U.S. Department of Transportation; U.S. Treasury Department Federal Financial Assistance Listings 20.507 Federal Transit Cluster FTA 5307 CARES Act 2020 – Agreement #CA-17, ID-2021-027 Federal Financial Assistance Listings 21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Compliance Requirement – Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance 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: We noted that while the City does have a purchasing policy, elements required by Uniform Guidance are absent from the policy. This created a situation where the City did not verify vendors were not suspended or debarred before entering into contract with that vendor. In addition, elements that are required to be included in contracts with vendors who are paid using federal monies were missing from the contracts. Cause: The City had not reviewed its procurement policy to ensure that the policy and contracts included the provisions that were required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect: While our testing noted no instances of noncompliance, the absence of internal controls over compliance as it relates to having a Uniform Guidance compliant policy, could lead the City to enter into covered transactions that are not compliant with federal regulations. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used to test compliance of the Policy. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The City should review the applicable provisions of the CFR to ensure their written procurement policy is compliant with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The City concurs with the auditor’s findings.
Condition: The Organization purchased property and services without implementing procedures that comply with procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. 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. Cause: The Organization did not 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. Effect: The Organization did not comply with procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Context: A sample of 5 purchases totaling $37,971 was selected for audit from a population of 21 purchases totaling $284,550. The test found that five purchases did not adhere to the Organization's documented procurement procedures and 1 purchase that also did not include competitive bidding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization use their own documented procurement procedures that comply with procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Item 2023-001 (Originally of 2022-001) Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 (Repeated) U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure that accurate and complete certified payrolls were provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $1,521,784.16 Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023‐001 (Originally of 2022‐001) Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 (Repeated) U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 (84.425U) (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $110,029. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023‐001 (Originally of 2022‐001) Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 (Repeated) U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 (84.425U) (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $110,029. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023-001 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425U U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education, Pass Through Grantor Number 199 Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure that accurate and complete certified payrolls were provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $149,982 Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
2023-006 — Procurement Federal/state program information: Funding agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Title: Indian Self-Determination ALN: 93.441 Award period: 10/1/2022 – 9/30/2023 Criteria: Non-federal entities other than 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. This includes oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to responsible contractors, and maintaining records to document history of procurements. Further, according to the CBNHC Finance Policies and Procedures, the Board of Directors shall approve all purchases over $5,000. Condition: For one vendor paid over $5,000 during fiscal year 2023, there was no evidence that selection and use of this vendor was approved by the Board of Directors. For one additional contractor, CBNHC did not have an active contract in place with the contractor. Context: Two of 35 nonpayroll transactions tested. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: CBNHC is not implementing their Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved according to purchase authority levels. Effect: CBNHC is not in compliance with procurement requirements for the Indian Self-Determination program. Auditor’s Recommendations: CBNHC should implement its Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved. Management’s Response: In fiscal year 2023, CBNHC experienced significant disruption in its administrative operations caused by political struggles over its rightful governing body. During this period, two key leadership members were administratively unavailable to support the proper procurement of vendor contract renewals. The purchases were made outside the CBNHC procurement policies unbeknownst to CBNHC leadership.
2023-006 — Procurement Federal/state program information: Funding agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Title: Indian Self-Determination ALN: 93.441 Award period: 10/1/2022 – 9/30/2023 Criteria: Non-federal entities other than 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. This includes oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to responsible contractors, and maintaining records to document history of procurements. Further, according to the CBNHC Finance Policies and Procedures, the Board of Directors shall approve all purchases over $5,000. Condition: For one vendor paid over $5,000 during fiscal year 2023, there was no evidence that selection and use of this vendor was approved by the Board of Directors. For one additional contractor, CBNHC did not have an active contract in place with the contractor. Context: Two of 35 nonpayroll transactions tested. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: CBNHC is not implementing their Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved according to purchase authority levels. Effect: CBNHC is not in compliance with procurement requirements for the Indian Self-Determination program. Auditor’s Recommendations: CBNHC should implement its Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved. Management’s Response: In fiscal year 2023, CBNHC experienced significant disruption in its administrative operations caused by political struggles over its rightful governing body. During this period, two key leadership members were administratively unavailable to support the proper procurement of vendor contract renewals. The purchases were made outside the CBNHC procurement policies unbeknownst to CBNHC leadership.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Signficiant Deficiency - Internal Controls over Procurement Department of Treasury - Direct Program- COVID 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - ALN 21.027 - Program Year 2023 Criteria - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund (CSLFRF) award funds may be used to enter into contracts to procure goods and services necessary to implement one or more of the eligible purposes outline in 42 sections 802(c) and 803(c) and the Treasury's Interim and Final Rules. Recipients are expected to have procurement standards outline in the Uniform Guidance as set out in 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Condition- The County did not obtain the supporting documentation from the Medical Examiner's Office at the time of the purchases to support that the procurement standards as outline in Uniform Guidance had been followed. Cause/Effect - The State of Florida Medical Examiner does have procurement policies in place that state that the County's Medical Examiner shall follow the procurement standards as outline in the Uniform Guidance. The County Medical Examiner follows the procurement policies of the State of Florida Medical Examiner. However, the County did not obtain documentation from the County Medical Examiner to support the procurement policies and Uniform Guidance had been followed as of the time of the purchase. Questioned Costs- None Auditor's Recommendation - We recommend the County obtain all documentation to support compliance with procurement under Uniform Guidance prior to the purchase of goods or services. Management Response - See Correction Plan Letter
U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Financial Assistance Listing 21.027 COVID‐19 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance 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: We noted that while the City does have a purchasing policy, elements as required by Uniform Guidance are absent from the policy. In addition, elements that are required to be included in contracts with vendors who are paid using federal monies were missing from the contracts. Cause: The City had not had single audits performed until recently as a result of the increase in funding due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Because of this, they had not updated their purchasing policy to be compliance with Uniform Guidance. Effect: While our testing noted no instances of noncompliance, the absence of internal controls over compliance as it relates to having a Uniform Guidance compliant policy, could lead the City to enter into covered transactions that are not compliant with federal regulations. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used to test the policy. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The City should review the applicable provisions of the CFR to ensure their written procurement policy is compliant with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Item 2023‐001 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements (Repeat) Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2021 (84.425U) and September 30, 2020 (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and to provide timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that certain payments to contractors selected for testing did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $117,000. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023‐001 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements (Repeat) Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2021 (84.425U) and September 30, 2020 (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and to provide timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that certain payments to contractors selected for testing did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $117,000. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received each week in which construction work is performed.
U.S. Department of Transportation; U.S. Treasury Department Federal Financial Assistance Listings 20.507 Federal Transit Cluster FTA 5307 CARES Act 2020 – Agreement #CA-17, ID-2021-027 Federal Financial Assistance Listings 21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Compliance Requirement – Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance 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: We noted that while the City does have a purchasing policy, elements required by Uniform Guidance are absent from the policy. This created a situation where the City did not verify vendors were not suspended or debarred before entering into contract with that vendor. In addition, elements that are required to be included in contracts with vendors who are paid using federal monies were missing from the contracts. Cause: The City had not reviewed its procurement policy to ensure that the policy and contracts included the provisions that were required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect: While our testing noted no instances of noncompliance, the absence of internal controls over compliance as it relates to having a Uniform Guidance compliant policy, could lead the City to enter into covered transactions that are not compliant with federal regulations. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used to test compliance of the Policy. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The City should review the applicable provisions of the CFR to ensure their written procurement policy is compliant with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The City concurs with the auditor’s findings.
U.S. Department of Transportation; U.S. Treasury Department Federal Financial Assistance Listings 20.507 Federal Transit Cluster FTA 5307 CARES Act 2020 – Agreement #CA-17, ID-2021-027 Federal Financial Assistance Listings 21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Compliance Requirement – Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance 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: We noted that while the City does have a purchasing policy, elements required by Uniform Guidance are absent from the policy. This created a situation where the City did not verify vendors were not suspended or debarred before entering into contract with that vendor. In addition, elements that are required to be included in contracts with vendors who are paid using federal monies were missing from the contracts. Cause: The City had not reviewed its procurement policy to ensure that the policy and contracts included the provisions that were required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect: While our testing noted no instances of noncompliance, the absence of internal controls over compliance as it relates to having a Uniform Guidance compliant policy, could lead the City to enter into covered transactions that are not compliant with federal regulations. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used to test compliance of the Policy. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The City should review the applicable provisions of the CFR to ensure their written procurement policy is compliant with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The City concurs with the auditor’s findings.
U.S. Department of Transportation; U.S. Treasury Department Federal Financial Assistance Listings 20.507 Federal Transit Cluster FTA 5307 CARES Act 2020 – Agreement #CA-17, ID-2021-027 Federal Financial Assistance Listings 21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Compliance Requirement – Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance 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: We noted that while the City does have a purchasing policy, elements required by Uniform Guidance are absent from the policy. This created a situation where the City did not verify vendors were not suspended or debarred before entering into contract with that vendor. In addition, elements that are required to be included in contracts with vendors who are paid using federal monies were missing from the contracts. Cause: The City had not reviewed its procurement policy to ensure that the policy and contracts included the provisions that were required by the Uniform Guidance. Effect: While our testing noted no instances of noncompliance, the absence of internal controls over compliance as it relates to having a Uniform Guidance compliant policy, could lead the City to enter into covered transactions that are not compliant with federal regulations. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used to test compliance of the Policy. Repeat Finding from Prior Year(s): No Recommendation: The City should review the applicable provisions of the CFR to ensure their written procurement policy is compliant with Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The City concurs with the auditor’s findings.
Condition: The Organization purchased property and services without implementing procedures that comply with procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. 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. Cause: The Organization did not 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. Effect: The Organization did not comply with procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR part 200. Context: A sample of 5 purchases totaling $37,971 was selected for audit from a population of 21 purchases totaling $284,550. The test found that five purchases did not adhere to the Organization's documented procurement procedures and 1 purchase that also did not include competitive bidding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization use their own documented procurement procedures that comply with procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.326. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Item 2023-001 (Originally of 2022-001) Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 (Repeated) U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure that accurate and complete certified payrolls were provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $1,521,784.16 Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023‐001 (Originally of 2022‐001) Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 (Repeated) U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 (84.425U) (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $110,029. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023‐001 (Originally of 2022‐001) Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 (Repeated) U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Years ended September 30, 2022 and September 30, 2023 (84.425U) (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $110,029. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Item 2023-001 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425U U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education, Pass Through Grantor Number 199 Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non‐Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non‐Federal entity is managing the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – Adequate controls were not in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the Wage Rate Requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure that accurate and complete certified payrolls were provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $149,982 Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
2023-006 — Procurement Federal/state program information: Funding agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Title: Indian Self-Determination ALN: 93.441 Award period: 10/1/2022 – 9/30/2023 Criteria: Non-federal entities other than 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. This includes oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to responsible contractors, and maintaining records to document history of procurements. Further, according to the CBNHC Finance Policies and Procedures, the Board of Directors shall approve all purchases over $5,000. Condition: For one vendor paid over $5,000 during fiscal year 2023, there was no evidence that selection and use of this vendor was approved by the Board of Directors. For one additional contractor, CBNHC did not have an active contract in place with the contractor. Context: Two of 35 nonpayroll transactions tested. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: CBNHC is not implementing their Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved according to purchase authority levels. Effect: CBNHC is not in compliance with procurement requirements for the Indian Self-Determination program. Auditor’s Recommendations: CBNHC should implement its Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved. Management’s Response: In fiscal year 2023, CBNHC experienced significant disruption in its administrative operations caused by political struggles over its rightful governing body. During this period, two key leadership members were administratively unavailable to support the proper procurement of vendor contract renewals. The purchases were made outside the CBNHC procurement policies unbeknownst to CBNHC leadership.
2023-006 — Procurement Federal/state program information: Funding agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Title: Indian Self-Determination ALN: 93.441 Award period: 10/1/2022 – 9/30/2023 Criteria: Non-federal entities other than 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. This includes oversight of contractors’ performance, maintaining written standards of conduct for employees involved in contracting, awarding contracts only to responsible contractors, and maintaining records to document history of procurements. Further, according to the CBNHC Finance Policies and Procedures, the Board of Directors shall approve all purchases over $5,000. Condition: For one vendor paid over $5,000 during fiscal year 2023, there was no evidence that selection and use of this vendor was approved by the Board of Directors. For one additional contractor, CBNHC did not have an active contract in place with the contractor. Context: Two of 35 nonpayroll transactions tested. Questioned Costs: None. Cause: CBNHC is not implementing their Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved according to purchase authority levels. Effect: CBNHC is not in compliance with procurement requirements for the Indian Self-Determination program. Auditor’s Recommendations: CBNHC should implement its Financial Policies and Procedures to ensure that the selection and use of all vendors and contractors are properly documented and approved. Management’s Response: In fiscal year 2023, CBNHC experienced significant disruption in its administrative operations caused by political struggles over its rightful governing body. During this period, two key leadership members were administratively unavailable to support the proper procurement of vendor contract renewals. The purchases were made outside the CBNHC procurement policies unbeknownst to CBNHC leadership.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal and State Awards (continued) Finding Number: 2023‐002 Repeat Finding: Yes; 2022‐002, 2021‐002 Federal Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Federal Transit Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 20.507, 20.526 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Award Number: 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039, 5339‐R‐2022‐GCTD‐00039 Federal Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Department of Transportation State Program Name: State Urbanized Area Formula Program, State Formula Grants For Rural Areas State Agency: Texas Department of Transportation Type of Finding: Noncompliance Material to Financial Statements and Federal/State Major Programs, Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Questioned Costs: N/A; In accordance with 2 CFR 200.516(b)(7), when there are known questioned costs but the dollar amount is undetermined or not reported, the audit findings must include a description of why the dollar amount was undetermined or otherwise could not be reported. Based on our description of the finding below, the District was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines were followed for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Due to inadequate records being maintained by the District, we were unable to determine if proper procured occurred for each purchase, and could not be located, or proper procurement never occurred. Therefore, we were unable to differentiate transactions as questioned costs from transactions in question caused solely because of deficiencies in internal control. 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition: The District did not meet the requirement to verify that covered transactions were only made to an entity that was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded. Additionally, the District did was unable to provide evidence that the federal guidelines for purchases exceeding the small purchases threshold. Cause: The District’s internal controls over procurement of goods and services were not adequate. Effect: The District was not in compliance with Federal regulations and guidelines related to suspension and debarment or procurement. Context: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. During our review of purchasing, we noted the following: • For 7 out of 7 procurements reviewed, documentation demonstrating a vendor check for suspension and debarment was not retained. • For 3 out of 5 vendors reviewed with total expenditures below the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of quotes was maintained. • For 2 out of 2 vendors reviewed with total expenditures that exceeded the Simplified Acquisition threshold, no documentation of a sealed procurement issued in accordance with federal guidelines was maintained. Recommendation: The District should maintain documentation of procurement actions in the vendor file including sealed procurements issued, quotes and suspension and debarment checks. Review of procurement compliance should occur before the District’s funds are obligated. Views of Responsible Officials: The District agrees with the finding and has taken steps to address this issue as detailed in the Corrective Action Plan.
Item 2023-001 Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Education Stabilization Fund (ESF) ALN# 84.425 U.S. Department of Education Passed through the State Department of Education Grant period – Year ended September 30, 2023 (84.425U) (84.425D) Criteria – Grantees should have controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors are notified of the requirement to pay prevailing wage rates to all laborers and mechanics employed on construction contracts in excess of $2,000 financed by federal assistance funds and to submit weekly certified payrolls for each week in which contract work is performed. 2 CFR 200.303 requires the non_x0002_Federal entity to “(a) establish and maintain effective internal controls over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in accordance with all applicable statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award.” 2 CFR 200.326 and 29 CFR Part 5, Labor Standards Provisions Applicable to Contracts Governing Federally Financed and Assisted Construction (DOL Regulations) require 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). Condition – There is a systemic lack of controls in place to ensure that contractors and subcontractors were notified of the requirements to comply with the wage rate requirements and provided timely certified payrolls throughout the construction projects. Cause – A clause describing the wage rate requirements was not added to the construction contracts. There was a lack of sufficient controls over the communication of this requirement to ensure the accuracy and completeness of the certified payrolls being provided to the Board. Effect – Lack of notification of the wage rate requirements to the contractors and subcontractors could lead to disallowed costs. We noted that payments to contractors did not have supporting documentation of certified payrolls. However, our audit disclosed no instances of unallowable costs. Questioned Costs – $316,382. Recommendation – We recommend the strengthening of controls to ensure the prevailing wage rate clauses are included in the contracts and that certified payrolls are received for each week in which construction work is performed. Management’s Response – The Board will strengthen the controls in place to provide assurance that proper prevailing wage rate clauses are added to construction contracts and certified payrolls are received from each week in which construction work is performed.
Federal Agency: U.S Department of Transportation Assistance Listing Program: 20.106 Airport Improvement Program Federal Award Nos.: 3-68-0001-018-2017, 3-68-0001-020-2019, 3-68-0001-022-2020, 3-68-0001-023-2020,3-68-0001-024-2020, 3-68-0001-025-2022 Area: Special Tests and Provisions – Wage Rate Requirements Questioned Costs: $ Undeterminable Criteria: All laborers and mechanics employed by contractors or subcontractors to work on construction contracts more than $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 (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). Condition: For the year ended September 30, 2023, the Authority did not receive and review certified weekly payrolls from contractors and/or subcontractors. Cause: The Authority lacks internal control policies and procedures to obtain required certified weekly payrolls reports from contractors and/or subcontractors to ensure compliance with wage rate requirements. Effect: The Authority is in noncompliance with applicable wage rate requirements. No questioned costs are reported as we were unable to determine the quantitative impact to the program. Recommendation: We recommend the Authority’s responsible personnel to establish internal control policies and procedures to ensure that contractors and/or subcontractors are submitting weekly certified payrolls as required. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: The Authority agrees with the finding and provides details in its Corrective Action Plan.
Findings and Questioned Costs Related to Federal Awards Finding Number: 2023‐001 Repeat Finding: No Program Name/Assistance Listing Title: Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listing Number: 84.425U Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Federal Award Number: 21528001075902 Pass‐Through Agency: Texas Education Agency Questioned Costs: N/A Type of Finding: Noncompliance, Significant Deficiency Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment 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 §§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. Additionally, non‐federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. 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 §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 of Award Management (SAM) maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition The District did not follow Federal, State, and Board policies and regulations governing procurement. Cause The District official responsible for making the purchase was not aware of the procurement compliance requirements. Additionally, those responsible for approving the purchase did not verify compliance. Effect The District was not in compliance with Federal, State, and Board policies and regulations governing procurement. Context The District procured computers, software licenses, and charging carts in the amount of $356,747 using quotations rather than issuing a formal procurement. Furthermore, the District did not check whether the vendor was suspended or debarred. Recommendation District employees who are delegated the authority to procure goods and services should receive training on Federal, State, and Board procurement policies and procedures. Additionally, approvers of requisitions should ensure purchases exceeding the formal procurement threshold are appropriately procured in accordance with Federal, State and Board policies and regulations. Views of Responsible Officials See Corrective Action Plan.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District lacks internal controls and therefore, cannot detect whether the District develops a proper construction contract with vendors and whether the District receives the required documentation for Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without proper internal controls, the District cannot prevent or detect instances of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance. Lack of internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and establish internal controls to ensure the District obtains the required documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District lacks internal controls and therefore, cannot detect whether the District develops a proper construction contract with vendors and whether the District receives the required documentation for Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without proper internal controls, the District cannot prevent or detect instances of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance. Lack of internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and establish internal controls to ensure the District obtains the required documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District lacks internal controls and therefore, cannot detect whether the District develops a proper construction contract with vendors and whether the District receives the required documentation for Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without proper internal controls, the District cannot prevent or detect instances of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance. Lack of internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and establish internal controls to ensure the District obtains the required documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District lacks internal controls and therefore, cannot detect whether the District develops a proper construction contract with vendors and whether the District receives the required documentation for Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without proper internal controls, the District cannot prevent or detect instances of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance. Lack of internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and establish internal controls to ensure the District obtains the required documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District lacks internal controls and therefore, cannot detect whether the District develops a proper construction contract with vendors and whether the District receives the required documentation for Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without proper internal controls, the District cannot prevent or detect instances of Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance. Lack of internal controls may result in questioned costs and noncompliance with the terms of the grant. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and establish internal controls to ensure the District obtains the required documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements on a timely basis. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District did not have a contract in place with the contractor or subcontractor. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without having a contract, the District cannot prevent or detect Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance by the contractor or subcontractor. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and ensure the District obtains the proper contractual documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District did not have a contract in place with the contractor or subcontractor. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without having a contract, the District cannot prevent or detect Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance by the contractor or subcontractor. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and ensure the District obtains the proper contractual documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District did not have a contract in place with the contractor or subcontractor. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without having a contract, the District cannot prevent or detect Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance by the contractor or subcontractor. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and ensure the District obtains the proper contractual documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District did not have a contract in place with the contractor or subcontractor. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without having a contract, the District cannot prevent or detect Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance by the contractor or subcontractor. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and ensure the District obtains the proper contractual documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Criteria: Under the Uniform Guidance, 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). Condition: During our review of the federal program, we determined that the District did not have a contract in place with the contractor or subcontractor. Cause: The District does not have sufficient detection and prevention procedures. Effect: Without having a contract, the District cannot prevent or detect Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirements noncompliance by the contractor or subcontractor. Questioned Costs: $0 Recommendation: We recommend the District adhere to the Uniform Guidance and ensure the District obtains the proper contractual documentation for the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage requirement. Management’s views: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan on page 94.
Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control for Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Health Center Program Cluster CFDA No. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. H80CS00438 and H8FCS40427 Criteria: The Organization is required to create a written procurement, suspension and debarment policy that complies with applicable federal requirements as indicated in 2 CFR 200.318 ‐200.326 and to follow this policy when procuring goods and services. Condition: During the testing performed, it was determined that documentation to support quotes, estimates, or closed bids were not maintained prior to entering into contracts. Additionally, documentation was not maintained to support that the vendors were not suspended or debarred. Cause: The Organization has designed internal controls over these areas; however, the controls did not operate as designed. Effect: Purchases were made that did not adhere to the Health Organization’s procurement, suspension and debarment policy. Questioned costs: n/a Context: The Organization did not maintain supporting documentation that management obtained price or rate quotes for purchases above the micro‐purchase threshold. In addition, the Health Center did not maintain documentation to support that the vendors were not suspended or debarred, however subsequent testing verified that none of the vendors selected for review were suspended or debarred. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. Procedures will be developed and staff will be trained to ensure future procurement, suspension and debarment transactions are identified and documentation is maintained to support the evaluation. Repeat Finding: n/a Recommendation: The Organization should review and update the procurement and suspension and debarment policies. Additionally, the Organization should provide training to staff on transactions that are covered by the procurement, suspension and debarment policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. Procedures will be developed and staff will be trained to ensure future procurement, suspension and debarment transactions are identified and documentation is maintained to support the evaluation.
Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control for Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Health Center Program Cluster CFDA No. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. H80CS00438 and H8FCS40427 Criteria: The Organization is required to create a written procurement, suspension and debarment policy that complies with applicable federal requirements as indicated in 2 CFR 200.318 ‐200.326 and to follow this policy when procuring goods and services. Condition: During the testing performed, it was determined that documentation to support quotes, estimates, or closed bids were not maintained prior to entering into contracts. Additionally, documentation was not maintained to support that the vendors were not suspended or debarred. Cause: The Organization has designed internal controls over these areas; however, the controls did not operate as designed. Effect: Purchases were made that did not adhere to the Health Organization’s procurement, suspension and debarment policy. Questioned costs: n/a Context: The Organization did not maintain supporting documentation that management obtained price or rate quotes for purchases above the micro‐purchase threshold. In addition, the Health Center did not maintain documentation to support that the vendors were not suspended or debarred, however subsequent testing verified that none of the vendors selected for review were suspended or debarred. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. Procedures will be developed and staff will be trained to ensure future procurement, suspension and debarment transactions are identified and documentation is maintained to support the evaluation. Repeat Finding: n/a Recommendation: The Organization should review and update the procurement and suspension and debarment policies. Additionally, the Organization should provide training to staff on transactions that are covered by the procurement, suspension and debarment policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. Procedures will be developed and staff will be trained to ensure future procurement, suspension and debarment transactions are identified and documentation is maintained to support the evaluation.
Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control for Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Health Center Program Cluster CFDA No. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. H80CS00438 and H8FCS40427 Criteria: The Organization is required to create a written procurement, suspension and debarment policy that complies with applicable federal requirements as indicated in 2 CFR 200.318 ‐200.326 and to follow this policy when procuring goods and services. Condition: During the testing performed, it was determined that documentation to support quotes, estimates, or closed bids were not maintained prior to entering into contracts. Additionally, documentation was not maintained to support that the vendors were not suspended or debarred. Cause: The Organization has designed internal controls over these areas; however, the controls did not operate as designed. Effect: Purchases were made that did not adhere to the Health Organization’s procurement, suspension and debarment policy. Questioned costs: n/a Context: The Organization did not maintain supporting documentation that management obtained price or rate quotes for purchases above the micro‐purchase threshold. In addition, the Health Center did not maintain documentation to support that the vendors were not suspended or debarred, however subsequent testing verified that none of the vendors selected for review were suspended or debarred. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. Procedures will be developed and staff will be trained to ensure future procurement, suspension and debarment transactions are identified and documentation is maintained to support the evaluation. Repeat Finding: n/a Recommendation: The Organization should review and update the procurement and suspension and debarment policies. Additionally, the Organization should provide training to staff on transactions that are covered by the procurement, suspension and debarment policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with this finding. Procedures will be developed and staff will be trained to ensure future procurement, suspension and debarment transactions are identified and documentation is maintained to support the evaluation.