between the micro-purchase threshold (currently $10,000) and the simplified acquisition threshold (current $250,000), price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate. Per 24 PA Statue 8.807.1, there should be three quotes that are either written or well documented. Furthermore, Section 2 CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance details five (5) circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. CAUSE: District officials responsible for federal procurement did not adhere to District, state and federal policies and regulations regarding the expenditure of federal funds. EFFECT: The District did not comply with 1) the District’s Procurement Policy for Federal Programs, 2) the 24 PA Statute 8.807.1, 3) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) and Section 2CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the proper documentation required for noncompetitive procurement using federal funding, or 4) Section CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the requirement to perform a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000). QUESTIONED COST: $332,200 RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that for all future purchases of goods and/or services utilizing federal funds, that the District adhere to the requirements of 1) the District’s Procurement Policy for Federal Programs, 2) the 24 PA Statute 8.807.1, 3) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance regarding maintaining records sufficient to detail the history of procurement which includes rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price, 4) Section 2 CFR 200.300(a)(2)(i) of the Uniform Guidance regarding obtaining three price or rate quotations for the purchase of goods between $10,000 and $22,500, and services between $10,000 and $250,000, and as applicable, 5) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) and Section 2CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the proper documentation required for noncompetitive procurement using federal funding, and 5) Section CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the requirement to perform a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000). VIEW OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: See Correction Action Plan
CONDITION: During my review of Aliquippa School District’s compliance with the requirements of the Public School Code and the Uniform Guidance for procurement of goods and services, the District was unable to provide documentation or other evidence that 1) competitive bidding was performed for the purchases of goods or services over $22,500 and 2) a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000), or 3) the vendor met the requirements of a ‘sole source provider’ with documentation to support such designation, for the following vendor –– Beaver Valley Intermediate Unit ($332,200). This is a repeat procurement finding from (2023-005) from the previous fiscal year.CRITERIA: As specified in 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance, the District 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. In addition, small purchase procedures per 2 CFR 200.320(a)(2)(i) for acquisitions between the micro-purchase threshold (currently $10,000) and the simplified acquisition threshold (current $250,000), price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate. Per 24 PA Statue 8.807.1, there should be three quotes that are either written or well documented. Furthermore, Section 2 CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance details five (5) circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. CAUSE: District officials responsible for federal procurement did not adhere to District, state and federal policies and regulations regarding the expenditure of federal funds. EFFECT: The District did not comply with 1) the District’s Procurement Policy for Federal Programs, 2) the 24 PA Statute 8.807.1, 3) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) and Section 2CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the proper documentation required for noncompetitive procurement using federal funding, or 4) Section CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the requirement to perform a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000). QUESTIONED COST: $332,200 RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that for all future purchases of goods and/or services utilizing federal funds, that the District adhere to the requirements of 1) the District’s Procurement Policy for Federal Programs, 2) the 24 PA Statute 8.807.1, 3) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance regarding maintaining records sufficient to detail the history of procurement which includes rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price, 4) Section 2 CFR 200.300(a)(2)(i) of the Uniform Guidance regarding obtaining three price or rate quotations for the purchase of goods between $10,000 and $22,500, and services between $10,000 and $250,000, and as applicable, 5) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) and Section 2CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the proper documentation required for noncompetitive procurement using federal funding, and 5) Section CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the requirement to perform a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000). VIEW OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: See Correction Action Plan
CONDITION: During my review of Aliquippa School District’s compliance with the requirements of the Public School Code and the Uniform Guidance for procurement of goods and services, the District was unable to provide documentation or other evidence that 1) competitive bidding was performed for the purchases of goods or services over $22,500 and 2) a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000), or 3) the vendor met the requirements of a ‘sole source provider’ with documentation to support such designation, for the following vendor –– Beaver Valley Intermediate Unit ($332,200). This is a repeat procurement finding from (2023-005) from the previous fiscal year.CRITERIA: As specified in 2 CFR 200. 318(i) of the Uniform Guidance, the District 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. In addition, small purchase procedures per 2 CFR 200.320(a)(2)(i) for acquisitions between the micro-purchase threshold (currently $10,000) and the simplified acquisition threshold (current $250,000), price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate. Per 24 PA Statue 8.807.1, there should be three quotes that are either written or well documented. Furthermore, Section 2 CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance details five (5) circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. CAUSE: District officials responsible for federal procurement did not adhere to District, state and federal policies and regulations regarding the expenditure of federal funds. EFFECT: The District did not comply with 1) the District’s Procurement Policy for Federal Programs, 2) the 24 PA Statute 8.807.1, 3) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) and Section 2CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the proper documentation required for noncompetitive procurement using federal funding, or 4) Section CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the requirement to perform a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000). QUESTIONED COST: $332,200 RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that for all future purchases of goods and/or services utilizing federal funds, that the District adhere to the requirements of 1) the District’s Procurement Policy for Federal Programs, 2) the 24 PA Statute 8.807.1, 3) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) of the Uniform Guidance regarding maintaining records sufficient to detail the history of procurement which includes rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price, 4) Section 2 CFR 200.300(a)(2)(i) of the Uniform Guidance regarding obtaining three price or rate quotations for the purchase of goods between $10,000 and $22,500, and services between $10,000 and $250,000, and as applicable, 5) Section 2 CFR 200.318(i) and Section 2CFR 200.320(c’) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the proper documentation required for noncompetitive procurement using federal funding, and 5) Section CFR 200.324(a) of the Uniform Guidance regarding the requirement to perform a cost or price analysis for purchases in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold ($250,000). VIEW OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIALS: See Correction Action Plan
Finding 2024-001 – Procurement Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing No.: No. 21.027 Federal Award Number: ASST_NON_SLFRP0137_2001 Grant Award Period: 9/1/2022 – 8/31/2024 Pass Through Entity: Los Angeles County - Department of Public Health Repeat Finding – No Statistically Valid Sample – The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample Criteria 2 CFR 200.324 requires that the non-federal entity perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the recipient of federal funds 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. Condition/Context For both of the samples selected for testing which had related procurements above the California Community Foundation’s (the Foundation's) Simplified Acquisition Threshold, there was no support evidencing a cost or price analysis performed by management before receiving the corresponding proposals, although multiple bids were received as part of these procurements. Cause Although the Foundation included the requirement in its procurement policies that the cost or price analysis needed to be performed before bids or proposals are received the Foundation did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure that a cost or price analysis is performed prior to receiving bids or proposals. Effect Because the Foundation was not in compliance with one of the procurement requirements this could result in disallowed costs if procurement amounts aren't considered reasonable. The Foundation did, however, receive multiple bids as part of the procurement process for each of the samples noted above to demonstrate the costs claimed for reimbursement under the contract were reasonable and under the budget provided to the Foundation by the passthrough awarding entity. Questioned Costs None noted. Auditors’ Recommendation We recommend that the Foundation strengthen processes and internal controls to ensure that a cost or price analysis is performed, reviewed, and substantiated with formal documentation prior to receiving bids or proposals for all procurement actions above the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. Views of Responsible Officials The Foundation acknowledges the finding and will enhance compliance with federal procurement standards by reinforcing staff training on cost and price analysis requirements, strengthening internal oversight mechanisms, and implementing a formalized process to ensure proper documentation is completed and retained. Periodic reviews and audits will verify adherence to these standards and maintain consistent implementation.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name 21.027, U.S. Department of the Treasury, COVID 19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and 93.493, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Congressional Directives Federal Award Identification Number and Year 21.027 192908 and 93.493 6 CE2CS52794 01 07 Pass through Entity 21.027 Chicago Department of Public Health; 93.493 N/A Finding Type Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding No Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), nonfederal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal 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 Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR 200.318(i), the nonfederal 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. Per 2 CFR 200.319(a) All procurement transactions under the federal award must be conducted in a manner that provides full and open competition and is consistent with the standards of this section and § 200.320(b) covering formal procurement methods. Per 2 CFR 200.324(a), the nonfederal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent upon the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation; but, as a starting point, the nonfederal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Finally, per 2 CFR 180.300, nonfederal entities must verify that outside parties are not suspended or debarred from engaging in federal activity before entering into a covered transaction. Condition Controls were not sufficient to ensure procurement activities were performed in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and management’s internal policies and procedures related to procurement, suspension, and debarment. Questioned Costs $ 237,890 If Questioned Costs are not Determinable, Description of why Known Questioned Costs Were Undetermined or Otherwise Could not be Reported N/A Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed Questioned costs represent expenditures under these contracts reported on the SEFA. Context For three contracts in excess of the Organization's formal procurement threshold ($50,000), management did not retain documentation of having obtained the required number of competitive bids or document rationale for sole procurement, did not document the history of procurement decisions, and was unable to provide evidence that contractors were checked for suspension and debarment in advance of entering into a covered transaction. Cause and Effect A lack of controls to ensure required procurement activities were performed could result in material noncompliance with federal procurement standards. Recommendation We recommend that management retain documented evidence that its policies and procedures were followed to ensure compliance with federal procurement standards. Additionally, we recommend management review its internal procurement policy regularly to ensure compliance with federal procurement standards under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the relevant guidance to ensure compliance. Careful consideration was done in selecting the vendors to look at obtaining the best cost for the value of the service as IWS was responsible for a portion of the expenses. Necessary revisions will be made to the existing procurement processes and controls in a timely manner to ensure that procurement decisions are documented, as required by 2 CFR Part 200.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name 21.027, U.S. Department of the Treasury, COVID 19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, and 93.493, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Congressional Directives Federal Award Identification Number and Year 21.027 192908 and 93.493 6 CE2CS52794 01 07 Pass through Entity 21.027 Chicago Department of Public Health; 93.493 N/A Finding Type Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding No Criteria Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), nonfederal entities must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonfederal 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 Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR 200.318(i), the nonfederal 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. Per 2 CFR 200.319(a) All procurement transactions under the federal award must be conducted in a manner that provides full and open competition and is consistent with the standards of this section and § 200.320(b) covering formal procurement methods. Per 2 CFR 200.324(a), the nonfederal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent upon the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation; but, as a starting point, the nonfederal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Finally, per 2 CFR 180.300, nonfederal entities must verify that outside parties are not suspended or debarred from engaging in federal activity before entering into a covered transaction. Condition Controls were not sufficient to ensure procurement activities were performed in accordance with 2 CFR 200 and management’s internal policies and procedures related to procurement, suspension, and debarment. Questioned Costs $ 237,890 If Questioned Costs are not Determinable, Description of why Known Questioned Costs Were Undetermined or Otherwise Could not be Reported N/A Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed Questioned costs represent expenditures under these contracts reported on the SEFA. Context For three contracts in excess of the Organization's formal procurement threshold ($50,000), management did not retain documentation of having obtained the required number of competitive bids or document rationale for sole procurement, did not document the history of procurement decisions, and was unable to provide evidence that contractors were checked for suspension and debarment in advance of entering into a covered transaction. Cause and Effect A lack of controls to ensure required procurement activities were performed could result in material noncompliance with federal procurement standards. Recommendation We recommend that management retain documented evidence that its policies and procedures were followed to ensure compliance with federal procurement standards. Additionally, we recommend management review its internal procurement policy regularly to ensure compliance with federal procurement standards under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan Management agrees with the recommendation and will review the relevant guidance to ensure compliance. Careful consideration was done in selecting the vendors to look at obtaining the best cost for the value of the service as IWS was responsible for a portion of the expenses. Necessary revisions will be made to the existing procurement processes and controls in a timely manner to ensure that procurement decisions are documented, as required by 2 CFR Part 200.
Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Finding Number: 2024-003 Assistance Listing Number and Title COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – AL #21.027 Federal Award Identification Number / Year: 2024 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Pass-Through Entity: Ohio Facilities Construction Commission Repeat Finding from Prior Audit? No Noncompliance and Material Weakness 2 CFR 1000.10 gives regulatory effect to the U.S. Department of Treasury for 2 CFR § 200.318 through 200.327 which describe specific procedures non-Federal entities must follow when entering into procurement transactions using Federal funds. 2 CFR 200.324(a) requires a cost or price analysis be performed for every procurement transaction, including contract modifications, in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold. The method and degree of analysis conducted depend on the facts surrounding the particular procurement transaction. 2 CFR 200.324(c) states that the “cost plus a percentage of cost” and “percentage of construction costs” methods of contracting must not be used. Additionally, District Policy: PROCUREMENT - FEDERAL GRANTS/FUNDS, states that the District shall perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of $250,000, including contract modifications. A cost analysis generally means evaluating the separate cost elements that make up the total price, while a price analysis means evaluating the total price, without looking at the individual cost elements. The method and degree of analysis are dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation; however, the District shall come to an independent estimate prior to receiving bids or proposals. The District did not have the proper internal controls in place to perform a cost or price analysis for procurements in excess of $250,000. During testing of Ohio K-12 School Safety Grant – Public School Districts, we noted the District used the sealed bid procurement to award a project in excess of $250,000, and there was no evidence the District performed a cost or price analysis. Due to the deficient internal control structure, the required cost or price analysis was not completed for the procurement action covering a transaction made in Fiscal Year 2024. Failing to have the appropriate controls in place may result in rewarding contracts to vendors whose bids or proposals are not the most responsive and responsible. The District should perform a cost or price analysis for all procurement actions in excess of $250,000.
2024 – 007 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Department of Interior Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning ALN: 21.027 15.916 Pass-Through Agency: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning Arizona State Park Trails Pass-Through Number(s): Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04-007-652304 Award Number and Period: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) 1505-0271 3/3/2021 – 12/31/2024 Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04/18/2022-12/31/24 Statistically Valid Sample: No, and not intended to be a statistically valid sample Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the City of Nogales must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it 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 the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR 200.324, the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220). All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the 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. This verification may be accomplished by: (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov | Home (click on Search Record, then click on Advanced Search-Exclusions) (Note: The OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 180 and agency implementing regulations still refer to the SAM Exclusions as the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)), (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: The following is a summary results for each audited program. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) - Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. Three out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide support for the procurement method used, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. One out of five vendors tested did not have a valid contract on file. Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning – Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. • Five out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide sample support requested to test procurement method selected, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. • Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Questioned costs: Unknown Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The City’s written procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures are in compliance with Uniform Grant Guidance but were not properly adhered to. Effect: The City is not in compliance with uniform grant guidance requirements related to procurement, suspension, and debarment. Repeat Finding: Yes. See 2024-005. Recommendation: The City of Nogales should enhance and/or modify existing controls over procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures to ensure adherence to all uniform grant guidance requirements. This could include implementing a more robust checklist that should be completed, signed off by management and included with each procurement which has all required items noted such as cost/price analysis and verification of suspension and debarment of vendors. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan. Corrective action plan: See corrective action plan.
2024 – 007 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Department of Interior Federal Program Title: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning ALN: 21.027 15.916 Pass-Through Agency: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning Arizona State Park Trails Pass-Through Number(s): Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) N/A Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04-007-652304 Award Number and Period: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) 1505-0271 3/3/2021 – 12/31/2024 Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning 04/18/2022-12/31/24 Statistically Valid Sample: No, and not intended to be a statistically valid sample Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the City of Nogales must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that it 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 the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Per 2 CFR 200.324, the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220). All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the 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. This verification may be accomplished by: (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at SAM.gov | Home (click on Search Record, then click on Advanced Search-Exclusions) (Note: The OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 180 and agency implementing regulations still refer to the SAM Exclusions as the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS)), (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Condition: The following is a summary results for each audited program. Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (ARPA) - Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. Three out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide support for the procurement method used, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. One out of five vendors tested did not have a valid contract on file. Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning – Audit procedures included selection and testing of five competitively procured vendor contracts. • Five out of five vendors tested for procurement did not provide sample support requested to test procurement method selected, price/bid comparison, and cost analysis performed. • Five out of five vendors tested did not provide support for the SAMS verification check that the winning vendor was not suspended nor debarred from receiving federal funds prior to awarding the contract. Questioned costs: Unknown Context: See “Condition.” Cause: The City’s written procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures are in compliance with Uniform Grant Guidance but were not properly adhered to. Effect: The City is not in compliance with uniform grant guidance requirements related to procurement, suspension, and debarment. Repeat Finding: Yes. See 2024-005. Recommendation: The City of Nogales should enhance and/or modify existing controls over procurement, suspension and debarment policies and procedures to ensure adherence to all uniform grant guidance requirements. This could include implementing a more robust checklist that should be completed, signed off by management and included with each procurement which has all required items noted such as cost/price analysis and verification of suspension and debarment of vendors. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan. Corrective action plan: See corrective action plan.
FINDING 2023-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2023 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations require formal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), which is set at $250,000 unless a lower more restrictive threshold is set by a nonfederal entity. As Indiana Code has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, this threshold and formal procurement methods must be used when procuring goods and services in excess of $150,000. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures and obtaining sealed bids or proposals. The Town had a documented procurement policy; however, the Town did not follow its policy for one of the two vendors that exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold. The vendor, paid $2,419,821, was chosen without obtaining sealed bids or proposals, nor was a formal contract entered into with the vendor. Furthermore, there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement or the Town's justification for limiting competition. The lack of effective internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the one vendor noted above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 15 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 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 done by checking the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS), collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. The Town's policies related to the SLFRF suspension and debarment requirements included a clause or condition added to covered transactions expected to equal or exceed $25,000 with that vendor. Three vendors were identified as having transactions that equaled or exceeded $25,000. All three vendors were selected for testing. The three vendors, with total expenditures of $4,333,484, were reviewed. For all three vendors, the Town did not have documented evidence that the clause was included in the contract with the vendor nor that any other methods were employed to verify the vendor was not suspended, debarred, or other excluded prior to entering into the transactions. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systematic 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 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.324(a) states: "The Non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: ". . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance awards exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. (i) In order for sealed bidding to be feasible, the following conditions should be present: (A) A complete, adequate, and realistic specification or purchase description is available; (B) Two or more responsible bidders are willing and able to compete effectively for the business; and (C) The procurement lends itself to a firm fixed price contract and the selection of the successful bidder can be made principally on the basis of price. (ii) If sealed bids are used, the following requirements apply: (A) Bids must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified sources, providing them sufficient response time prior to the date set for opening the bids, for local, and tribal governments, the invitation for bids must be publicly advertised; (B) The invitation for bids, which will include any specifications and pertinent attachments, must define the items or services in order for the bidder to properly respond; (C) All bids will be opened at the time and place prescribed in the invitation for bids, and for local and tribal governments, the bids must be opened publicly; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (D) A firm fixed price contract award will be made in writing to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Where specified in bidding documents, factors such as discounts, transportation cost, and life cycle costs must be considered in determining which bid is lowest. Payment discounts will only be used to determine the low bid when prior experience indicates that such discounts are usually taken advantage of; and (E) Any or all bids may be rejected if there is a sound documented reason. (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. They are awarded in accordance with the following requirements: (i) Requests for proposals must be publicized and identify all evaluation factors and their relative importance. Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified offerors. Any response to publicized requests for proposals must be considered to the maximum extent practical; (ii) The non-Federal entity must have a written method for conducting technical evaluations of the proposals received and making selections; (iii) Contracts must be awarded to the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the non-Federal entity, with price and other factors considered; and (iv) The non-Federal entity may use competitive proposal procedures for qualifications based procurement of architectural/engineering (A/E) professional services whereby offeror's qualifications are evaluated and the most qualified offeror is selected, subject to negotiation of fair and reasonable compensation. The method, where price is not used as a selection factor, can only be used in procurement of A/E professional services. It cannot be used to purchase other types of services though A/E firms that are a potential source to perform the proposed effort. (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 31 CFR 19.300 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 do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the EPLS, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person if allowed by this rule, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Town did not adhere to its procurement policy as written. Instead, a vendor was selected based on factors other than solicited bids. In addition, the Town was unable to provide documentation to demonstrate they included a clause in contracts or otherwise verified contractors were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into the transaction as a direct result of the Town's policy not addressing those vendors not requiring a contract and not following the policy for those vendors who had a contract. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the Town cannot ensure goods and services were properly procured. As a result, one vendor paid did not have adequate documentation to support that the appropriate bid process was followed or that nonprocurement procedures were permissible. Furthermore, without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the Town cannot ensure the vendors paid with federal funds are eligible to participate in federal programs. Any program funds the Town used to pay vendors that have been suspended or debarred would be unallowable. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future funding to the Town. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommend that management of the Town establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure contractors and subrecipients, as appropriate, are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering contracts or subawards, and document reasons for vendors that are chosen without adhering to formal procurement methods. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
2023-004 Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Prior Year Finding Number: N/A Year of Finding Origination: 2023 Type of Finding: Internal Control Over Compliance and Compliance Severity of Deficiency: Significant Deficiency and Other Matter Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Program: 21.027 COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award Number and Year: SLFRP1274, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: N/A – Federal Direct Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.303 states that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the auditee is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.318(i) states that the County 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. Additionally, the County must follow further federal guidance over full and open competition as provided in Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.319, and perform a cost or price analysis as provided in Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.324. Federal requirements prohibit non-federal entities from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 180.300 describes a required verification process. Prior to entering into the transaction, one of the following must be performed: (1) checking SAM.gov exclusions, (2) collecting a certification, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction. Condition: For two procurements tested above the micro-purchase threshold, documentation of the history of the procurement, providing full and open competition, and a cost or price analysis was not available. For the one covered transaction tested, the verification for suspended or debarred vendors was not performed before entering into the covered transaction. Questioned Costs: None. Context: Two of five contracts were tested for compliance with applicable federal regulations. Additionally, one covered transaction was subject to suspension and debarment. The sample size was based on guidance from Chapter 11 of the AICPA Audit Guide, Government Auditing Standards and Single Audits. Effect: It cannot be determined that the contracting process was open and fair because the County did not document the rationale for the contractor selection. It also cannot be determined that an entity was not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from conducting business with the County. Cause: The County did not maintain the necessary documentation to allow the auditor to test for procurement and suspension and debarment. Recommendation: We recommend the County maintain documentation on the history of a procurement, provide for full and open competition, and perform a cost or price analysis to support compliance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations §§ 200.318, 200.319, and 200.324. We further recommend the County maintain documentation to demonstrate that vendors were not debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from conducting business with the County; this documentation should be completed prior to entering into a covered transaction. View of Responsible Official: Concur
FINDING 2023-002 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2023 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context Procurement Federal regulations require formal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), which is set at $250,000 unless a lower more restrictive threshold is set by a nonfederal entity. As Indiana Code has a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, this threshold and formal procurement methods must be used when procuring goods and services in excess of $150,000. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures and obtaining sealed bids or proposals. The Town had a documented procurement policy; however, the Town did not follow its policy for one of the two vendors that exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold. The vendor, paid $2,419,821, was chosen without obtaining sealed bids or proposals, nor was a formal contract entered into with the vendor. Furthermore, there was no documentation detailing the history of the procurement or the Town's justification for limiting competition. The lack of effective internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the one vendor noted above. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 15 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) 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 done by checking the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS), collecting a certification from that vendor, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that vendor. The Town's policies related to the SLFRF suspension and debarment requirements included a clause or condition added to covered transactions expected to equal or exceed $25,000 with that vendor. Three vendors were identified as having transactions that equaled or exceeded $25,000. All three vendors were selected for testing. The three vendors, with total expenditures of $4,333,484, were reviewed. For all three vendors, the Town did not have documented evidence that the clause was included in the contract with the vendor nor that any other methods were employed to verify the vendor was not suspended, debarred, or other excluded prior to entering into the transactions. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systematic 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 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.324(a) states: "The Non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals." 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: ". . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance awards exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. (i) In order for sealed bidding to be feasible, the following conditions should be present: (A) A complete, adequate, and realistic specification or purchase description is available; (B) Two or more responsible bidders are willing and able to compete effectively for the business; and (C) The procurement lends itself to a firm fixed price contract and the selection of the successful bidder can be made principally on the basis of price. (ii) If sealed bids are used, the following requirements apply: (A) Bids must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified sources, providing them sufficient response time prior to the date set for opening the bids, for local, and tribal governments, the invitation for bids must be publicly advertised; (B) The invitation for bids, which will include any specifications and pertinent attachments, must define the items or services in order for the bidder to properly respond; (C) All bids will be opened at the time and place prescribed in the invitation for bids, and for local and tribal governments, the bids must be opened publicly; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (D) A firm fixed price contract award will be made in writing to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Where specified in bidding documents, factors such as discounts, transportation cost, and life cycle costs must be considered in determining which bid is lowest. Payment discounts will only be used to determine the low bid when prior experience indicates that such discounts are usually taken advantage of; and (E) Any or all bids may be rejected if there is a sound documented reason. (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. They are awarded in accordance with the following requirements: (i) Requests for proposals must be publicized and identify all evaluation factors and their relative importance. Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified offerors. Any response to publicized requests for proposals must be considered to the maximum extent practical; (ii) The non-Federal entity must have a written method for conducting technical evaluations of the proposals received and making selections; (iii) Contracts must be awarded to the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the non-Federal entity, with price and other factors considered; and (iv) The non-Federal entity may use competitive proposal procedures for qualifications based procurement of architectural/engineering (A/E) professional services whereby offeror's qualifications are evaluated and the most qualified offeror is selected, subject to negotiation of fair and reasonable compensation. The method, where price is not used as a selection factor, can only be used in procurement of A/E professional services. It cannot be used to purchase other types of services though A/E firms that are a potential source to perform the proposed effort. (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 TOWN OF BROWNSBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 31 CFR 19.300 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 do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking the EPLS, or (b) Collecting a certification from that person if allowed by this rule, or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." Cause The Town did not adhere to its procurement policy as written. Instead, a vendor was selected based on factors other than solicited bids. In addition, the Town was unable to provide documentation to demonstrate they included a clause in contracts or otherwise verified contractors were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into the transaction as a direct result of the Town's policy not addressing those vendors not requiring a contract and not following the policy for those vendors who had a contract. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the Town cannot ensure goods and services were properly procured. As a result, one vendor paid did not have adequate documentation to support that the appropriate bid process was followed or that nonprocurement procedures were permissible. Furthermore, without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the Town cannot ensure the vendors paid with federal funds are eligible to participate in federal programs. Any program funds the Town used to pay vendors that have been suspended or debarred would be unallowable. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future funding to the Town. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommend that management of the Town establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure contractors and subrecipients, as appropriate, are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering contracts or subawards, and document reasons for vendors that are chosen without adhering to formal procurement methods. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
Assistance Listing Number, Federal Agency, and Program Name - 20.507 and 20.526, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Cluster, 20.509, Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit State Program: Program Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Program Federal Award Identification Number and Year - TX 2023 111, TX 2024 017, TX 2021 017, TX 2022 065, TX 2024 018, 5539 R 2022 HCTD 00027, TX 2020 031, 5311 2020 HCTD 00035, 5311 2022 HCTD 00096, 5311 2023 HCTD 00034 State Award Idenitification Number and Year:STATE U 2023 HCTD 00101, STATE U 2022 HCTD 00160, STATE U 2023 HCTD 00102, and STATE U 2022 HCTD 00159 Pass through Entity - Texas Department of Transportation Finding Type - Material weakness and material noncompliance with laws and regulations Repeat Finding - No Criteria - 2 CFR 200.320 and 200.324 outline the auditee responsibility to utilize the appropriate procurement method and comply with all related requirements of that selected procurement methodology. Also, 2 CFR 180.300 outlines the auditee responsibility related to suspension and debarment requirements for vendors with whom an entity contracts. Condition - HCTD did not have sufficient controls in place to ensure compliance with its procurement policy and that appropriate documentation is retained regarding the procurement methodology chosen and support for compliance with the suspension and debarment requirements. Questioned Costs - None Identification of How Questioned Costs Were Computed - N/A Context - Of the sample of 38 contracts procured this year that we selected for testing, 7 did not have the required support for the procurement method selected based on federal and state guidelines and HCTD's procurement policy, and none of the 3 contracts selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Cause and Effect - HCTD did not retain support to show it obtained price quotes, as required by the small purchases provision; had the appropriate rationale, as required by the noncompetitive solicitation provision; or had support for proposals submitted, as required by the purchases over $250,000 provision. Support was not retained for 7 of the 24 samples selected during procurement testing; therefore, procurement methodology was not supported. Additionally, none of the 3 samples selected for suspension and debarment testing had the required support retained. Recommendation - We recommend HCTD implement internal control procedures to ensure that procurement policy is followed and the proper documentation is kept in the procurement files to support any and all procurement decisions in accordance with the purchasing policy and federal and state regulations. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan - HCTD agrees with this finding and has begun implementing the corrective action as follows. Procurement support is currently provided to HCTD through a contract with Hendrickson Transportation Group. This contract began in January 2024. Under this contract, the Procurement Policies and Procedures Manual and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program are being updated, procurement forms will be created, and training for HCTD staff will be conducted.
2023-004 Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Prior Year Finding Number: N/A Year of Finding Origination: 2023 Type of Finding: Internal Control Over Compliance and Compliance Severity of Deficiency: Significant Deficiency and Other Matter Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Program: 21.027 COVID-19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Award Number and Year: SLFRP1274, 2021 Pass-Through Agency: N/A – Federal Direct Criteria: Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.303 states that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the auditee is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.318(i) states that the County 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. Additionally, the County must follow further federal guidance over full and open competition as provided in Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.319, and perform a cost or price analysis as provided in Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 200.324. Federal requirements prohibit non-federal entities from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations § 180.300 describes a required verification process. Prior to entering into the transaction, one of the following must be performed: (1) checking SAM.gov exclusions, (2) collecting a certification, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction. Condition: For two procurements tested above the micro-purchase threshold, documentation of the history of the procurement, providing full and open competition, and a cost or price analysis was not available. For the one covered transaction tested, the verification for suspended or debarred vendors was not performed before entering into the covered transaction. Questioned Costs: None. Context: Two of five contracts were tested for compliance with applicable federal regulations. Additionally, one covered transaction was subject to suspension and debarment. The sample size was based on guidance from Chapter 11 of the AICPA Audit Guide, Government Auditing Standards and Single Audits. Effect: It cannot be determined that the contracting process was open and fair because the County did not document the rationale for the contractor selection. It also cannot be determined that an entity was not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from conducting business with the County. Cause: The County did not maintain the necessary documentation to allow the auditor to test for procurement and suspension and debarment. Recommendation: We recommend the County maintain documentation on the history of a procurement, provide for full and open competition, and perform a cost or price analysis to support compliance with Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations §§ 200.318, 200.319, and 200.324. We further recommend the County maintain documentation to demonstrate that vendors were not debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from conducting business with the County; this documentation should be completed prior to entering into a covered transaction. View of Responsible Official: Concur
2023 – 003 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: U.S. Department Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP3738 11/30/2021 Award Period: March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024 Type of Finding: • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance • Other Matter Criteria or specific requirement: Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires non-federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.318, 2 CFR 200.319, 2 CFR 200.324, 2 CFR 180.220, and 2 CFR 200.320,) requires a non-federal entity to maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement, the providing of full and open competition, the performing of cost or price analysis, and prohibits the non-federal entity to contract or make subawards to parties that are suspended or debarred (covered transactions over $25,000). These records will include the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, the basis for the contract price, how full and open competition was provided, the cost or price analysis performed, and verification the vendor is not suspended or debarred through the SAMs exclusion list, collecting of certification from the entity, or by adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with the entity. Procurement methods used must be appropriate based on the dollar amount and conditions specified. Condition: Procurement methods for certain federal award purchases were not adequately documented or appropriately selected in accordance with the County’s procurement policy. In addition, the County did not maintain records the vendor was not suspended or debarred prior to entering into the transactions. Questioned costs: Unknown Context: 6 of 6 tested for procurement documentation and 6 of 6 tested for suspension and debarment documentation. Cause: With new federal funding opportunities due to the pandemic, and new guidance related to those grants, proper documentation was not retained. County policies have not been updated yet. Effect: May result in a disallowed cost if grant requirements are not followed. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. Prior year finding number was 2022-003. Recommendation: We recommend the County carefully review federal procurement requirements for proper documentation needed. The County should consider use of a Federal procurement checklist. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
2023 – 003 Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: U.S. Department Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRP3738 11/30/2021 Award Period: March 3, 2021 through December 31, 2024 Type of Finding: • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance • Other Matter Criteria or specific requirement: Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.303) requires non-federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal laws, regulations, and program compliance requirements. Uniform Grant Guidance (2 CFR 200.318, 2 CFR 200.319, 2 CFR 200.324, 2 CFR 180.220, and 2 CFR 200.320,) requires a non-federal entity to maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement, the providing of full and open competition, the performing of cost or price analysis, and prohibits the non-federal entity to contract or make subawards to parties that are suspended or debarred (covered transactions over $25,000). These records will include the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, the basis for the contract price, how full and open competition was provided, the cost or price analysis performed, and verification the vendor is not suspended or debarred through the SAMs exclusion list, collecting of certification from the entity, or by adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with the entity. Procurement methods used must be appropriate based on the dollar amount and conditions specified. Condition: Procurement methods for certain federal award purchases were not adequately documented or appropriately selected in accordance with the County’s procurement policy. In addition, the County did not maintain records the vendor was not suspended or debarred prior to entering into the transactions. Questioned costs: Unknown Context: 6 of 6 tested for procurement documentation and 6 of 6 tested for suspension and debarment documentation. Cause: With new federal funding opportunities due to the pandemic, and new guidance related to those grants, proper documentation was not retained. County policies have not been updated yet. Effect: May result in a disallowed cost if grant requirements are not followed. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. Prior year finding number was 2022-003. Recommendation: We recommend the County carefully review federal procurement requirements for proper documentation needed. The County should consider use of a Federal procurement checklist. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
The U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.318, of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) states that non-Federal entities must have and use its own documented procurement procedures which reflect State and local laws and regulations provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified within that section. The Code of Alabama 1975, Section 16-13B-1, requires boards of education to competitively bid the labor, services, work, or the purchase of materials, equipment, supplies, or other personal property involving forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) or more. In addition, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.320, of the Uniform Guidance states that non-Federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures and that when purchases are made that exceed the simplified acquisition threshold defined in the Uniform Guidance formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods include sealed bids, competitive proposals, and, in specific circumstances, noncompetitive proposals. Furthermore, the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200.324, of the Uniform Guidance states that the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold including contract modifications. The Mobile County Board of School Commissioners (the “Board”) entered into a contract for STEM classroom services for $572,265.00 using COVID-19 Education Stabilization Funds without obtaining bids in accordance with State of Alabama Bid Law or performing a cost or price analysis. The Board did not maintain adequate documentation for utilizing the noncompetitive procurement method. The Board did not follow their procurement policies, State Bid Laws, or the Uniform Guidance regarding this purchase. As a result, the Board did not comply with the Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. Recommendation: The Board should ensure compliance with the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) 2 CFR 200.318, CFR 200.320, and CFR 200.324 and the Code of Alabama 1975, 16-13B-1.
Reference Number: 2023-025 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services State Agency: Agency of Human Services Federal Program: COVID-19 - Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (STLT) Health Department Response to Public Health or Healthcare Crises Assistance Listing Number: 93.391 Award Number and Year: NH75OT000034 (6/1/2021 – 5/31/2024) Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: Per 2 CFR section 200.324(a), the non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Agency of Human Services (Agency) was unable to provide documentation that a cost analysis was performed for a procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. Context: For one of seven contracts selected for testing, the Agency was unable to provide documentation that a cost analysis was performed. Cause: The Agency’s procedures were not sufficient to ensure that a cost analysis was performed for all procurement actions in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold. Internal controls did not detect or prevent the error. Section III – Findings and Questioned Costs – Major Federal Programs (Continued) Effect: Failure to perform a cost analysis could result in the Agency procuring goods or services that are not cost-effective nor in the best interest of the Agency or the program. Questioned costs: Undetermined. Recommendation: We recommend the Agency review and enhance internal controls and procedures to ensure that it performs a cost analysis for all procurement actions in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, including contract modifications. We further recommend that cost analysis documentation is maintained and readily available for audit. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding 2023-004 – Material Weakness AL No: 20.507 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Transit Formula Grants - Direct Award. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The District was unable to provide documentation that the procurement of the CNG tank replacement project for five Orion buses exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold of $250,000 was approved by the Board. There is documentation that an invitation for bid (IFB) was released for the project, but only one bid was received and the District awarded the contract to the sole bidder. Missing documentation includes support of the rationale to approve the contract absent evidence of full and open competition. The District was also not able to provide the request for proposal for review. Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart E (Uniform Guidance) states the following: Section 200.318(a) states that “The non-federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or service required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in Sections 200.317 through 200.327.” Section 200.318(i) 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.” Section 200.320(c) states that “There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold…; (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the retirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non- Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate.” Section 200.324(a) states that “The non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals.” Cause: Staff turnover at the District and the need for the project to be completed by a certain date to avoid the buses losing certification led to the lack of adequate records being maintained. Effect: The District was unable to prove it was in compliance with the Uniform Guidance regarding open competition on procurements. Context: The CNG tank replacement needed to be completed by a certain timeframe in order for the buses to be operational, so not every step was documented. The awarded contract was signed on the date of a Board meeting, but the Board minutes did not document that this contract was reviewed nor approved by the Board. Recommendation: We recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolders for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals, proposals received, analysis of reasons for selecting the winning bid, executed contract, certifications by contractor if not part of proposal or executed contract, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. We also recommend training be provided to staff that work on procurements of the requirements under Uniform Guidance Section 2 CFR 200.318 to 200.326. View of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included at the Corrective Action Plan end of this report.
2 CFR § 400.1 gives regulatory effect for the U.S. Department of Agriculture to the OMB guidance in 2 CFR § 200. 2 CFR § 200.317 - 200.327 requires entities to 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. A non-Federal entity must: 1. Meet the general procurement standards in 2 CFR 200.318, which include oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to responsible contractors, and maintaining records to document history of procurements. 2. Conduct all procurement transactions in a manner providing full and open competition, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.319. 3. Use the micro-purchase and small purchase methods only for procurements that meet the applicable criteria under 2 CFR 200.320(a)(1) and (2). Under the micro-purchase method, the aggregate dollar amount does not exceed $10,000 ($2,000 in the case of acquisition for construction subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (Davis-Bacon Act)). Small purchase procedures are used for purchases that exceed the micro-purchase amount but do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold ($250,000). Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive quotations if the non-Federal entity considers the price to be reasonable (2 CFR 200.320(a)). If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources (2 CFR 200.320(b)). 4. For acquisitions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the non-Federal 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); 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 four circumstances are met, in accordance with 2 CFR 200.320(c). 5. Perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold, including contract modifications (2 CFR 200.324(a)). The cost plus a percentage of cost and percentage of construction cost methods of contracting must not be used (2 CFR 200.324(d)). 6. Ensure that every purchase order or other contract includes applicable provisions required by 2 CFR 200.326. These provisions are described in Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, “Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards.” The School District paid more than $250,000 to Valley Wholesale during fiscal year 2023 for food products for the Child Nutrition Cluster. This amount exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold thus the District should follow a formal competitive procurement method described in 2 CFR 200.320(b). However, the School District did not follow a formal procurement method because they chose to use this local vendor (Valley Wholesale) to allow them to get their fresh produce in a timely manner to avoid food waste. The School District did not have the proper internal controls in place to ensure proper bidding procedures were followed. Failure to have the appropriate controls in place may result in vendors being used that are not providing the best possible prices. The School District should follow their established procurement policies and federal guidelines when choosing all vendors for the Child Nutrition Cluster.