Finding Reference 2024-03 Assistance Listing Number 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction (Federal-Aid Highway Program) Name of Federal Agency Department of Transportation Compliance Requirement Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency on Internal Control and Noncompliance Condition: From a sample of twenty-five payroll periods of construction projects examined, we noticed the following: 1) For one construction project, the contractor's payroll for the week of July 3, 2023, through July 9, 2023, was certified on July 27, 2023, exceeding the weekly certification requirement outlined in the Uniform Guidance. 2) For one construction project, the subcontractor's payroll for the week of July 3, 2023, through July 9, 2023, was certified on August 4, 2023, exceeding the weekly certification requirement outlined in the Uniform Guidance. 3) For one construction project, the contractor’s payroll for the week of November 13, 2023, through November 19, 2023, was certified on November 27, 2023, exceeding the weekly certification requirement outlined in the Uniform Guidance. 4) For one construction project, the contractor’s payroll for the week of June 24, 2024, through June 30, 2024, was certified on July 17, 2024, exceeding the weekly certification requirement outlined in the Uniform Guidance. This is a repeat finding from prior year 2023. Although this finding was originally not reported in the 2023 Single Audit Report, during the current audit, we became aware that this issue also involved 2023. Therefore, the 2023 Single Audit Report is in the process of being reissued. In the reissued 2023 Single Audit Report, the finding will be identified as No. 2023-05. Criteria: In accordance with the 2024 Compliance Supplement: Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Cause: The delays in the certification of payroll weeks are due to several factors, including: Inefficient payroll processing procedures within the contractor or subcontractor's system. Lack of oversight and monitoring by the Authority to ensure timely certification of payrolls. Miscommunication between the contractor, subcontractor, and the Authority regarding certification deadlines. Effect: The failure to certify payrolls on a weekly basis as required by federal regulations can lead to noncompliance with federal regulations, specifically the Davis-Bacon Act and related Department of Labor (DOL) regulations and increased risk of wage underpayments or miscalculations, which may result in financial liabilities for the entity. Questioned Costs: None Recommendation: To address the identified issues, the following corrective actions are recommended: Implement a Payroll Monitoring System: Establish automated tracking mechanisms to ensure payrolls are certified and submitted within the required weekly timeframe. Enhance Oversight and Compliance Reviews: Designate a compliance officer or team responsible for verifying that certified payrolls are submitted on time. Perform regular internal audits to identify and correct compliance issues promptly. Provide Training for Contractors and Subcontractors: Conduct mandatory training sessions on Davis- Bacon Act requirements and payroll certification processes. Ensure all responsible staff understand the federal regulations governing wage rate compliance. Improve Communication Between Stakeholders: Establish clear communication channels between contractors, subcontractors, and the Authority. Require periodic status updates to ensure timely payroll submission. Views of Responsible Officials Refer to Management’s unaudited corrective action plan.
2024-004 Program: Highway Planning and Construction Financial Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-through: California Department of Transportation Award Year: Multiple Grant Award Number: Multiple Compliance Requirements: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147. Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). 2 CFR 200.303, the 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. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the receipt and review of certified payrolls. Condition: We noted for eight (8) out of eight (8) certified payrolls selected for testing, the City did not document their review and approval of certified payroll submission. In addition, for two (2) out of eight (8) weeks of certified payroll selected for testing, we noted the contractor or subcontractor did not submit the certified payroll in a timely manner. Cause: The City’s procedures did not include documenting the review of the certified payroll received. In addition, the City did not have the necessary internal controls in place to ensure the contractor’s and subcontractor’s timely submittal of certified payroll. Effect: Ineffective procedures over this area of compliance could result in noncompliance with the wage rate compliance requirements. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was used. We selected eight (8) of twenty-one (21) certified payrolls for testing. Repeat Finding from the Prior Year(s): No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen its internal controls to ensure that timely reviews of certified payroll submissions are being performed by the City. This could include performing procedures to ensure that information being provided to the City by its consultant project managers is accurate and that the required certified payroll is being submitted by contractors and subcontractors in a timely manner. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions The City concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
2024-004 Program: Highway Planning and Construction Financial Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-through: California Department of Transportation Award Year: Multiple Grant Award Number: Multiple Compliance Requirements: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147. Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). 2 CFR 200.303, the 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. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the receipt and review of certified payrolls. Condition: We noted for eight (8) out of eight (8) certified payrolls selected for testing, the City did not document their review and approval of certified payroll submission. In addition, for two (2) out of eight (8) weeks of certified payroll selected for testing, we noted the contractor or subcontractor did not submit the certified payroll in a timely manner. Cause: The City’s procedures did not include documenting the review of the certified payroll received. In addition, the City did not have the necessary internal controls in place to ensure the contractor’s and subcontractor’s timely submittal of certified payroll. Effect: Ineffective procedures over this area of compliance could result in noncompliance with the wage rate compliance requirements. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was used. We selected eight (8) of twenty-one (21) certified payrolls for testing. Repeat Finding from the Prior Year(s): No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen its internal controls to ensure that timely reviews of certified payroll submissions are being performed by the City. This could include performing procedures to ensure that information being provided to the City by its consultant project managers is accurate and that the required certified payroll is being submitted by contractors and subcontractors in a timely manner. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions The City concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
2024-004 Program: Highway Planning and Construction Financial Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-through: California Department of Transportation Award Year: Multiple Grant Award Number: Multiple Compliance Requirements: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147. Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). 2 CFR 200.303, the 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. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the receipt and review of certified payrolls. Condition: We noted for eight (8) out of eight (8) certified payrolls selected for testing, the City did not document their review and approval of certified payroll submission. In addition, for two (2) out of eight (8) weeks of certified payroll selected for testing, we noted the contractor or subcontractor did not submit the certified payroll in a timely manner. Cause: The City’s procedures did not include documenting the review of the certified payroll received. In addition, the City did not have the necessary internal controls in place to ensure the contractor’s and subcontractor’s timely submittal of certified payroll. Effect: Ineffective procedures over this area of compliance could result in noncompliance with the wage rate compliance requirements. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was used. We selected eight (8) of twenty-one (21) certified payrolls for testing. Repeat Finding from the Prior Year(s): No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen its internal controls to ensure that timely reviews of certified payroll submissions are being performed by the City. This could include performing procedures to ensure that information being provided to the City by its consultant project managers is accurate and that the required certified payroll is being submitted by contractors and subcontractors in a timely manner. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions The City concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
2024-004 Program: Highway Planning and Construction Financial Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-through: California Department of Transportation Award Year: Multiple Grant Award Number: Multiple Compliance Requirements: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147. Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). 2 CFR 200.303, the 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. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the receipt and review of certified payrolls. Condition: We noted for eight (8) out of eight (8) certified payrolls selected for testing, the City did not document their review and approval of certified payroll submission. In addition, for two (2) out of eight (8) weeks of certified payroll selected for testing, we noted the contractor or subcontractor did not submit the certified payroll in a timely manner. Cause: The City’s procedures did not include documenting the review of the certified payroll received. In addition, the City did not have the necessary internal controls in place to ensure the contractor’s and subcontractor’s timely submittal of certified payroll. Effect: Ineffective procedures over this area of compliance could result in noncompliance with the wage rate compliance requirements. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was used. We selected eight (8) of twenty-one (21) certified payrolls for testing. Repeat Finding from the Prior Year(s): No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen its internal controls to ensure that timely reviews of certified payroll submissions are being performed by the City. This could include performing procedures to ensure that information being provided to the City by its consultant project managers is accurate and that the required certified payroll is being submitted by contractors and subcontractors in a timely manner. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions The City concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
2024-004 Program: Highway Planning and Construction Financial Assistance Listing Number: 20.205 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-through: California Department of Transportation Award Year: Multiple Grant Award Number: Multiple Compliance Requirements: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147. Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). 2 CFR 200.303, the 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. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the receipt and review of certified payrolls. Condition: We noted for eight (8) out of eight (8) certified payrolls selected for testing, the City did not document their review and approval of certified payroll submission. In addition, for two (2) out of eight (8) weeks of certified payroll selected for testing, we noted the contractor or subcontractor did not submit the certified payroll in a timely manner. Cause: The City’s procedures did not include documenting the review of the certified payroll received. In addition, the City did not have the necessary internal controls in place to ensure the contractor’s and subcontractor’s timely submittal of certified payroll. Effect: Ineffective procedures over this area of compliance could result in noncompliance with the wage rate compliance requirements. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was used. We selected eight (8) of twenty-one (21) certified payrolls for testing. Repeat Finding from the Prior Year(s): No. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen its internal controls to ensure that timely reviews of certified payroll submissions are being performed by the City. This could include performing procedures to ensure that information being provided to the City by its consultant project managers is accurate and that the required certified payroll is being submitted by contractors and subcontractors in a timely manner. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions The City concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
2024-003 Program: Nationally Significant Freight and Highway Projects Financial Assistance Listing Number: 20.934 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-through: California Department of Transportation Award Year: Multiple Grant Award Number: Multiple Compliance Requirements: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Material Instance of Noncompliance Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) 40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147. Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326. 2 CFR 200.303, the 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. This includes internal controls over maintaining records of the receipt and review of certified payrolls. Condition: In March 2024, the City implemented procedural changes to their certified payroll review process. Until February 2024, the City did not retain evidence to document the individual who reviewed the certified payroll for each week in which work was performed by construction contractors and subcontractors. Due to backlog, the City was not able to catch up on certifications until August 2024 which was after the fiscal year had ended. For fifty-four (54) of sixty (60) weeks of certified payroll submissions selected for testing, we noted that the City did not review the contractors’ submissions of certified payroll in a timely manner. For six (6) out of sixty (60) weeks of certified payroll submissions selected, we noted that a statement of non-performance was submitted. However, the tracking spreadsheet provided to the City by its 3rd party project manager indicated that work had been performed. For nineteen (19) out of sixty (60) weeks of certified payroll submissions selected, we noted that the contractor or subcontractor had not submitted the weekly certified payroll in a timely manner. The contractor had submitted their certified payroll several weeks after the week of work performed. Cause: The City’s procedures did not include documenting the review of the certified payroll received. In addition, the City did not have the necessary internal controls in place to ensure the accuracy of the tracking of work weeks being performed as well as the contractor’s and subcontractor’s timely submittal of certified payroll. Effect: Ineffective controls over this area of compliance could result in noncompliance with the wage rate compliance requirements. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was used. We selected sixty (60) out of all weeks indicated as work weeks for the City’s project for testing. However, due to the condition noted above, the population of work weeks could not be verified. Repeat Finding from the Prior Year(s): Yes, 2023-003. Recommendation: We recommend that the City strengthen its internal controls to ensure that timely reviews of certified payroll submissions are being performed by the City. This could include performing procedures to ensure that information being provided to the City by its consultant project managers is accurate and that the required certified payroll is being submitted by contractors and subcontractors in a timely manner. View of Responsible Official and Planned Corrective Actions The City concurs with the finding. See separate corrective action plan.
WIC Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children Assistance Listing No. 10.557 U.S. Department of Agriculture Criteria or Specific Requirement – Procurement (45 CFR 200.318-200.326) Condition - The Health System, prior to fiscal year 2025, did not have a comprehensive procurement policy that is in line with Uniform Guidance requirements. In addition, the Health System entered into various professional services contracts for marketing, advertising, and information dissemination that do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold and are considered micro-purchases, but did not maintain appropriate documentation to document the price reasonableness based on research, experience, and purchase history to support its procurement decisions. Questioned Costs - None Context - We tested one out of a total of four contracts that were considered micro-purchases. The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our testing of procurement requirements, the two vendor contracts tested over the micro-purchase threshold did not have appropriate documentation to evidence the basis of vendor selection (documentation of the price reasonableness based on research, experience, and purchase history). Effect - Micro-purchases were made without appropriate documentation to comply with Uniform Guidance requirements. Cause - The Health System did not have a comprehensive procurement policy that is in line with Uniform Guidance requirements. Adequate supporting documentation on the procurements were not obtained or maintained within vendor files and vendor contracts do not contain the necessary contract provision and language required by the Uniform Guidance. Repeat Finding - Yes Recommendation - We recommend the Health System revisit controls over this compliance requirement to ensure that appropriate documentation is gathered and retained within its procurement files to support all Federally funded purchasing decisions. We also recommend the Organization perform a comprehensive review of its procurement policy and ensure that it is in compliance and in-line with the procurement requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – The Organization has developed and implemented a policy and checklist to maintain written documentation of vendor selection and procurement process, along with the review and approval process required under the Uniform Guidance requirements.
Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria Procurement Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow specific procurement standards set out in 2 CFR sections 200.317 through 200.327, which includes documenting the procurement methods used for vendor selection. These procedures are designed to ensure fair competition, cost-effectiveness, and federal requirements. These procurement standards require, among other provisions, that a non-federal entity must: 1. Meet the general procurement standards in 2 CFR Section 200.318, which include oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to reliable contractors, and maintaining records to document the history of procurement. 2. Conduct all procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services under a federal award in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of 2 CFR section 200.320. 3. Use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of 2 CFR 200.317 to 320. 2 CFR 200.320 enumerates below the different procurement methods that a non-federal entity should use: a) The micro-purchase and small purchase methods only for procurements that meet the applicable criteria under 2 CFR sections 200.320(a) (1) and (2). Under the micro-purchase method, the aggregate dollar amount does not exceed $50,000. b) Small purchase procedures are used for purchases that exceed the micro-purchase amount but do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. c) Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive quotations if the non-federal entity considers the price to be reasonable (2 CFR section 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 section 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 section 200.320(b) (1); the competitive proposals method under the conditions specified in 2 CFR section 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 section 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 section 200.323(a)). The cost plus a percentage of cost and percentage of construction cost methods of contracting must not be used (2 CFR section 200.323(b)). 6. Ensure that every purchase order or other contract includes applicable provisions required by 2 CFR section 200.326. These provisions are described in Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, “Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards.” Suspension and Debarment 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 During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide purchase order documentation or contract for eight samples that are above $500. Per current procurement policy, “Purchases of supplies, services, and equipment costing more than five hundred ($500) shall be made by purchase order, unless authorized by a signed contract or Mountain Transit Board Approval”. During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide supporting documentation to demonstrate that the required price or rate quotations for those purchases or contracts with contract amounts above $10,000 were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources and maintained the documentation to support its conclusion. These were noted for two samples tested. The expenditure paid ranged from $10,000 to $36,000 in 2024. During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide supporting documentation to demonstrate that the process of verifying if vendors are not suspended or debarred was performed on two vendors tested. The expenditure paid to these vendors ranged from $109,000 to $647,000 in 2024. Cause MARTA did not follow its existing purchasing policy and procedures, and lack of procedures in maintaining appropriate records of vendor selection and compliance with procurement standards. Effect The absence of procurement documentation raises the risk of non-compliance with federal regulations, which could lead to potential disallowances or unnecessary sanctions. Questioned Costs None Recommendation MARTA should strengthen its internal controls over procurement by ensuring that all procurement activities, particularly significant expenditures, are properly documented. This includes retaining evidence that procurement methods required by the Uniform Guidance were followed, such as bids, contracts, or justifications for sole-source vendors. MARTA should also conduct training for staff involved in procurement to ensure awareness and adherence to the policies. Regular internal audits may be implemented to verify compliance with procurement procedures. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action MARTA is in the process of updating the Procurement Policy. MARTA will ensure that updated policies and procedures will be implemented to address compliance and documentation requirements for small and micro-purchases, sole-source, and informal processes. The updated Procurement Policy will be brought to the October 2025 Board of Directors meeting for Board review or approval. Personnel responsible: Sandy Benson, General Manager Anticipated completion date: October 2025
Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria Procurement Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow specific procurement standards set out in 2 CFR sections 200.317 through 200.327, which includes documenting the procurement methods used for vendor selection. These procedures are designed to ensure fair competition, cost-effectiveness, and federal requirements. These procurement standards require, among other provisions, that a non-federal entity must: 1. Meet the general procurement standards in 2 CFR Section 200.318, which include oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to reliable contractors, and maintaining records to document the history of procurement. 2. Conduct all procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services under a federal award in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of 2 CFR section 200.320. 3. Use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of 2 CFR 200.317 to 320. 2 CFR 200.320 enumerates below the different procurement methods that a non-federal entity should use: a) The micro-purchase and small purchase methods only for procurements that meet the applicable criteria under 2 CFR sections 200.320(a) (1) and (2). Under the micro-purchase method, the aggregate dollar amount does not exceed $50,000. b) Small purchase procedures are used for purchases that exceed the micro-purchase amount but do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. c) Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive quotations if the non-federal entity considers the price to be reasonable (2 CFR section 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 section 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 section 200.320(b) (1); the competitive proposals method under the conditions specified in 2 CFR section 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 section 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 section 200.323(a)). The cost plus a percentage of cost and percentage of construction cost methods of contracting must not be used (2 CFR section 200.323(b)). 6. Ensure that every purchase order or other contract includes applicable provisions required by 2 CFR section 200.326. These provisions are described in Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, “Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards.” Suspension and Debarment 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 During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide purchase order documentation or contract for eight samples that are above $500. Per current procurement policy, “Purchases of supplies, services, and equipment costing more than five hundred ($500) shall be made by purchase order, unless authorized by a signed contract or Mountain Transit Board Approval”. During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide supporting documentation to demonstrate that the required price or rate quotations for those purchases or contracts with contract amounts above $10,000 were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources and maintained the documentation to support its conclusion. These were noted for two samples tested. The expenditure paid ranged from $10,000 to $36,000 in 2024. During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide supporting documentation to demonstrate that the process of verifying if vendors are not suspended or debarred was performed on two vendors tested. The expenditure paid to these vendors ranged from $109,000 to $647,000 in 2024. Cause MARTA did not follow its existing purchasing policy and procedures, and lack of procedures in maintaining appropriate records of vendor selection and compliance with procurement standards. Effect The absence of procurement documentation raises the risk of non-compliance with federal regulations, which could lead to potential disallowances or unnecessary sanctions. Questioned Costs None Recommendation MARTA should strengthen its internal controls over procurement by ensuring that all procurement activities, particularly significant expenditures, are properly documented. This includes retaining evidence that procurement methods required by the Uniform Guidance were followed, such as bids, contracts, or justifications for sole-source vendors. MARTA should also conduct training for staff involved in procurement to ensure awareness and adherence to the policies. Regular internal audits may be implemented to verify compliance with procurement procedures. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action MARTA is in the process of updating the Procurement Policy. MARTA will ensure that updated policies and procedures will be implemented to address compliance and documentation requirements for small and micro-purchases, sole-source, and informal processes. The updated Procurement Policy will be brought to the October 2025 Board of Directors meeting for Board review or approval. Personnel responsible: Sandy Benson, General Manager Anticipated completion date: October 2025
Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria Procurement Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow specific procurement standards set out in 2 CFR sections 200.317 through 200.327, which includes documenting the procurement methods used for vendor selection. These procedures are designed to ensure fair competition, cost-effectiveness, and federal requirements. These procurement standards require, among other provisions, that a non-federal entity must: 1. Meet the general procurement standards in 2 CFR Section 200.318, which include oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to reliable contractors, and maintaining records to document the history of procurement. 2. Conduct all procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services under a federal award in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of 2 CFR section 200.320. 3. Use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of 2 CFR 200.317 to 320. 2 CFR 200.320 enumerates below the different procurement methods that a non-federal entity should use: a) The micro-purchase and small purchase methods only for procurements that meet the applicable criteria under 2 CFR sections 200.320(a) (1) and (2). Under the micro-purchase method, the aggregate dollar amount does not exceed $50,000. b) Small purchase procedures are used for purchases that exceed the micro-purchase amount but do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. The non-Federal entity is responsible for determining an appropriate simplified acquisition threshold based on internal controls, an evaluation of risk and its documented procurement procedures which must not exceed the threshold established in the FAR. When applicable, a lower simplified acquisition threshold used by the non-Federal entity must be authorized or not prohibited under State, local, or tribal laws or regulations. c) Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive quotations if the non-federal entity considers the price to be reasonable (2 CFR section 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 section 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 section 200.320(b) (1); the competitive proposals method under the conditions specified in 2 CFR section 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 section 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 section 200.323(a)). The cost plus a percentage of cost and percentage of construction cost methods of contracting must not be used (2 CFR section 200.323(b)). 6. Ensure that every purchase order or other contract includes applicable provisions required by 2 CFR section 200.326. These provisions are described in Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200, “Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards.” Suspension and Debarment 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 During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide purchase order documentation or contract for eight samples that are above $500. Per current procurement policy, “Purchases of supplies, services, and equipment costing more than five hundred ($500) shall be made by purchase order, unless authorized by a signed contract or Mountain Transit Board Approval”. During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide supporting documentation to demonstrate that the required price or rate quotations for those purchases or contracts with contract amounts above $10,000 were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources and maintained the documentation to support its conclusion. These were noted for two samples tested. The expenditure paid ranged from $10,000 to $36,000 in 2024. During our audit, MARTA was unable to provide supporting documentation to demonstrate that the process of verifying if vendors are not suspended or debarred was performed on two vendors tested. The expenditure paid to these vendors ranged from $109,000 to $647,000 in 2024. Cause MARTA did not follow its existing purchasing policy and procedures, and lack of procedures in maintaining appropriate records of vendor selection and compliance with procurement standards. Effect The absence of procurement documentation raises the risk of non-compliance with federal regulations, which could lead to potential disallowances or unnecessary sanctions. Questioned Costs None Recommendation MARTA should strengthen its internal controls over procurement by ensuring that all procurement activities, particularly significant expenditures, are properly documented. This includes retaining evidence that procurement methods required by the Uniform Guidance were followed, such as bids, contracts, or justifications for sole-source vendors. MARTA should also conduct training for staff involved in procurement to ensure awareness and adherence to the policies. Regular internal audits may be implemented to verify compliance with procurement procedures. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action MARTA is in the process of updating the Procurement Policy. MARTA will ensure that updated policies and procedures will be implemented to address compliance and documentation requirements for small and micro-purchases, sole-source, and informal processes. The updated Procurement Policy will be brought to the October 2025 Board of Directors meeting for Board review or approval. Personnel responsible: Sandy Benson, General Manager Anticipated completion date: October 2025
2024 – 002 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Justice Federal Program Title: Crime Victim Assistance Federal Assistance Listing Number: 16.575 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 15POVC23GG00443ASSI-2024 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Office of Justice Programs Pass-Through Number(s): A-CVS-2024-AMS-077 Award Period: 10/01/2023 to 09/30/2025 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Major Federal Programs and Other Matters Criteria or Specific Requirement: Nonfederal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Condition: The Organization did not have a written procurement policy in accordance with Uniform Guidance for a portion of the year. In addition, during our testing, we noted the Organization did not apply the proper procurement procedures for two vendors as they did not perform appropriate procedures nor retain adequate documentation in accordance with Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs: Unknown Context: Two out of the two procurement selections did not have procurement procedures followed. Cause: Vendors were procured prior to the implementation of a formal procurement policy; therefore, proper documentation was not retained as of the procurement date. Effect: Potential effect of noncompliance with Uniform Guidance when procuring goods and services for expenditures over federal awards. Repeat Finding: This is a repeat finding. Recommendation: The Organization should continue to apply its current procurement policy to new and existing vendors to ensure proper documentation is retained in accordance with said procurement policy and SA UG. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The Organization will apply its current procurement policy to new and existing vendors in order to comply with applicable procurement requirements.
Condition: The Organization’s written policies and procedures related to financial management and procurement do not meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200, Subpart D and Subpart E. Criteria: According to 2 CFR Section 200.302.b and 2 CFR Section 200.305 of the Uniform Guidance, the Organization is required to have a written financial management policy. Additionally, according to 2 CFR Section 200.317 – 200.326, the Organization is required to have a written procurement policy. Cause: The Organization was unaware of requirements regarding policies and procedures outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Effect: Written policies necessary for non-Federal entities receiving federal funds were not in place. Repeat Finding: Yes Questioned Costs: None reported Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update their written policies and procedures that meet the requirements of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: We concur with the auditor’s finding and will update the Organization’s written policies and procedures for the Uniform Guidance requirements.
Condition: The Organization did not have documentation related to the suspension and debarment testing performed on vendors. Criteria: According to 2 CFR Section 200.318 and 2 CFR Section 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance, non-federal entities other than states must follow procurement standards when operating federal programs and the procurement procedures required depend on the amount of the transaction. Cause: The Organization was in the process of implementing the draft procurement policy as of June 30, 2024. The policy is properly designed and follows the Uniform Guidance. However, the policy was not implemented during the period under audit. Effect: There was an increased risk that the Organization was contracting and awarding contracts to suspended or debarred vendors.. Repeat Finding: No Questioned Costs: None reported Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a process to perform suspension and debarment testing as required by their procurement policy, and that as part of this process they maintain adequate supporting documentation and records to document suspension and debarment and the procedures performed to comply with the applicable CFR sections. This could include the use of standard forms and templates for suspension and debarment testing. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: We concur with the auditor’s finding and will develop an updated procurement policy that includes maintaining adequate supporting documentation and records regarding suspension and debarment procedures performed.
Condition: The Organization’s written policies and procedures related to financial management and procurement do not meet the requirements of 2 CFR 200, Subpart D and Subpart E. Criteria: According to 2 CFR Section 200.302.b and 2 CFR Section 200.305 of the Uniform Guidance, the Organization is required to have a written financial management policy. Additionally, according to 2 CFR Section 200.317 – 200.326, the Organization is required to have a written procurement policy. Cause: The Organization was unaware of requirements regarding policies and procedures outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Effect: Written policies necessary for non-Federal entities receiving federal funds were not in place. Repeat Finding: Yes Questioned Costs: None reported Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update their written policies and procedures that meet the requirements of the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: We concur with the auditor’s finding and will update the Organization’s written policies and procedures for the Uniform Guidance requirements.
Condition: The Organization did not have documentation related to the suspension and debarment testing performed on vendors. Criteria: According to 2 CFR Section 200.318 and 2 CFR Section 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance, non-federal entities other than states must follow procurement standards when operating federal programs and the procurement procedures required depend on the amount of the transaction. Cause: The Organization was in the process of implementing the draft procurement policy as of June 30, 2024. The policy is properly designed and follows the Uniform Guidance. However, the policy was not implemented during the period under audit. Effect: There was an increased risk that the Organization was contracting and awarding contracts to suspended or debarred vendors.. Repeat Finding: No Questioned Costs: None reported Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization implement a process to perform suspension and debarment testing as required by their procurement policy, and that as part of this process they maintain adequate supporting documentation and records to document suspension and debarment and the procedures performed to comply with the applicable CFR sections. This could include the use of standard forms and templates for suspension and debarment testing. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: We concur with the auditor’s finding and will develop an updated procurement policy that includes maintaining adequate supporting documentation and records regarding suspension and debarment procedures performed.
2 CFR § 3474.1 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Education for 2 CFR part 200 of the Uniform Guidance. 2 CFR §§ 200.318 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance outline procurement requirements for all non-payroll direct expenditures. Entities expending federal monies are required to follow Uniform Guidance procurement standards. 2 CFR 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. The School District considered the contracts with Educational Service Centers to be noncompetitive procurements; however, the School District was unable to provide documentation that they met the criteria established in 2 CFR 200.320(c) to be considered as such. Due to a lack of internal controls over federal procurement documentation, the District did not properly maintain required supporting documentation. Failure to follow federal procurement standards, may result in the misuse of public funds, loss of "low risk auditee" status, increased audit expenses, loss of future federal awards, findings for recovery or other audit adjustments. The School District should review and follow the established Procurement policy to ensure proper procurement procedures are followed and sufficiently documented.
2 CFR § 3474.1 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Education for 2 CFR part 200 of the Uniform Guidance. 2 CFR §§ 200.318 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance outline procurement requirements for all non-payroll direct expenditures. Entities expending federal monies are required to follow Uniform Guidance procurement standards. 2 CFR 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. The School District considered the contracts with Educational Service Centers to be noncompetitive procurements; however, the School District was unable to provide documentation that they met the criteria established in 2 CFR 200.320(c) to be considered as such. Due to a lack of internal controls over federal procurement documentation, the District did not properly maintain required supporting documentation. Failure to follow federal procurement standards, may result in the misuse of public funds, loss of "low risk auditee" status, increased audit expenses, loss of future federal awards, findings for recovery or other audit adjustments. The School District should review and follow the established Procurement policy to ensure proper procurement procedures are followed and sufficiently documented.
2 CFR § 3474.1 gives regulatory effect to the Department of Education for 2 CFR part 200 of the Uniform Guidance. 2 CFR §§ 200.318 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance outline procurement requirements for all non-payroll direct expenditures. Entities expending federal monies are required to follow Uniform Guidance procurement standards. 2 CFR 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. The School District considered the contracts with Educational Service Centers to be noncompetitive procurements; however, the School District was unable to provide documentation that they met the criteria established in 2 CFR 200.320(c) to be considered as such. Due to a lack of internal controls over federal procurement documentation, the District did not properly maintain required supporting documentation. Failure to follow federal procurement standards, may result in the misuse of public funds, loss of "low risk auditee" status, increased audit expenses, loss of future federal awards, findings for recovery or other audit adjustments. The School District should review and follow the established Procurement policy to ensure proper procurement procedures are followed and sufficiently documented.
2024-003 Wage Rate Compliance CFDA Title: Education Stabilization Fund CFDA Number: 84.425 Federal Award Number and Year: 2021 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-through Entity: Montana Office of Public Instruction Condition: The District did not comply with the wage rate compliance related to construction using Education Stabilization Fund (ESSER) Grant monies. Context: During the testing of significant claims for the ESSER major programs related to construction, we noted claims in which there should be contracts in place and that the wage rate requirements would apply. Criteria: Section 7007 construction funds, as well as any Section 7002 or 7003(b) funds spent for construction or minor remodeling, are subject to Wage Rate Requirements (20 USC 1232b). Compliance Requirement – All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by Federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147). Non-federal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the non-Federal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR part 176, subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Effect: Noncompliance with the Wage Rate Requirement for construction paid for out of the ESSER Grants. Cause: The District was not aware of the requirement. Recommendation: The District should implement internal controls to determine the federal compliance requirements of all federal funds received. In addition, procedures should be implemented to ensure any federal funds received in which the Wage Rate Requirement is required the following are implemented: 1. Any construction vendor is by contract, and that contract includes the Prevailing Wage clauses for the contractors and subcontractors. 2. The weekly certified payrolls are submitted to the District.
2024-003 Wage Rate Compliance CFDA Title: Education Stabilization Fund CFDA Number: 84.425 Federal Award Number and Year: 2021 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-through Entity: Montana Office of Public Instruction Condition: The District did not comply with the wage rate compliance related to construction using Education Stabilization Fund (ESSER) Grant monies. Context: During the testing of significant claims for the ESSER major programs related to construction, we noted claims in which there should be contracts in place and that the wage rate requirements would apply. Criteria: Section 7007 construction funds, as well as any Section 7002 or 7003(b) funds spent for construction or minor remodeling, are subject to Wage Rate Requirements (20 USC 1232b). Compliance Requirement – All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by Federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147). Non-federal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the non-Federal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR part 176, subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Effect: Noncompliance with the Wage Rate Requirement for construction paid for out of the ESSER Grants. Cause: The District was not aware of the requirement. Recommendation: The District should implement internal controls to determine the federal compliance requirements of all federal funds received. In addition, procedures should be implemented to ensure any federal funds received in which the Wage Rate Requirement is required the following are implemented: 1. Any construction vendor is by contract, and that contract includes the Prevailing Wage clauses for the contractors and subcontractors. 2. The weekly certified payrolls are submitted to the District.
2024-003 Wage Rate Compliance CFDA Title: Education Stabilization Fund CFDA Number: 84.425 Federal Award Number and Year: 2021 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-through Entity: Montana Office of Public Instruction Condition: The District did not comply with the wage rate compliance related to construction using Education Stabilization Fund (ESSER) Grant monies. Context: During the testing of significant claims for the ESSER major programs related to construction, we noted claims in which there should be contracts in place and that the wage rate requirements would apply. Criteria: Section 7007 construction funds, as well as any Section 7002 or 7003(b) funds spent for construction or minor remodeling, are subject to Wage Rate Requirements (20 USC 1232b). Compliance Requirement – All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by Federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147). Non-federal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the non-Federal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR part 176, subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Effect: Noncompliance with the Wage Rate Requirement for construction paid for out of the ESSER Grants. Cause: The District was not aware of the requirement. Recommendation: The District should implement internal controls to determine the federal compliance requirements of all federal funds received. In addition, procedures should be implemented to ensure any federal funds received in which the Wage Rate Requirement is required the following are implemented: 1. Any construction vendor is by contract, and that contract includes the Prevailing Wage clauses for the contractors and subcontractors. 2. The weekly certified payrolls are submitted to the District.
2024-003 Wage Rate Compliance CFDA Title: Education Stabilization Fund CFDA Number: 84.425 Federal Award Number and Year: 2021 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-through Entity: Montana Office of Public Instruction Condition: The District did not comply with the wage rate compliance related to construction using Education Stabilization Fund (ESSER) Grant monies. Context: During the testing of significant claims for the ESSER major programs related to construction, we noted claims in which there should be contracts in place and that the wage rate requirements would apply. Criteria: Section 7007 construction funds, as well as any Section 7002 or 7003(b) funds spent for construction or minor remodeling, are subject to Wage Rate Requirements (20 USC 1232b). Compliance Requirement – All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by Federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL) (40 USC 3141-3144, 3146, and 3147). Non-federal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations (29 CFR part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction). This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the non-Federal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR part 176, subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Effect: Noncompliance with the Wage Rate Requirement for construction paid for out of the ESSER Grants. Cause: The District was not aware of the requirement. Recommendation: The District should implement internal controls to determine the federal compliance requirements of all federal funds received. In addition, procedures should be implemented to ensure any federal funds received in which the Wage Rate Requirement is required the following are implemented: 1. Any construction vendor is by contract, and that contract includes the Prevailing Wage clauses for the contractors and subcontractors. 2. The weekly certified payrolls are submitted to the District.
Finding 2024-001 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund - AL No. 21.027 U.S. Department of Treasury Other Matters Related to Internal Control over Compliance of the Major Program Criteria: Non‐federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Condition and Context: During our testing as it related to compliance with procurement we noted that an expense for engineering services for the Waste Water Treatment Assessment services charged to the major program would have required a formal bidding process as the project exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold. The Town had selected the engineering company for “On Call” engineering services as it related to the DPW through a request for qualifications process. The contract does include as part of the services to be provided Waste Water Treatment Assessment services. However, the contract is not specific to federally funded projects. The Town of Medfield had submitted the request for qualifications documentation as well as the executed contracted for “On Call” services to both the Town’s consulting service and the pass through entity for approval of the Waste Water Treatment Assessment. The pass through entity and the pass through entities Auditors did not have any concerns with the request for qualifications as it relates to the Waste Water Treatment Assessment project. Questioned Costs: $40,500 Cause: Based on the judgement of the pass through entity (Norfolk County) and their auditors, the Town was approved to procure engineering services for the Waste Water Treatment Assessment as part of a larger “On Call” services contract. The Town did select the contractor through a competitive request for qualifications process, but did not initiate a separate procurement for the sub-project. Effect or Potential Effect: There is risk that amounts charged to the federal awards major program may not be in accordance with procurement, suspension, and debarment principles. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: Going forward, the Town of Medfield should consider a separate bidding process for expenses related to federal grant funds. Management Response: Due to the differences in the interpretation of federal requirements regarding competitive procurement, the Town will follow the more restrictive one on an ongoing basis. New projects paid for by federal grants will have separate procurements.
2024-004 Procurement Federal Agency: All Federal Agencies - US Department of Transportation Federal Program Name: All Federal Programs Assistance Listing Number: All Assistance Listing Numbers - 20.205 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: N/A – applies to all Federal Programs Pass-Through Agency: N/A Pass-Through Number(s): N/A Award Period: N/A Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matter Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200 Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (UG) requires compliance with the provisions of procurement, suspension, and debarment. Condition: The Town’s procurement standards do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Effect: With the absence of a compliant policy, the Town is at risk for noncompliance as it relates to federal procurement. Cause: The Town was unaware that the policy was not compliant with Uniform Guidance. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the Town review its formal procurement policies and make necessary changes to comply with the criteria as set out in 2 CFR sections 200.318 and 200.326. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding.
Finding No. 2024-004 Procurement Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: SLFRFP4547 – 2021 Award Period: 3/3/21 – 12/31/24 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or Specific Requirement: The Town must comply with procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318 through 200.326 within Uniform Guidance. 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 be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). UG §200.318 General procurement standards. (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. §200.320 states that the non-Federal entity must use one of the prescribed methods of procurement. (a) Informal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal award does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (SAT), as defined in §200.1, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are not required. The non-Federal entity may use informal procurement methods to expedite the completion of its transactions and minimize the associated administrative burden and cost. The informal methods used for procurement of property or services at or below the SAT include: (1) Micro-purchases. Procurement by micro-purchase is the acquisition of supplies or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (See the definition of micro-purchase in §200.1). To the maximum extent practicable, the non-Federal entity should distribute micro-purchases equitably among qualified suppliers. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price or rate quotations if the non-Federal entity considers the price to be reasonable based on research, experience, purchase history or other information and documents it files accordingly. Purchase cards can be used for micropurchases if procedures are documented and approved by the non-Federal entity. (2) Small purchase. Procurement by small purchase is the acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity. (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a noncompetitive 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. 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. (2) Proposals. 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. (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 allowed circumstances apply. Condition: The Town purchasing policy does not include all elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318 through 200.326 noted above. Questioned Costs: None Context: Although the Town’s purchasing policies do not include all elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318 through 200.326, we did not identify transactions where contracts were awarded without proper justification in 7 of 7 procurement transactions tested. Cause: Management was not aware of the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318 through 200.326 within Uniform Guidance. Effect: The Town is at risk for noncompliance with Federal grants as it relates to procurement. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that the Town update its procurement policies to include all elements identified in 2 CFR sections 200.303 and 200.318 through 200.326. Views of Responsible Officials: Management is working with our current auditors to update the Town’s procurement policies to be in compliance with the Uniform Guidance.
2024-001 PROCUREMENT, SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT Grantor: U. S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds CFDA Number: 21.027 Pass-through Entities: CT Department of Social Services CT Department of Children and Families CT Office of Early Childhood CT Office of Victim Services Criteria: When procuring property and services, entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318-200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The procurement policy in place during fiscal 2024 had not been updated to comply with the requirement of the Uniform Guidance as stated above, and did not specify a micro-purchase or small purchase threshold above which written quotes would be required. A formal written policy for ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred was not included in the existing policy and therefore this process was not being executed in a consistent manner. Questioned Costs: None. Effect: Certain purchases could be incurred at higher amounts than might have been the case had multiple written quotes been obtained prior to the transaction. However, all purchases tested appeared to be in the normal course of business and costs appeared reasonable. Our testing did not result in any questioned costs. Additionally, the potential existed that a vendor that could either be suspended or debarred could have unknowingly been utilized due to the existing process. Cause: The agency did not timely complete the process to update its policies and procedures to conform with the Uniform Guidance by the expiration of the extended implementation deadline cited in the Uniform Guidance. A new policy was implemented subsequent to year-end. Recommendation: Additional training of relevant staff regarding the new policies and procedures should be considered, especially regarding retention of adequate documentation of bids, quotes, or other procedures including documentation of the checking of vendors against the suspension and debarment lists. Views of Responsible Officials: A new procurement policy, including a process to ensure vendors are not suspended or debarred, was prepared and implemented effective in January 2025. Relevant staff have been and continue to be trained appropriately regarding execution of related procedures to ensure all aspects are being properly performed.
2024-001 PROCUREMENT, SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT Grantor: U. S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds CFDA Number: 21.027 Pass-through Entities: CT Department of Social Services CT Department of Children and Families CT Office of Early Childhood CT Office of Victim Services Criteria: When procuring property and services, entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318-200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The procurement policy in place during fiscal 2024 had not been updated to comply with the requirement of the Uniform Guidance as stated above, and did not specify a micro-purchase or small purchase threshold above which written quotes would be required. A formal written policy for ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred was not included in the existing policy and therefore this process was not being executed in a consistent manner. Questioned Costs: None. Effect: Certain purchases could be incurred at higher amounts than might have been the case had multiple written quotes been obtained prior to the transaction. However, all purchases tested appeared to be in the normal course of business and costs appeared reasonable. Our testing did not result in any questioned costs. Additionally, the potential existed that a vendor that could either be suspended or debarred could have unknowingly been utilized due to the existing process. Cause: The agency did not timely complete the process to update its policies and procedures to conform with the Uniform Guidance by the expiration of the extended implementation deadline cited in the Uniform Guidance. A new policy was implemented subsequent to year-end. Recommendation: Additional training of relevant staff regarding the new policies and procedures should be considered, especially regarding retention of adequate documentation of bids, quotes, or other procedures including documentation of the checking of vendors against the suspension and debarment lists. Views of Responsible Officials: A new procurement policy, including a process to ensure vendors are not suspended or debarred, was prepared and implemented effective in January 2025. Relevant staff have been and continue to be trained appropriately regarding execution of related procedures to ensure all aspects are being properly performed.
2024-001 PROCUREMENT, SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT Grantor: U. S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds CFDA Number: 21.027 Pass-through Entities: CT Department of Social Services CT Department of Children and Families CT Office of Early Childhood CT Office of Victim Services Criteria: When procuring property and services, entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318-200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The procurement policy in place during fiscal 2024 had not been updated to comply with the requirement of the Uniform Guidance as stated above, and did not specify a micro-purchase or small purchase threshold above which written quotes would be required. A formal written policy for ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred was not included in the existing policy and therefore this process was not being executed in a consistent manner. Questioned Costs: None. Effect: Certain purchases could be incurred at higher amounts than might have been the case had multiple written quotes been obtained prior to the transaction. However, all purchases tested appeared to be in the normal course of business and costs appeared reasonable. Our testing did not result in any questioned costs. Additionally, the potential existed that a vendor that could either be suspended or debarred could have unknowingly been utilized due to the existing process. Cause: The agency did not timely complete the process to update its policies and procedures to conform with the Uniform Guidance by the expiration of the extended implementation deadline cited in the Uniform Guidance. A new policy was implemented subsequent to year-end. Recommendation: Additional training of relevant staff regarding the new policies and procedures should be considered, especially regarding retention of adequate documentation of bids, quotes, or other procedures including documentation of the checking of vendors against the suspension and debarment lists. Views of Responsible Officials: A new procurement policy, including a process to ensure vendors are not suspended or debarred, was prepared and implemented effective in January 2025. Relevant staff have been and continue to be trained appropriately regarding execution of related procedures to ensure all aspects are being properly performed.
2024-001 PROCUREMENT, SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT Grantor: U. S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds CFDA Number: 21.027 Pass-through Entities: CT Department of Social Services CT Department of Children and Families CT Office of Early Childhood CT Office of Victim Services Criteria: When procuring property and services, entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318-200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The procurement policy in place during fiscal 2024 had not been updated to comply with the requirement of the Uniform Guidance as stated above, and did not specify a micro-purchase or small purchase threshold above which written quotes would be required. A formal written policy for ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred was not included in the existing policy and therefore this process was not being executed in a consistent manner. Questioned Costs: None. Effect: Certain purchases could be incurred at higher amounts than might have been the case had multiple written quotes been obtained prior to the transaction. However, all purchases tested appeared to be in the normal course of business and costs appeared reasonable. Our testing did not result in any questioned costs. Additionally, the potential existed that a vendor that could either be suspended or debarred could have unknowingly been utilized due to the existing process. Cause: The agency did not timely complete the process to update its policies and procedures to conform with the Uniform Guidance by the expiration of the extended implementation deadline cited in the Uniform Guidance. A new policy was implemented subsequent to year-end. Recommendation: Additional training of relevant staff regarding the new policies and procedures should be considered, especially regarding retention of adequate documentation of bids, quotes, or other procedures including documentation of the checking of vendors against the suspension and debarment lists. Views of Responsible Officials: A new procurement policy, including a process to ensure vendors are not suspended or debarred, was prepared and implemented effective in January 2025. Relevant staff have been and continue to be trained appropriately regarding execution of related procedures to ensure all aspects are being properly performed.
2024-001 PROCUREMENT, SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT Grantor: U. S. Department of the Treasury Federal Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds CFDA Number: 21.027 Pass-through Entities: CT Department of Social Services CT Department of Children and Families CT Office of Early Childhood CT Office of Victim Services Criteria: When procuring property and services, entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318-200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The procurement policy in place during fiscal 2024 had not been updated to comply with the requirement of the Uniform Guidance as stated above, and did not specify a micro-purchase or small purchase threshold above which written quotes would be required. A formal written policy for ensuring vendors are not suspended or debarred was not included in the existing policy and therefore this process was not being executed in a consistent manner. Questioned Costs: None. Effect: Certain purchases could be incurred at higher amounts than might have been the case had multiple written quotes been obtained prior to the transaction. However, all purchases tested appeared to be in the normal course of business and costs appeared reasonable. Our testing did not result in any questioned costs. Additionally, the potential existed that a vendor that could either be suspended or debarred could have unknowingly been utilized due to the existing process. Cause: The agency did not timely complete the process to update its policies and procedures to conform with the Uniform Guidance by the expiration of the extended implementation deadline cited in the Uniform Guidance. A new policy was implemented subsequent to year-end. Recommendation: Additional training of relevant staff regarding the new policies and procedures should be considered, especially regarding retention of adequate documentation of bids, quotes, or other procedures including documentation of the checking of vendors against the suspension and debarment lists. Views of Responsible Officials: A new procurement policy, including a process to ensure vendors are not suspended or debarred, was prepared and implemented effective in January 2025. Relevant staff have been and continue to be trained appropriately regarding execution of related procedures to ensure all aspects are being properly performed.
2024 – 009 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Federal Agency: Department of Interior Federal Program Title: Outdoor Recreation Acquisition, Development and Planning ALN: 15.916 Pass-Through Agency: Arizona State Park Trails Pass-Through Number(s): 04-007-652304 Award Number and Period: 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 (City) 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 40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds must be paid wages not less than those established for the locality of the project (prevailing wage rates) by the Department of Labor (DOL). Per 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contacts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction: Nonfederal entities shall include in their construction contracts subject to the Wage Rate Requirements (which still may be referenced as the Davis-Bacon Act) a provision that the contractor or subcontractor comply with those requirements and the DOL regulations. This includes a requirement for the contractor or subcontractor to submit to the nonfederal entity weekly, for each week in which any contract work is performed, a copy of the payroll and a statement of compliance (certified payrolls) (29 CFR sections 5.5 and 5.6; the A-102 Common Rule (section 36(i)(5)); OMB Circular A-110 (2 CFR Part 215, Appendix A, Contract Provisions); 2 CFR Part 176, Subpart C; and 2 CFR section 200.326). Condition: There was no support provided for the three out of three contractor vendors with construction work noted on their purchase orders. Questioned costs: None. Context: See “Condition.” Cause: Current process and controls are not at the correct precision level to ensure special provisions regarding the Wage Rate compliances are being met. Effect: Ineffective internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant award. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: The City of Nogales should refine its current process and associated controls surrounding the requirements in 40 USC 3141–3144, 3146, and 3147 to ensure they are met. Views of responsible officials: See corrective action plan. Corrective action plan: See corrective action plan.
2024-003 – Written Policies Required by the Uniform Grant Guidance Finding Type. Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Immaterial Noncompliance (Procurement and Suspension and Debarment) Program. COVID-19 State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Cluster (CFDA# 21.027); U.S. Department of Treasury; Passed through Lake County. Criteria. Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Condition. The District did not have documented procurement standards to comply with 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Cause. The District has drafted a policy for these areas in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, but it has not been finalized. Effect. As a result of this condition, the District did not fully comply with 2 CFR Part 200 applicable to the above noted grant. Questioned Costs. No costs have been questioned as a result of this finding. Recommendation. We recommend that the District develop a policy as soon as practical, but no later than the end of fiscal year 2025, to comply with 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. View of Responsible Officials. We agree with the recommendation and will develop procedures to comply with the Uniform Guidance applicable to grants Repeat finding. 2023-003
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
The procurement policy and conflict of interest policy of the Organization do not include the essential elements as outlined in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326.
Finding 2024-002: Procurement Federal Program Information: Department of Housing and Urban Development Continuum of Care Program, Direct funding – AL No. 14.267, Grant No. CA1320L9T142208. CA1320L9T142309, CA1255L9T142208, CA0841L9T141908, CA0773L9T142214, CA0773L9T142315, CA1317L9T132106 and CA1403L9T132106 Condition: Wipfli, LLP obtained the supporting documentation for purchases of client furnishings, cleaning services, and pest control services. The documentation indicated these vendors were selected based on best price. Turning Point of Central California, Inc. was able to provide explanations for why the vendor were selected, but procurement records supporting the explanations were not available for the pest control vendor. In addition, Wipfli noted Turning Point of Central California, Inc.’s procurement policy included references to outdated federal regulations and did not comply with all of the procurement requirements in the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200). This is a repeat finding from the June 30, 2021, 2022 and 2023 audits. Criteria: The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, 2 CFR Part 200, section 318(i) (Uniform Guidance) states that the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. The records will include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contractor type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. In addition, the Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR Part 200, section 200.118 states that the non-Federal entity must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326 and must use their own documented procurement procedures that must conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Cause: Turning Point of Central California, Inc. did not retain procurement records to support its assertion that it is contracting with vendors that provide the best prices. Turning Point of Central California, Inc. has not updated its procurement policy to comply with the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200). Effect: Due to the conditions noted above, Turning Point of Central California, Inc. was not in compliance with the procurement regulations and there exists a material weakness in internal controls over the procurement compliance requirement. Recommendation: We recommend Turning Point of Central California, Inc. implement controls to ensure the procurement decisions are properly documented in accordance with updated internal policies and procedures that conform to the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200). View of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and has submitted a corrective action plan.
Finding Number: 2024-002 Repeat Finding: Similar to prior year finding 2023-003 Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Indian School Equalization, Special Education Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 15.042, 84.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Education Federal Award Number: A23AV00811 Questioned Costs: None Type of Finding: Noncompliance, Material Weakness Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: Under 2 CFR §215.43 the School is required to implement certain procurement policies that adhere to the minimum federal requirements as outlined in 2 CFR §215.44. Non-federal entities other than States, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of States, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR §§200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable State and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the Procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The School did not always follow procurement standards as put forth in 2 CFR §200.318 through §200.326. Effect: Noncompliance with federal regulation that led to a qualified audit opinion over the listed federal programs as noted above. Cause: Management oversight. Context: For two of 25 vendors within the Simplified Acquisition Threshold tested, the School did not maintain documentation that appropriate procurement procedures were performed or provide documentation to support the School’s reasoning for a noncompetitive procurement. Recommendation: The School should review its procurement procedures to ensure that proper procurement procedures are performed documentation is maintained to support the procurement. Response: The School’s responses are presented in a separate document. Contact person: Dolores Silva, Chief Financial Officer
Finding Number: 2024-002 Repeat Finding: Similar to prior year finding 2023-003 Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Indian School Equalization, Special Education Cluster Assistance Listing Number: 15.042, 84.027 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Education Federal Award Number: A23AV00811 Questioned Costs: None Type of Finding: Noncompliance, Material Weakness Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: Under 2 CFR §215.43 the School is required to implement certain procurement policies that adhere to the minimum federal requirements as outlined in 2 CFR §215.44. Non-federal entities other than States, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of States, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR §§200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable State and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the Procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Condition: The School did not always follow procurement standards as put forth in 2 CFR §200.318 through §200.326. Effect: Noncompliance with federal regulation that led to a qualified audit opinion over the listed federal programs as noted above. Cause: Management oversight. Context: For two of 25 vendors within the Simplified Acquisition Threshold tested, the School did not maintain documentation that appropriate procurement procedures were performed or provide documentation to support the School’s reasoning for a noncompetitive procurement. Recommendation: The School should review its procurement procedures to ensure that proper procurement procedures are performed documentation is maintained to support the procurement. Response: The School’s responses are presented in a separate document. Contact person: Dolores Silva, Chief Financial Officer
Criteria: The Association should have in place written procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Condition: The Association does not have written procurement standards that are in accordance with the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: The Association’s written purchasing policy has not been updated to incorporate the standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Effect: The Association is not in compliance with the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance. Recommendation: We recommend the Association update its written purchasing policy to ensure the procurement standards found in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326 of the Uniform Guidance are incorporated. Management’s Response: The Association will update its purchasing policy to ensure the procurement standards in 2 CFR 200.317 – 200.326 are incorporated.
Finding 2024-002 – COVID 19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund - AL No. 21.027 U.S. Department of Treasury Noncompliance and Material Weakness Related to Internal Control over Compliance of the Major Program Criteria: Non‐federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. They must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. As governmental subrecipients of states they are also required to use the same state procurement policies and procedures for federal funds as for non‐federal funds, the Town is required to follow Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b). MGL 30(b) requires the solicitation of three written or oral quotes for procurements of supplies between $10,000 and $49,999 and sealed bids or proposals for procurements of supplies $50,000 and over. Management of the Town is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal program. However, a deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. Condition and Context: During fiscal year 2024, the Town did not comply with the required procurement policies and procedures in place as it related to expenses charged to the major program requiring procurement procedures. One of the expenses tested was for engineering services that would have been exempt under Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter (MGL) 30(b) (State Procurement Requirement), under federal statutes and procurement requirements for engineering services identified in 2 CFR Part 200, the Town would have been required to go out to bid for the services. Questioned Costs: $413,477.78 Cause: The noncompliance occurred because the organization mistakenly relied on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions, which govern state and local procurements, and did not recognize the need to comply with the more stringent federal procurement requirements for federal fund usage. Staff members were not sufficiently aware of the specific requirements under 2 CFR Part 200 and the precedence of federal procurement regulations over state law in this context. Effect or Potential Effect: There is risk that the amounts charged to the federal awards major program may not be in accordance with procurement, suspension, and debarment principles. Identification as a Repeat Finding: 2023-003 Recommendation: The Town of Bellingham should address the nocompliance and material weakness in internal controls noted above in order to ensure that procurements are conducted in accordance with federal and state requirements. Management Response: We acknowledge the audit finding regarding our reliance on Massachusetts Chapter 30B exemptions for procurement involving federal funds. We understand that federal procurement regulations under 2 CFR Part 200 take precedence over state law and that we failed fully to comply with federal requirements for competitive bidding, sole-source justification, and documentation. We are committed to addressing this issue by reviewing our procurement policies to clearly differentiate between state and federal requirements, ensuring that federal standards govern all procurement involving federal funds. We will provide additional training to staff, implement stronger documentation procedures, and review past procurement to ensure full compliance moving forward.
Criteria: 2 C.F.R. § 200.326 and 2 C.F.R. Part 200, Appendix II require specific provisions and clauses to be included in non-federal entity contracts when utilizing federal funds to reimburse expenditures. Additionally, Louisiana Revised Statute (L.R.S.) 38:2224 requires that affidavit(s) be completed attesting that the public contract was not secured through employment or payment of solicitor public funds. Condition: The School Board’s contract for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) - disaster #1603 alternate project PW 11249, did not include the provisions and clauses required for non-federal entity contracts. Additionally, affidavit(s) was not completed attesting that the public contract was not secured through employment or payment of solicitor public funds. Cause: The School Board did not include the required provisions and clauses or ensure the affidavits were properly completed. Effect: The School Board did not meet all federal compliance requirements for federally funded contracts. Additionally, the School Board was not in compliance with L.R.S. 38:2224 requiring completed affidavit(s) for public works contracts. Recommendation: The School Board should develop and implement procedures to ensure federally funded contracts include all required provisions and clauses. Additionally, the School Board should include in those federally funded contract procedures requirements that appropriate affidavits as required by L.R.S. 38:2224 be completed.
CFDA No. 14.228 – Community Development Block Grant Year Ended – May 31, 2024 Passed Through the NEW York State Housing Trust Fund Federal Agency – U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Criteria – the Village’s procurement policy must incorporate federal award activity within the process and procedures followed by the Village in accordance with the Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), sections 200.112, 200.317-200.326. Under the Uniform Guidance, the procurement requirements were required to be implemented by January 1, 2018 for federal award recipients. Condition – The Village’s code of ethics, conflict of interest and procurement policies have not been updated to comply with the requirements in the Uniform Guidance. Cause – The control environment related to the requirements of the Uniform Guidance has not be reviewed and incorporated into the Village’s control activities through the updating and documentation of the Village’s policies noted above. Effect – The Village was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.112, Conflict of Interest and Sections 200.317-200.326, Procurement Standards. Questioned Costs – There were no questioned costs noted related to this finding. Context – This finding was identified during inquiries of management in regards to the control environment over the requirements of the Uniform Guidance and through the review of the related policies noted above. Recommendation – We recommend the Village review their policies and establish/update such policies to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance. Village’s Response – The Village Mayor will continue working with the consultants to update the required policies and procedures to ensure compliance during this next year.
CFDA No. 14.228 – Community Development Block Grant Year Ended – May 31, 2024 Passed Through the NEW York State Housing Trust Fund Federal Agency – U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Criteria – the Village’s procurement policy must incorporate federal award activity within the process and procedures followed by the Village in accordance with the Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), sections 200.112, 200.317-200.326. Under the Uniform Guidance, the procurement requirements were required to be implemented by January 1, 2018 for federal award recipients. Condition – The Village’s code of ethics, conflict of interest and procurement policies have not been updated to comply with the requirements in the Uniform Guidance. Cause – The control environment related to the requirements of the Uniform Guidance has not be reviewed and incorporated into the Village’s control activities through the updating and documentation of the Village’s policies noted above. Effect – The Village was not in compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.112, Conflict of Interest and Sections 200.317-200.326, Procurement Standards. Questioned Costs – There were no questioned costs noted related to this finding. Context – This finding was identified during inquiries of management in regards to the control environment over the requirements of the Uniform Guidance and through the review of the related policies noted above. Recommendation – We recommend the Village review their policies and establish/update such policies to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance. Village’s Response – The Village Mayor will continue working with the consultants to update the required policies and procedures to ensure compliance during this next year.
Finding 2023-001 Noncompliance and material weakness in internal control over compliance with procurement requirements Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Assistance Listing Number: 14.251 Assistance Listing Name: Community Project Funding Award Number: B-23-CP-WA-1530 Criteria Nonfederal entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. For acquisitions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the nonfederal entity must use one of the following procurement methods: the sealed bid method if the acquisition meets the criteria in 2 CFR section 200.320(b)(i); the competitive proposals method under the conditions specified in 2 CFR section 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 section 200.320(c)). Condition and Effect During our testing of the procurement compliance requirement, we noted that the Aquarium had not performed the required procurement procedures for one of the vendors in our sample. For this one vendor the acquisition exceeded the simplified acquisition threshold. The Aquarium used a noncompetitive method to select the vendor; however, the acquisition did not meet one of the four qualifying circumstances for a noncompetitive procurement. Cause The Aquarium’s system of internal control did not operate effectively to prevent the Aquarium from incorrectly using a noncompetitive procurement process, when instead a proscribed competitive procurement process should have been followed. Context During the year under audit there was a total population of nine vendors to which the procurement compliance requirement applied. For our testing of the procurement compliance requirement, we tested a sample of two vendors from the total population of nine. As noted in the condition section above, our testing found that the Aquarium did not comply with the procurement compliance requirements for one of the vendors tested. We also noted that the procurement activity for this vendor occurred in 2017 and prior to the Aquarium seeking federal funding for the Ocean Pavilion project. Questioned Costs Payments to that one vendor during 2023 that were charged to the major federal program totaled $118,845. Repeat Finding This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation We recommend management provide training for those involved with procurement activities for acquisitions that will be charged to federal awards to ensure the Aquarium’s procurement policies and procedures are consistently applied. We also recommend management update the Aquarium’s procurement policies and procedures to ensure they incorporate the required procedures and controls to ensure compliance with the procurement requirements in 2 CFR 200 (the Uniform Guidance) for acquisitions that will be charged to federal awards. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan Management agrees with the finding and has provided the accompanying corrective action plan.
Criteria or specific requirement: Part 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Sections 200.317 through 200.326 describe specific federal requirements related to procurement actions and documented procurement policies for federal award recipients. These standards require various elements, such as addressing conflicts of interests, avoiding acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items, maintaining records sufficient to detail the history of the procurement, and conducting procurement in a manner that provides full and open competition, and adherence to the required methods of procurement for the acquisition of property and services. These Uniform Guidance standards have been updated several times in the past few years. Part 2 CFR, Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition: The Organization’s procurement policy does not address all federally required elements of procurement policies under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326. Specifically, some of the items absent from the Organization’s procurement policy include: certain federally defined methods of procurement, open-competition clauses, and clauses related to acquisition of unnecessary and duplicative items. The Organization also does not have a written policy that specifies its suspension and debarment procedures. As a result, the Organization was not able to provide evidence that it verified a vendor with which it entered into a cover transaction was not suspended and debarred before the date it entered into the transaction with such vendor. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendor was not suspended and debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: Based on our review of the Organization's procurement policy, we noted that several federally required elements were absent from the policy. We also noted that the Organization did not have a documented suspension and debarment policy, and as a result the Organization was not able to provide evidence that it verified a vendor with which it entered into a cover transaction was not suspended and debarred before the date it entered into the transaction with such vendor. Cause: The Organization’s procurement policy has not been revised to address all federally required elements specified in the Uniform Guidance. The Organization also does not have a documented suspension and debarment policy. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to a documented procurement policy, and documented suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its procurement policy to include all federally required elements of such policies for federal award recipients under the Uniform Guidance. We also recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of its suspension and debarment procedures to be in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Part 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Sections 200.317 through 200.326 describe specific federal requirements related to procurement actions and documented procurement policies for federal award recipients. These standards require various elements, such as addressing conflicts of interests, avoiding acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items, maintaining records sufficient to detail the history of the procurement, and conducting procurement in a manner that provides full and open competition, and adherence to the required methods of procurement for the acquisition of property and services. These Uniform Guidance standards have been updated several times in the past few years. Part 2 CFR, Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition: The Organization’s procurement policy does not address all federally required elements of procurement policies under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326. Specifically, some of the items absent from the Organization’s procurement policy include: certain federally defined methods of procurement, open-competition clauses, and clauses related to acquisition of unnecessary and duplicative items. The Organization also does not have a written policy that specifies its suspension and debarment procedures. As a result, the Organization was not able to provide evidence that it verified a vendor with which it entered into a cover transaction was not suspended and debarred before the date it entered into the transaction with such vendor. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendor was not suspended and debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: Based on our review of the Organization's procurement policy, we noted that several federally required elements were absent from the policy. We also noted that the Organization did not have a documented suspension and debarment policy, and as a result the Organization was not able to provide evidence that it verified a vendor with which it entered into a cover transaction was not suspended and debarred before the date it entered into the transaction with such vendor. Cause: The Organization’s procurement policy has not been revised to address all federally required elements specified in the Uniform Guidance. The Organization also does not have a documented suspension and debarment policy. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to a documented procurement policy, and documented suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its procurement policy to include all federally required elements of such policies for federal award recipients under the Uniform Guidance. We also recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of its suspension and debarment procedures to be in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Criteria or specific requirement: Part 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Sections 200.317 through 200.326 describe specific federal requirements related to procurement actions and documented procurement policies for federal award recipients. These standards require various elements, such as addressing conflicts of interests, avoiding acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items, maintaining records sufficient to detail the history of the procurement, and conducting procurement in a manner that provides full and open competition, and adherence to the required methods of procurement for the acquisition of property and services. These Uniform Guidance standards have been updated several times in the past few years. Part 2 CFR, Section 180.300 describes federal requirements related to suspension and debarment for federal award recipients. The standards require that a federal award recipient verify that an entity with which it plans to enter into a covered transaction is not suspended and debarred. Procedures for satisfying such requirements should be documented, and evidence of such procedures should be maintained. Condition: The Organization’s procurement policy does not address all federally required elements of procurement policies under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.326. Specifically, some of the items absent from the Organization’s procurement policy include: certain federally defined methods of procurement, open-competition clauses, and clauses related to acquisition of unnecessary and duplicative items. The Organization also does not have a written policy that specifies its suspension and debarment procedures. As a result, the Organization was not able to provide evidence that it verified a vendor with which it entered into a cover transaction was not suspended and debarred before the date it entered into the transaction with such vendor. During our audit procedures, we noted that the vendor was not suspended and debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: Based on our review of the Organization's procurement policy, we noted that several federally required elements were absent from the policy. We also noted that the Organization did not have a documented suspension and debarment policy, and as a result the Organization was not able to provide evidence that it verified a vendor with which it entered into a cover transaction was not suspended and debarred before the date it entered into the transaction with such vendor. Cause: The Organization’s procurement policy has not been revised to address all federally required elements specified in the Uniform Guidance. The Organization also does not have a documented suspension and debarment policy. Effect: The Organization is not in compliance with federal requirements related to a documented procurement policy, and documented suspension and debarment procedures. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update its procurement policy to include all federally required elements of such policies for federal award recipients under the Uniform Guidance. We also recommend that the Organization document and maintain evidence of its suspension and debarment procedures to be in compliance with requirements specified in the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.