Findings Citing § 200.327

Federal agency: U.S. Small Business Administration Federal program name: Congressional Grants Inclusive Ventures Small Business Program Assistance listing number: 59.059 Pass-through agency: Anne Arundel County, Maryland Pass-through number: SBAHQ23I0140 Award Period: September 1,2023 through August 31, 2028 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Findings: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance, Material Noncompliance (Modified Opinion) Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: Nonfederal entities must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327. 2 CFR section 200.318 states the grant recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in sections 200.317 through 200.327. Compliance: Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR section 180.220. All non-procurement transactions entered into by a pass-through entity (i.e., subawards to subrecipients), irrespective of award amount, are considered covered transactions, unless they are exempt as provided in 2 CFR section 180.215. When a non-federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the nonfederal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA), (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR section 180.300). Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition The Corporation did not follow their written procurement procedures which reflect applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations which also conform to the applicable federal law and standards identified in the Uniform Guidance. The Corporation could not provide documentation that it ensured contractors were not suspended or debarred before executing contracts with the entities. Questioned Costs Amounts paid to the two contractors for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 was $175,000. Context Supporting documentation for the procurement, suspension and debarment status for two of the two contractors selected for testing was not documented. Cause The Corporation has not historically received federal funding so the procurement, suspension and debarment documentation was not deemed necessary. Effect A lack of documented procurement standards for the Corporation could increase the risk of goods and services being procured through a method which is not in accordance with applicable State, local, and tribal law as well as federal regulations including the Uniform Guidance. If the suspension and debarment status is not verified when entering into covered transactions, it is possible that a subaward could be issued to an ineligible entity. Repeat Finding No Recommendation We recommend that management follow their written procurement policies and controls to ensure it maintains documentation of procurement, suspension and debarments checks and that the documentation is available for audit. Views of Responsible Officials Management agrees with finding. See corrective action plan for additional information.

Program: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Assistance Listing No.: 10.557 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Agriculture Passed-through: California Department of Public Health Award No.: 22-10307 Award Year: 2022 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Instance of Non-Compliance Criteria: 2 CFR section 200.303(a), Internal Controls, states that the non-Federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 2 CFR 200.327 Contract provisions. The recipient's or subrecipient's contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in Appendix II to Part 200—Contract Provisions for Non-Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Awards. Condition: During our testing of the County’s provisions for procurement requirements, we noted the following: 1.For three (3) out of three (3) contracts selected for testing, the County did not include theapplicable provisions described in 2 CFR 200 Appendix II. 2.For one (1) out of three (3) contracts selected for testing, the County could not provide acopy of the approved contract. 3.For three (3) out of three (3) contracts tested, we noted that there was no evidence theCounty verified that the contracted entities were not suspended or debarred or otherwiseexcluded from participating in federal programs prior to entering into the contract. Cause: The County did not follow their policy documenting the approval of the procurement. The County did not follow their policy to verify the information described in the condition prior to entering the transactions. The County’s policy does not include the requirement to include each of the applicable provisions identified in 2 CFR 200 Appendix II in its contracts or purchase orders. Effect: Failure to implement and maintain a proper control process could result in payments to vendors that are suspended or debarred or improper awarding of contracts under the procurement guidance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of three (3) out of ten (10) procurement contracts were tested. This represented a total of $184,840 in contracted services under the grant. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: Yes. Finding 2024-002 Recommendation: We recommend the County strengthen its policies and procedures to ensure that the verification of the debarment and suspension is documented and retained, the history of procurement transactions is documented and retained in its official records, and that contracts include all applicable provisions of 2 CFR 200 Appendix II. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.

Finding 2025-001 Internal control deficiency and noncompliance over procurement and suspension and debarment. Identification of the federal program: Assistance Listing Number 93.493: • Congressional Directives • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services • Federal award identification number – CE146487 • Federal award year – 7/1/2024 – 6/30/2025 • Pass-through entity – The Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center • Pass-through entity identifying numbers: H79FG000747 and H79FG001034 Criteria or specific requirement (including statutory, regulatory, or other citation): Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.303, Internal controls: The non-Federal entity must (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government,” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework,” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.318, General procurement standards: (a) the non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 200.317 through 200.327; (b) non-Federal entities must maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders; (c) (1) the non-Federal entity must maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.318, General procurement standards: (i) the non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.319, Competition: (a) All procurement transactions for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award must be conducted in a manner providing full and open competition consistent with the standards of this section and 200.320. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.320, Methods of procurement to be followed: The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with the standards of this section and 200.317, 200.318, and 200.319 for any of the following methods of procurement used for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or sub-award: (a) (2) Small purchases – (i) Small purchase procedures. The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which is higher than the micro-purchase threshold but does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold. If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources as determined appropriate by the non-Federal entity; (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance award exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate –(1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price; (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.320, Methods of procurement to be followed: (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold; (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.324, Contract cost and price: (a) The non-Federal entity must perform a cost or price analysis in connection with every procurement action in excess of the Simplified Acquisition Threshold, including contract modifications. The method and degree of analysis is dependent on the facts surrounding the particular procurement situation, but, as a starting point, the non-Federal entity must make independent estimates before receiving bids or proposals. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart C 200.214, Suspension and debarment: Non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations that restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter I, Part 180, Subpart C 180.300: What must I do before I enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier? When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by (a) checking SAM Exclusions; (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. Condition: During our testing over procurement, we observed management did not have documented procurement procedures that conformed to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR section 200.318 to 200.327 and written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Management did not have internal controls in place over procurements to ensure price or rate quotations were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources, formal procurements to ensure sealed bids or proposals were obtained through public advertising, and completion of a cost or price analysis in connection with all procurement actions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold. Management did not maintain records for procurements to document the history of procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. In addition, during our testing over suspension and debarment, we observed management did not retain support for internal control documentation for all vendors, evidencing that the vendors were searched for suspension and debarment upon entering into a contract supported with federal funds. Cause: Management did not have internal controls in place over the compliance requirements as stated in the criteria or specific requirement section above. Effect or potential effect: Procurements were not supported by internal controls and could potentially include unreasonable prices or rates. In addition, if a search for suspension and debarment is not conducted, the entity could contract with vendors that are suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: $1,385,165 – Assistance Listing Number 93.493 Federal award identification number – CE146487 Pass-through entity identifying numbers: H79FG000747 and H79FG001034 Questioned costs were computed as all procurements selected for testing. Questioned costs for each award are as follows: • CE146487: $60,874 • H79FG000747: $119,479 • H79FG001034: $1,204,812 Questioned costs means an amount, expended or received from a Federal award, that (1) is noncompliant or suspected noncompliant with Federal statutes, regulations, or the terms and conditions of the Federal award or (2) at the time of the audit, lacked adequate documentation to support compliance. Context: During our testing over procurements, we selected five vendors for testing with total expenditures of $1,385,165 from a population of procurements totaling $1,425,361, subject to formal procurement procedures. We observed management did not have internal controls in place to ensure the compliance requirements as stated in the criteria or specific requirement section above were performed for any of the five procurements selected for testing. For suspension and debarment, we selected five vendors for testing totaling $1,385,165. Management was unable to provide documentation that internal controls were executed for any of the vendors selected for testing. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: No. Recommendation: Management should create documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.327 and written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing the actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Management should develop and implement internal controls over procurements to ensure price or rate quotations are obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources, formal procurements to ensure sealed bids or proposals are obtained through public advertising, and completion of a cost or price analysis in connection with all procurement actions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold. Management should maintain records for procurements to document the history of procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Management should create documented suspension and debarment procedures and develop and implement internal controls to ensure vendors were searched for suspension and debarment at the time of awarding a contract supported by federal funding and retain evidence supporting such procedures. Management should review the procurements identified as questioned costs to identify if any improper payments were made to the entity. Views of responsible officials: We agree with the finding that internal controls were not sufficient to maintain compliance with federal procurement standards under Title 2, Subtitle A, Chapter II, Part 200, Subpart D, 200.318 to 200.327 for a non-federal entity. However, the funds were expended for the intended purpose of the federal award. The Company is committed to implementing internal controls to ensure procurement related to federal awards follow 2 CFR section 200.318 to 200.327. The Company will update the procurement policy to ensure it complies with the requirements of 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.327, which includes the written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest, governing the actions of its employees who select, award, and administer procurement contracts. This policy will include procedures to ensure proper procurement for purchases to ensure sufficient price quotations are obtained from the required number of qualified sources, proper sealed bids or proposals are obtained through public advertising, an appropriate cost or price analysis is performed for procurement actions exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, documentation is retained, and proper oversight is exercised to demonstrate compliance with 2 CFR section 200.318 through 200.327.

U.S. Department of Treasury Pass-through Entity: Mecklenburg County, North Carolina Program Name: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Significant Deficiency and Nonmaterial Noncompliance – Procurement Finding 2025-006 – Repeat Finding Criteria: Per Sections 200.318 – 200.327 of the Uniform Grant Guidance, a non-federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with Uniform Grant Guidance Title 2 CFR Section 200.318 for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. Furthermore, a contract award must not be made to a suspended or debarred party listed on the System for Award Management. Condition: There was one (1) contract out of two (2) contracts tested where Roof Above did not retain documentation demonstrating that the bid was publicly advertised as required under Uniform Grant Guidance procurement standards. Additionally, Roof Above did not perform or retain documentation evidencing verification that the vendor was not suspended or debarred on the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) prior to procuring services. Questioned Costs: None of the nonmaterial noncompliance items resulted in questioned costs. Effect: By not having sufficient documentation, the Organization may not be able to evidence compliance with Uniform Grant Guidance and could have improperly contracted with a vendor. Cause: The Organization did not have formalized procedures in place to ensure procurement requirements under Uniform Grant Guidance were consistently documented and reviewed, including public advertisement of bids and verification of vendor suspension or debarment status, prior to entering into contracts. Recommendation: The Organization should consider implementing a procurement policy in line with Uniform Grant Guidance and ensure proper documentation of the procurement process for all vendors utilized with federal funding. Views of Management: Management agrees with the finding and is implementing procedures to correct this which are further discussed in the Corrective Action Plan. See Corrective Action Plan for more information.

Assistance Listing Number 84.181 Special Education Department of Education Passed Through Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians Procurement 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327 Criteria Procurement Standards require for the District to maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. Condition The District performed a procurement activity that did not follow District policies as well as standards found in 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. The District failed to obtain quotes or bids for a purchase exceeding $10,000. This condition was noted for the following expenditure: Check 240313 Dated 10/17/2024 for $10,219.00 Context Per discussion with the District staff and review of program expenditures, there were 2 expenditures incurred in which quotes or bids should have been obtained. Both transactions were tested and it was noted that 1 transaction did not have the necessary quotes or bids. Cause District’s internal controls in place failed to ensure all procurement policies are followed. Effect District is not in compliance with their internal procurement policies and procurement standards. Questioned Costs Undeterminable. Repeat Finding See prior year finding 2024-006 Recommendation Recommend the District to review internal controls to ensure all internal policies and compliance requirements are both being monitored and the District is remaining in compliance. Management’s Response See corrective action plan.

Finding 2025-001 – Material Weakness AL No: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Passed-through: California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) Passed-through Grantor’s No’s.: SPIL-6085 (091) for Caltrans and #240023 for SACOG. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E (Uniform Guidance) Section 200.318(a) states that the “The recipient or subrecipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in Sections 200.317 through 200.327.” The contract should have conformed to the following sections in the Caltrans Local Assistance Procedures Manual (LAPM): - Section 10.1 provides requirements for federally funded architectural and engineering (A&E) contracts. - Section 10.3 provides requirements for non-A&E contracts. - Section 10.1.9 states that the local public agency (LPA) must “obtain Caltrans approval on the Exhibit 12- F: Cost Effectiveness/Public Interest Finding/A&E Noncompetitive and retain all documents in the project files” for procurements by noncompetitive proposals. - Section 9.7.2 states that the LPA must have a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) goal set, and “must have an Exhibit 9-D: DBE Contract Goal Methodology submitted to the” District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE). “LPAs may not advertise the contract before receiving DLAE feedback on the DBE goal.” Condition: Caltrans notified the Authority that two Next-Generation Facility Project (the Project) consulting contracts were procured in compliance the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA’s) procurement guidelines but did not conform with the State of California LAPM. Caltrans indicated that the AECOM A&E consultant contract procurement did not comply with Sections 10.01 and 10.1.9 of the LAPM, including not including a Public Interest Finding for the sole source procurement of the agreement, and the LeFlore Group, LLC non-A&E consultant contract procurement did not comply with Section 10.3 of the LAPM. In addition, a Disadvantaged Business Enterprise goal was not requested nor completed as part of the advertisement for the project, which was required under Section 9.7.2 of the Caltrans LAPM. Effect: The Authority was not in compliance with the Caltrans LAPM and as a result, the Authority was required to halt work and repay Caltrans and SACOG for funds already reimbursed to the Project of $300,000 under AL 20.205. Cause: Caltrans and SACOG are both pass-through agencies for this grant, with the Authority being the final subrecipient. SACOG was not aware that the procurement requirements under this grant follow U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration requirements that differ from U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration requirements, which are administered by a different Caltrans department. As a result, the additional requirements in the LAPM were not communicated to the Authority and the Authority was not aware of the requirements and failed to comply with the LAPM. Context: The Authority submitted the procurement to the Caltrans Federal Transit Administration Programs Procurement Oversight Branch for approval prior to contracting with the consultants and the procurement was approved. However, the grant was provided through the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Caltrans has a different oversight Branch for FHWA funded projects, which was not made clear to the Authority by either passthrough agency. AL 20.205 was originally reported on the SEFA and was selected for testing a major program as it was a high-risk Type B program under which the Authority incurred $300,000 of grant expenses and received the grant proceeds prior to June 30, 2025. Caltrans issued a sanction letter on December 9, 2025, which required the grant funds to be returned to Caltrans. As a result, the Authority removed the expenses from the SEFA, but the program is reported as a major program to report the procurement finding on the schedule of findings and questioned costs. - Questioned Costs: $300,000 Recommendation: We recommend the Authority add additional language to its Procurement Policy documenting the requirement to follow Section 10 of the LAPM and the criteria under which it applies when grants are received from the FHWA. Management’s Response: Management’s response is included in the attached Corrective Action Plan. Report on Internal Control over Compliance See finding 2025-001 above, which is also considered to be an internal control over compliance finding in the Major Federal Awards Program Audit.

Section III - Findings and Questioned Costs - Major Federal Award Program Audit Finding Reference Number: 2025-001 Title and Assistance Listing Number of Federal Program: Economic Development Initiative, Community_x0004_ Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants - 14.251 Type of Finding: Federal Award Finding Finding Resolution Status: In Process Information on Universe Population Size: N/A Sample Size Information: N/A Identification of Repeat Finding and Finding Reference Number: Not a repeat finding Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.318(a), non-federal entities must establish and maintain oversight to ensure that contractors perform in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders. As required under 2 CFR Subpart D (§§200.317–200.327), organizations must follow written procurement procedures that reflect applicable state, local, and tribal laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal law and the standards in the Uniform Guidance. Statement of Condition: United Playaz, Inc. and Subsidiary (the "Organization") does not have a documented procurement policy that complies with the procurement standards in 2 CFR 200.317–200.327. The Organization has purchasing policies, but no written procedures addressing required elements such as procurement methods, competition, conflicts of interest, domestic preferences, price/cost analysis, or contractor oversight. Cause: The absence of a compliant procurement policy appears to stem from insufficient familiarity with the detailed procurement requirements in the Uniform Guidance, as this was their first award and audit under these standards. Management utilized other local government procurement policies to perform their procurement procedures. Effect or Potential Effect: While no procurement errors were identified during the audit and no questioned costs resulted from this condition, the lack of required written procedures increases the risk of: -Noncompliance with Federal procurement standards -Inadequate competition and pricing documentation -Increased susceptibility to conflict of interest risks -Potential future questioned costs or disallowed expenditures Failure to maintain documented procedures also impairs the organization’s ability to demonstrate compliance to Federal agencies and pass through entities. Auditor Non-Compliance Code: S - Internal control deficiencies Questioned Costs: $- Reportable Views of Responsible Officials: While United Playaz did not have their own policy compliant with federal standards, the organization has historically used procurement guidelines as required by the San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) which complies to the Federal standards and guidelines administered and approved by HUD. In addition, the general contractor procurement process was completed prior to the initiation and receipt of the HUD award. _x0004__x0004_Management acknowledges that, while procurement activities were performed using established external guidelines, the Organization did not have a formally adopted written procurement policy that fully complies with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.317–200.327 at the time of the audit. Management has since identified this gap and is in the process of developing a compliant written procurement policy. Context: For procurement processes, the Organization has historically utilized procurement guidelines required by the San Francisco Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development and other applicable local government procurement frameworks. In addition, the general contractor procurement process was completed prior to the initiation and receipt of the federal award. Recommendations: 1. Develop and formally adopt a written procurement policy that complies with 2 CFR 200.317–200.327 addressing at minimum: -Procurement methods and applicable dollar thresholds -Full and open competition requirements -Standards of conduct and conflicts of interest -Price or cost analysis (200.324) -Domestic preference (200.322) -Use of small/minority owned businesses (200.321) -Required contract provisions (200.327) 2. Train staff involved in procurement to ensure consistent understanding and implementation. 3. Periodically review and update the policy to remain compliant as Federal requirements evolve Auditors’ Summary of the Auditee’s Comments on the Findings and Recommendations: Response Indicator: Agree Completion Date: 6/30/2026 Response: The Organization is in the process of developing, and will formally adopt and implement, a written procurement policy that complies with the requirements of 2 CFR 200.317–200.327. The policy will address, at a minimum, procurement methods, competition requirements, standards of conduct and conflicts of interest, price or cost analysis, domestic preference requirements, and required contract provisions. In addition, management will provide formal training to personnel involved in procurement to ensure consistent application of the policy and ongoing compliance with Federal procurement standards.

Condition – During our audit, we noted the quarterly report ended March 31, 2025, was not filed. The expenditures for that period were included on the quarterly report ended June 30, 2025. Effect – The effect is the inaccurate and untimely reporting of expenditures in the proper quarter. Cause – The cause is a lack of timely information received from the subrecipient to complete the reporting in a timely manner. Criteria – According to 2 CFR §200.327, Financial Reporting, information must be collected with the frequency required by the terms and conditions of the Federal award. The contract requires the filing of the quarterly report within 45 days after the quarter-end. Recommendation – We recommend that Yavapai County establish a system of monitoring the WIOA Cluster reporting requirements and review the listing to verify that reports are filed timely. Management’s Response – Yavapai County’s responsible officials’ views and planned corrective action are in its corrective action plan at the end of the report.

Federal Program: Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting Grant (including COVID-19) - ALN 93.870; Federal Award # 24853633; passed through Texas Department of Family and Protective Services; passed through Texas Health and Human Services Commission. State Programs: Texas Home Visiting (THV) Program Grant - Award # 24853633; direct funding from Texas Department of Family and Protective Services. Texas Home Visiting (THV) Program Grant - Award # 24853633; direct funding from Texas Health and Human Services Commission. Criteria: Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.318 - 200.327) and TxGMS (General Procurement Standards) requires non-federal entities to ensure procurements are conducted using appropriate methods based on dollar thresholds and retain supporting documentation, including an adequate number of quotations from qualified sources for simplified acquisitions (formerly small purchases). Condition /Context: During testing of procurement transactions, two instances were identified in which management incorrectly classified procurements as sole source without adequate justification in accordance with Uniform Guidance or TxGMS, as applicable. Additionally, in these two instances tested, management did not retain sufficient documentation of quotes to support that procurements were conducted in compliance with simplified acquisition requirements (formerly small purchase). Questioned Costs: None Effect: Noncompliance with procurement requirements of Uniform Guidance and TxGMS, which increases the risk that purchases were not conducted in a manner providing full and open competition and may result in disallowed costs or increased scrutiny from grantor agencies. Cause: The condition resulted from inadequate procurement controls, including a lack of formalized review procedures for determining and documenting appropriate procurement methods. This resulted in United Way ATX not retaining the required supporting documentation for competitive procurements. Recommendations: United Way ATX should strengthen procurement controls by performing supervisory review of procurement classification and supporting documentation prior to approval and payment. In addition, management should implement standardized documentation requirements, including identification of procurement methods used and retention of quotes or bids for applicable procurements.

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, passed through Barren County Fiscal Court ALN 14.251 – Economic Development Initiative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Contract No. B-22-CP-KY-0347 (2022) and B-23-CP-KY-0612 (2023) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.327 requires non-Federal entities to include a provision for compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act as supplemented by Department of Labor regulations. The Davis-Bason Act requires contractors to pay prevailing wages on federally funded or assisted construction projects, and requires non-Federal entities entering into such construction contracts to collect weekly certified payroll reports for all weeks in which wages are paid to construction workers. 2 CFR 200.303 requires recipients and subrecipients to establish, document, and maintain effective controls over Federal awards. Condition: During our audit procedures, we noted the Authority did not notify contractors that Federal funds would be in payments. As such, contractors did not include federal prevailing wage language in their bids/contracts, and did not provide weekly certified payroll reports to the Authority. Cause: Management was unaware of the requirements of prevailing wage for federal construction grants, and as such, did not communicate to contractors that federal funds would be utilized. Effect: The Authority was not in compliance with the Davis-Bacon Act and related regulations. Questioned Costs: Unable to determine. Recommendation: We recommend management obtain a greater understanding of the Davis-Bacon Act, and implement a review process whereby contracts and invoices are not approved without appropriate prevailing wage consideration and certified payrolls. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management concurs with the finding and as a result, the Authority will gain a greater understanding of HUD grants, and will implement a review process to ensure prevailing wage requirements are considered prior to approving contracts and invoices.

NONCOMPLIANCE WITH PROCUREMENT AND SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT REQUIREMENTS, CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS, ASSISTANCE LISTING No. 21.027, Direct Allocation, AM-23-0256, AM-23-0255, YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2025 Criteria: Per 2 CFR 200.214, non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement, debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR part 180. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. Condition: The city did not comply with the procurement standards outlined in 2 CFR §200.318-§200.327, which require competitive procurement processes and verification that contractors are not suspended or debarred. Specifically, the city did not verify the eligibility of program recipients/participants/contractors through the System for Award Management (SAM) or equivalent documentation in order to verify that they were not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in the program. Cause: The city does not have procurement policies and procedures in place that allow it to comply with procurement standards outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Effect: Non-compliance with program terms and conditions. Questioned costs: None. Recommendation: Management should develop procedures that will provide reasonable assurance that procurement of goods and services are made in compliance with applicable federal regulations and other procurement requirements specific to a federal award or subaward, and that no subaward, contract, or agreement for purchase of goods or services is made with any suspended or debarred party. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: The government agrees with this finding and will adhere to the attached corrective action plan.

2025-005 – Procurement Federal program information: Funding agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Title: All major programs Assistance listing numbers: 93.696, 93.912 Award year: 7/1/2024 – 6/30/2025 Criteria: According to 2 CFR Part 200.318 through 200.327, non-federal entities 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. SFRC’s P&P Manual requires two written quotes for purchases between $10,000 and $250,000. Purchases over $250,000 require advertisement in the local newspaper, bid opening/evaluation, and the Board of Directors shall approve purchases in excess of $250,000 prior to contract signing. Condition: For one vendor paid in excess of $10,000 during fiscal year 2025, no written quotes were obtained for the services. There was also no purchase order approved with this vendor and there is no evidence that the Board of Directors approved the purchase. The contract signed with this vendor exceeded $250,000, and there is also no evidence that the Board of Directors approved this contract. One additional vendor was also paid in excess of $10,000 during fiscal year 2025, and there were no written quotes were obtained for the goods purchased. Context: One of ten vendors tested under ALN 93.696 and two of ten vendors tested under ALN 93.912. Questioned Costs: None Cause: SFRC has not implemented the requirements of its P&P Manual over procurement. Effect: SFRC is not in compliance with its P&P Manual and SFRC could be paying more for goods and services than if bids/quotes had been obtained. Auditor’s Recommendation: SFRC should enforce internal control procedures to ensure that all purchases are made in a manner consistent with its P&P Manual. Management’s Response: Management reviewed existing accounting staffing structure, revised position descriptions, and have advertised to fill two of three open positions; Accounts Payable Specialist and Controller. Management feels with these revised position descriptions, more focus on accounting operations, procedures, and property and equipment management.

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

Item 2025-004 - Reporting - U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Health Center Program Cluster (Assistance Listing Number 93.224/93.527) Notice of Award Number 6 H80CS00505-23-04, 6 H2ECS45602-02-04, 1 H8LCS50772-01-00 and 6 H8HCS46163-03-01 - (Significant Deficiency) Criteria: In accordance with 2 CFR § 200.327 and the terms and conditions of the federal award, LBUCC is required to submit accurate and timely Federal Financial Reports (SF-425) that reflect cumulative expenditures, unobligated balances, and program income. These reports must align with the underlying accounting records and be supported by documentation evidencing management's review and approval prior to submission. Statement of Condition: LBUCC did not maintain documentation evidencing management's review of the Federal Financial Report (SF-425) prior to submission. Although the reports were submitted timely, there were no indication of formal review procedures to validate the accuracy, completeness, or consistency of reported financial data with the accounting records. Cause: Lack of policies and procedures in relation to the review of the Federal Financial Report by a knowledgeable individual who is not the preparer thereof. Effect: In the absence of documented review, there is an increased risk of inaccurate financial reporting, which could lead to misstated expenditures and noncompliance with federal reporting requirements. Questioned Costs: None Context: All four annual Federal Financial Report (SF-425) tested had no evidence of review prior to submission. However, there was adequate support for the reports and the reports agreed to the underlying records. Identification as a Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that LBUCC establish and implement a formal review process over the Federal Financial Report (SF-425); we also recommend that evidence of the review be documented and approval be kept on file. Management Response: Management agrees with the finding and will be implementing formal review procedures including documented evidence of review and approval prior to submission.

Finding 2025-003 Identification of the Federal Program: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: AL 14.267 – Continuum of Care Program Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303(a) of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and conditions of the federal award. The nonfederal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200 Appendix II requires certain provisions be included in contracts if criteria are met. As outlined in 2 CFR 180, recipients must not utilize any contractor which is suspended or debarred or is otherwise excluded from the central contractor registry. Statement of condition and cause The Organization’s procurement policy did not include all the required elements as outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the Organization did not retain documentation to support the procedures performed to ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements. Effect Lack of complete procurement, suspension, and debarment policies and not retaining documentation to support compliance with suspension and debarment requirements could result in noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs N/A Repeat Finding No Recommendation We recommend that management develop a written procurement policy that conforms with the Uniform Guidance. In addition, we recommend that management implement procedures and control processes to retain documentation supporting compliance with major federal program compliance requirements regarding suspension and debarment. Management response See Corrective Action Plan

Finding 2025-003 Identification of the Federal Program: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: AL 14.267 – Continuum of Care Program Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Significant deficiency in internal controls over compliance. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303(a) of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and conditions of the federal award. The nonfederal entity’s documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200 Appendix II requires certain provisions be included in contracts if criteria are met. As outlined in 2 CFR 180, recipients must not utilize any contractor which is suspended or debarred or is otherwise excluded from the central contractor registry. Statement of condition and cause The Organization’s procurement policy did not include all the required elements as outlined in the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the Organization did not retain documentation to support the procedures performed to ensure compliance with suspension and debarment requirements. Effect Lack of complete procurement, suspension, and debarment policies and not retaining documentation to support compliance with suspension and debarment requirements could result in noncompliance with the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs N/A Repeat Finding No Recommendation We recommend that management develop a written procurement policy that conforms with the Uniform Guidance. In addition, we recommend that management implement procedures and control processes to retain documentation supporting compliance with major federal program compliance requirements regarding suspension and debarment. Management response See Corrective Action Plan

Criteria: 2 CFR §200.327 and §200.328 requires recipients of federal awards to submit accurate and timely financial reports as required by the terms and conditions of the award. The Federal Financial Report (FFR) must be submitted by the due date specified in the grant agreement and must reflect accurate financial data. Condition and Context: During our audit of the Community Health Centers Cluster, we noted the entity failed to submit the required FFRs by the established deadlines for two annual reports. Additionally, two submitted reports contained inaccuracies, including expenditures that did not agree to amounts reported on the 2024 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and/or underlying supporting financial records. In one instance the report was filed 107 days late. In the second instance the report was filed 33 days late. Since this is a repeat finding, this is considered to not be an isolated instance and appears to be more indicative of a systemic problem. Effect: Failure to submit timely and accurate financial reports may result in noncompliance with federal regulations, potential withholding of future funding, and increased risk of questioned costs or audit findings. Cause: The delays and inaccuracies were attributed to inadequate internal controls over the financial reporting process, including lack of review procedures and insufficient training of staff responsible for preparing the reports. Recommendation: We recommend the entity strengthen its internal controls over the financial reporting process by implementing formal review procedures, providing staff training on federal reporting requirements, and establishing a calendar system to ensure timely submissions.

2025-003 - Lack of Written Federal Program Policies. Type: Material Weakness. Condition: The Village does not have documented policies and procedures specific to the administration of the Water and Waste Disposal for Rural Communities program. This includes the absence of written guidance on key compliance areas such as procurement, subrecipient monitoring, allowable costs, and reporting requirements under Uniform Guidance. Criteria: Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance, non-federal entities are required to establish and maintain effective internal controls and written policies to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of federal awards. These policies should be tailored to the specific requirements of each federal program. Cause: The entity has not developed formal written policies and procedures for the Water and Waste Disposal for Rural Communities program, possibly due to reliance on informal practices or general administrative policies that do not address federal-specific requirements. Effect: Without documented policies, there is an increased risk of noncompliance with federal requirements, inconsistent program administration, and lack of accountability. This may result in questioned costs, audit findings, or potential repayment of federal funds. Questioned Costs: n/a. Recommendation: We recommend that the Village develop and implement written policies and procedures specific to the Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural communities program. These should include: - Procurement standards in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318 – 200.327. - Subrecipient monitoring protocols. - Guidelines for allowable costs and cost principles. - Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. - Internal control procedures to ensure compliance. Training should also be provided to staff responsible for administering the program to ensure consistent application of these policies. Views of Responsible Officials: Management acknowledges the auditor’s finding regarding the absence of formally documented federal program policies. We recognize the importance of maintaining written procedures to ensure consistent compliance with Uniform Guidance requirements and to strengthen internal controls over federal awards. While informal practices have historically guided our federal program administration, we agree that formalizing these policies will enhance transparency, accountability, and operational efficiency. Management is currently in the process of developing written policies covering key areas such as procurement, allowable costs, subrecipient monitoring, and cash management. We anticipate completing this documentation and implementing the policies by February 28, 2026. We are committed to continuous improvement and appreciate the auditor’s recommendations as part of our efforts to maintain strong compliance and stewardship of federal funds.

2024-005 Assistance Listing Number 66.468 Drinking Water State Revolving Fund United States Environmental Protection Agency North Dakota Public Finance Authority Procurement Suspension & Debarment 2 CFR Part 200.318 Criteria 2 CFR Part 200.318 states that a non-Federal entity must have and use documented procedures, consistent with state, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of 2 CFR part 200.317 through 200.327. Condition District does not have a written procurement policy in place. Cause The District has not approved a written procurement policy. Effect Non-compliance with Procurement Suspension & Debarment compliance requirements. Questioned Costs Not Applicable Repeat Finding See 2023-005. Recommendation We recommend for the board of the District to create and implement a procurement policy that adheres to state and local regulations as well as 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions The District will create and approve a procurement policy that adheres to state and local regulations as well as 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327.

Department of Transportation Federal Financial Assistance Listing 20.106; Awards AIP3-46-0050-59, AIP3-46-0050-62, AIP3-46-0050-63, and AIP3-46-0050-64. COVID-19 Airport Improvement Program Reporting Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal awards that provide assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.327 and 2 CFR 200.328 require the auditee to collect financial information and monitor its activities under federal awards to assure compliance with applicable federal requirements and performance expectations are being achieved and report these items in accordance with the program requirements. Condition - The SF-425 annual report dated September 30, 2024, for award AIP3-46-0050-64 underreported the federal share of expenditures by $23,588, while the FAA Form 5100-127 annual report dated December 31, 2023, for all awards underreported the total capital expenditures and construction in progress by $2,729,962. Cause - The Authority does not have an internal control structure designed to ensure amounts reported on SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports are adequately reviewed and agree to underlying accounting records. Effect - Lack of compliance with designed internal controls over reporting could result in the Authority reporting incorrect or incomplete information. Questioned Costs - None reported. Context/Sampling - A nonstatistical sample of 7 reports out of 27 reports. Repeat Finding from Prior Year – Yes, prior year finding 2023-002 Recommendation - Management should determine and formalize reporting responsibilities between the Airport and the State and establish review processes to ensure that amounts included in SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports agree with the underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials - Management agrees with the finding.

Department of Transportation Federal Financial Assistance Listing 20.106; Awards AIP3-46-0050-59, AIP3-46-0050-62, AIP3-46-0050-63, and AIP3-46-0050-64. COVID-19 Airport Improvement Program Reporting Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal awards that provide assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.327 and 2 CFR 200.328 require the auditee to collect financial information and monitor its activities under federal awards to assure compliance with applicable federal requirements and performance expectations are being achieved and report these items in accordance with the program requirements. Condition - The SF-425 annual report dated September 30, 2024, for award AIP3-46-0050-64 underreported the federal share of expenditures by $23,588, while the FAA Form 5100-127 annual report dated December 31, 2023, for all awards underreported the total capital expenditures and construction in progress by $2,729,962. Cause - The Authority does not have an internal control structure designed to ensure amounts reported on SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports are adequately reviewed and agree to underlying accounting records. Effect - Lack of compliance with designed internal controls over reporting could result in the Authority reporting incorrect or incomplete information. Questioned Costs - None reported. Context/Sampling - A nonstatistical sample of 7 reports out of 27 reports. Repeat Finding from Prior Year – Yes, prior year finding 2023-002 Recommendation - Management should determine and formalize reporting responsibilities between the Airport and the State and establish review processes to ensure that amounts included in SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports agree with the underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials - Management agrees with the finding.

Department of Transportation Federal Financial Assistance Listing 20.106; Awards AIP3-46-0050-59, AIP3-46-0050-62, AIP3-46-0050-63, and AIP3-46-0050-64. COVID-19 Airport Improvement Program Reporting Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal awards that provide assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.327 and 2 CFR 200.328 require the auditee to collect financial information and monitor its activities under federal awards to assure compliance with applicable federal requirements and performance expectations are being achieved and report these items in accordance with the program requirements. Condition - The SF-425 annual report dated September 30, 2024, for award AIP3-46-0050-64 underreported the federal share of expenditures by $23,588, while the FAA Form 5100-127 annual report dated December 31, 2023, for all awards underreported the total capital expenditures and construction in progress by $2,729,962. Cause - The Authority does not have an internal control structure designed to ensure amounts reported on SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports are adequately reviewed and agree to underlying accounting records. Effect - Lack of compliance with designed internal controls over reporting could result in the Authority reporting incorrect or incomplete information. Questioned Costs - None reported. Context/Sampling - A nonstatistical sample of 7 reports out of 27 reports. Repeat Finding from Prior Year – Yes, prior year finding 2023-002 Recommendation - Management should determine and formalize reporting responsibilities between the Airport and the State and establish review processes to ensure that amounts included in SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports agree with the underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials - Management agrees with the finding.

Department of Transportation Federal Financial Assistance Listing 20.106; Awards AIP3-46-0050-59, AIP3-46-0050-62, AIP3-46-0050-63, and AIP3-46-0050-64. COVID-19 Airport Improvement Program Reporting Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance; Material Noncompliance Criteria - 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal controls over the federal awards that provide assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.327 and 2 CFR 200.328 require the auditee to collect financial information and monitor its activities under federal awards to assure compliance with applicable federal requirements and performance expectations are being achieved and report these items in accordance with the program requirements. Condition - The SF-425 annual report dated September 30, 2024, for award AIP3-46-0050-64 underreported the federal share of expenditures by $23,588, while the FAA Form 5100-127 annual report dated December 31, 2023, for all awards underreported the total capital expenditures and construction in progress by $2,729,962. Cause - The Authority does not have an internal control structure designed to ensure amounts reported on SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports are adequately reviewed and agree to underlying accounting records. Effect - Lack of compliance with designed internal controls over reporting could result in the Authority reporting incorrect or incomplete information. Questioned Costs - None reported. Context/Sampling - A nonstatistical sample of 7 reports out of 27 reports. Repeat Finding from Prior Year – Yes, prior year finding 2023-002 Recommendation - Management should determine and formalize reporting responsibilities between the Airport and the State and establish review processes to ensure that amounts included in SF-425 and FAA Form 5100-127 reports agree with the underlying accounting records. Views of Responsible Officials - Management agrees with the finding.

2024-001 Procurement Policies and Procedures Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: ISA-ARPA-ADWR-123022-01 - 2023 Pass-Through Agency: State of Arizona Governor’s Office Pass-Through Number(s): ERMT-20-002 Award Period: January 1, 2023 through January 1, 2026 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Under the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Title 2, Part 200, Uniform Administrative requires certain elements to be part of the District’s procurement standards. The general procurement standards require the District to have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to the procurement standards identified in § 200.317 through 200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. The details of this requirements can be found in Title 2, Part 200, CFR Section 318(a). Condition: During our testing, we noted the District did not have adequate internal controls designed to ensure procurement procedures that conform to Uniform Guidance were followed, or designed to ensure vendors were not suspended or debarred. Questioned costs: None Context: During our testing, it was noted that the District was not following their federal procurement policy #2023-05 to ensure compliance with CFR, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Subparts D and E when entering into vendor contracts. Also noted the District was not reviewing vendors prior to entering into a contract to ensure the vendor was not on the suspended or debarred vendor list maintained by the General Services Administration. Cause: The District does not have effective internal controls in place to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance procurement rules and procedures. Effect: The lack of internal controls over the provisions of procurement, suspension, and debarment compliance requirements provides an opportunity for noncompliance. Repeat Finding: Repeat of prior year finding 2023-001. Recommendation: We recommend the District design controls to ensure an adequate review process is in place to review potential contractors to determine compliance with the Uniform Guidance procurement rules and procedures. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management concurs with the finding, and as reported in the corrective action plan, District policies will be updated and approved to conform to federal guidance.

Finding No. 2024-001 Significant Deficiency: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment - Compliance and Control Finding ALN 21.027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Agency: US Department of the Treasury Pass-Through Entity: Johnson County, Kansas Criteria Or Specific Requirement: The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The regulations in 2 CFR 200.327 also require certain contract language to be included in all federal contracts as identified in Appendix II to 2 CFR part 200. Condition: Audit procedures revealed that both contracts tested did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended or debarred, or that the vendor was evaluated for suspension or debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. Additionally, the contracts did not include all contract provisions as required by 2 CFR 200.327. Cause: The vendor did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended and debarred, and the District did not evaluate the vendor for suspension and debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. The District utilized pre-existing on-call construction services and architectural services contracts that were competitively bid by Johnson County, Kansas for non-federal purposes and utilized these contracts for federal purposes without requiring the vendor to execute contract amendments to incorporate the requirements of 2 CFR 200.327. Effect: Suspension and debarment provisions were not met for both contracts tested; however, suspension and debarment checks were performed subsequent to contract performance indicating the vendors were not suspended or debarred. The contract provisions that were excluded as required by 2 CFR 200.327, could have resulted in the vendor or the District violating federal laws and regulations identified in the required contract provisions of 2 CFR 200.327. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Context: Out of two contracts tested, both contracts tested did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended or debarred and that the vendor was not evaluated for suspension and debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. Both contracts also did not include the contract provisions required by 2 CFR 200.327. Identification As A Repeat Finding: This is a not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that management include a suspension and debarment clause in all contracts which may get allocated to federal funding prior to allocating federal funds to the contract or perform alternative procedures to ensure the vendor is not suspended or debarred. We recommend that management execute contract amendments for the federally funded project to ensure that the contract provisions of 2 CFR 200.327 are incorporated into the existing vendor contracts. Views Of Responsible Officials (Unaudited): Management has since performed the suspension and debarment check for each vendor for which it used the on-call services contracts available. Additionally, management will include an addendum in future contracts to ensure vendor compliance with the federal contract regulations. Anticipated Completion Date: May 2025 Contact Person: Noelle Lewis, CFO

Finding No. 2024-001 Significant Deficiency: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment - Compliance and Control Finding ALN 21.027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Agency: US Department of the Treasury Pass-Through Entity: Johnson County, Kansas Criteria Or Specific Requirement: The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The regulations in 2 CFR 200.327 also require certain contract language to be included in all federal contracts as identified in Appendix II to 2 CFR part 200. Condition: Audit procedures revealed that both contracts tested did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended or debarred, or that the vendor was evaluated for suspension or debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. Additionally, the contracts did not include all contract provisions as required by 2 CFR 200.327. Cause: The vendor did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended and debarred, and the District did not evaluate the vendor for suspension and debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. The District utilized pre-existing on-call construction services and architectural services contracts that were competitively bid by Johnson County, Kansas for non-federal purposes and utilized these contracts for federal purposes without requiring the vendor to execute contract amendments to incorporate the requirements of 2 CFR 200.327. Effect: Suspension and debarment provisions were not met for both contracts tested; however, suspension and debarment checks were performed subsequent to contract performance indicating the vendors were not suspended or debarred. The contract provisions that were excluded as required by 2 CFR 200.327, could have resulted in the vendor or the District violating federal laws and regulations identified in the required contract provisions of 2 CFR 200.327. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Context: Out of two contracts tested, both contracts tested did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended or debarred and that the vendor was not evaluated for suspension and debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. Both contracts also did not include the contract provisions required by 2 CFR 200.327. Identification As A Repeat Finding: This is a not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that management include a suspension and debarment clause in all contracts which may get allocated to federal funding prior to allocating federal funds to the contract or perform alternative procedures to ensure the vendor is not suspended or debarred. We recommend that management execute contract amendments for the federally funded project to ensure that the contract provisions of 2 CFR 200.327 are incorporated into the existing vendor contracts. Views Of Responsible Officials (Unaudited): Management has since performed the suspension and debarment check for each vendor for which it used the on-call services contracts available. Additionally, management will include an addendum in future contracts to ensure vendor compliance with the federal contract regulations. Anticipated Completion Date: May 2025 Contact Person: Noelle Lewis, CFO

Finding No. 2024-001 Significant Deficiency: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment - Compliance and Control Finding ALN 21.027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Agency: US Department of the Treasury Pass-Through Entity: Johnson County, Kansas Criteria Or Specific Requirement: The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. The regulations in 2 CFR 200.327 also require certain contract language to be included in all federal contracts as identified in Appendix II to 2 CFR part 200. Condition: Audit procedures revealed that both contracts tested did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended or debarred, or that the vendor was evaluated for suspension or debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. Additionally, the contracts did not include all contract provisions as required by 2 CFR 200.327. Cause: The vendor did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended and debarred, and the District did not evaluate the vendor for suspension and debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. The District utilized pre-existing on-call construction services and architectural services contracts that were competitively bid by Johnson County, Kansas for non-federal purposes and utilized these contracts for federal purposes without requiring the vendor to execute contract amendments to incorporate the requirements of 2 CFR 200.327. Effect: Suspension and debarment provisions were not met for both contracts tested; however, suspension and debarment checks were performed subsequent to contract performance indicating the vendors were not suspended or debarred. The contract provisions that were excluded as required by 2 CFR 200.327, could have resulted in the vendor or the District violating federal laws and regulations identified in the required contract provisions of 2 CFR 200.327. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. Context: Out of two contracts tested, both contracts tested did not include a suspension and debarment clause representing that the vendor is not suspended or debarred and that the vendor was not evaluated for suspension and debarment prior to allocating federal funds to the contract. Both contracts also did not include the contract provisions required by 2 CFR 200.327. Identification As A Repeat Finding: This is a not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that management include a suspension and debarment clause in all contracts which may get allocated to federal funding prior to allocating federal funds to the contract or perform alternative procedures to ensure the vendor is not suspended or debarred. We recommend that management execute contract amendments for the federally funded project to ensure that the contract provisions of 2 CFR 200.327 are incorporated into the existing vendor contracts. Views Of Responsible Officials (Unaudited): Management has since performed the suspension and debarment check for each vendor for which it used the on-call services contracts available. Additionally, management will include an addendum in future contracts to ensure vendor compliance with the federal contract regulations. Anticipated Completion Date: May 2025 Contact Person: Noelle Lewis, CFO

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

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

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

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

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

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

Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Program: Continuation of the National Evaluations System for Health Technology Coordinating Center Assistance listing number: 93.103 Federal award identification number and year: • 2U01FD006292-06 2024 • 3U01FD006292-06S1 2023 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.318 states non-federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200.214 states non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Order 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR Part 180. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. 2 CFR 200 requires adequate documentation of compliance with 2 CFR 200.214. Condition and context: The Organization established policies and procedures over suspension and debarment, including checking all vendors against the government suspension and debarment listing. The policies and procedures for suspension and debarment were being followed however the evidence of the search on sam.gov was not retained. A sample of five vendors with a total contract value of $8,528,526 was selected from a population of twelve. Cause: The Organization’s management did not retain evidence of compliance with the above criteria regarding suspension and debarment due to oversight. Effect: The Organization’s documentation was lacking evidence of tracking vendors for suspension and debarment. Questioned costs: None Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend management updates its policies and procedures to ensure adequate supporting documentation of suspension and debarment verification is maintained. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan.

Procurement, Suspension and Debarment Federal agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Program: Continuation of the National Evaluations System for Health Technology Coordinating Center Assistance listing number: 93.103 Federal award identification number and year: • 2U01FD006292-06 2024 • 3U01FD006292-06S1 2023 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.318 states non-federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. 2 CFR 200.214 states non-Federal entities are subject to the non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Order 12549 and 12689, 2 CFR Part 180. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. 2 CFR 200 requires adequate documentation of compliance with 2 CFR 200.214. Condition and context: The Organization established policies and procedures over suspension and debarment, including checking all vendors against the government suspension and debarment listing. The policies and procedures for suspension and debarment were being followed however the evidence of the search on sam.gov was not retained. A sample of five vendors with a total contract value of $8,528,526 was selected from a population of twelve. Cause: The Organization’s management did not retain evidence of compliance with the above criteria regarding suspension and debarment due to oversight. Effect: The Organization’s documentation was lacking evidence of tracking vendors for suspension and debarment. Questioned costs: None Repeat finding: No Recommendation: We recommend management updates its policies and procedures to ensure adequate supporting documentation of suspension and debarment verification is maintained. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan.

Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Criteria: Procurement In accordance with 2 CFR Part 200 for Procurement, small purchase procedures are used for purchases that exceed the micro-purchase amount but do not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold ($250,000). If small purchase procedures are used, price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive quotations if the non-federal entity considers the price reasonable and maintains documents to support its conclusion. Further, in accordance with the Laboratory’s procurement policy, documentation is required, using the Laboratory’s vendor justification/price verification form, for purchases to support the price checking and vendor selection for the items being charged directly to a federal award. Condition: 30 procurement transactions were selected from all procurement transactions over $10,000 under federal awards. Of the 30 items selected, we noted 1 item did not follow the requirement to obtain and maintain documentation in accordance with the Laboratory’s policy over soliciting competitive quotations for procurements over $10,000. Possible Asserted Cause and Effect: The Laboratory did not comply with their procurement policy or the 2 CFR Part 200, Appendix XI. The review controls in place to identify such required documentation was not executed as designed and as a result an invoice was charged to a federal award without the requisite documentation. However, we note the Laboratory did identify the error in documentation after the fact, during a monitoring review conducted by internal audit in 2025. Identification of Questioned Costs: $33,940 Whether Sampling was Statistically Valid: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Identification of Whether the Audit Finding was a Repeat Findings: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Laboratory review its current policies and procedures to ensure procurement transactions are reviewed and substantiated with formal documentation prior to approval of the transaction. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with finding 2024-001. In fiscal year 2024 the Laboratory charged a federal sponsored award for a procurement item, which exceeded the Laboratory’s micro-purchase threshold, without maintaining the proper documentation as required by Laboratory procurement policy. In fiscal 2025 this item was identified by the Laboratory’s Internal Audit and Sponsored Programs Accounting Offices as part of their routine review program. The transaction cost was removed by Laboratory Management from the federal award within 90 days of the item’s discovery; however, because the item was identified and adjusted in 2025, the fiscal year 2024 Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) was overstated. To ensure compliance with the Laboratory’s procurement policies, the Laboratory has implemented corrective actions as detailed below, in line with the recommendation: Corrective Actions Previously Implemented: 1. The Laboratory’s Internal Audit and Sponsored Program Accounting Offices will continue to conduct regular reviews of procurement items to ensure that documentation complies with Laboratory Procurement Methods Policy and Procedure, to ensure compliance with Laboratory policy, designed to ensure compliance with 2 CFR Sections 200.317 through 200.327. The audit focus will continue to be on 100% of sponsored award procurement transactions in the small purchase threshold. 2. The Laboratory Information Technology department, in collaboration with the Laboratory’s Procurement Office Director, enhanced certain system-generated reporting to allow for easier identification by Procurement Office personnel of charges to sponsored awards. Corrective Actions to be Implemented: 1. The Laboratory’s Sponsored Programs Accounting Office, in collaboration with its Procurement Office, will provide an annual re-education to Laboratory administrative research personnel concerning Laboratory Procurement Policies, designed to ensure compliance with 2 CFR Sections 200.317 through 200.327. 2. The Sponsored Programs Accounting Office will provide re-training for administrative staff to reinforce the Laboratory Procurement Method Policies and Procedure. 3. The Director of Procurement will streamline access and visibility of the Procurement Methods Policy and Procedure on the Laboratory’s internal website. Management intends for the re-education of administrative research personnel and re-training for administrative staff to be concluded by the end of the third quarter and/or early fourth quarter of 2025. Management intends to provide for streamlined access and visibility of Laboratory Procurement Methods Policy and Procedure on its internal website prior to the end of 2025.

2024-001: Internal Controls over Compliance for Procurement Suspension & Debarment U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – ALN 21.027 Criteria: Per 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327, [entities] 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. Further, when a non-federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. Condition: The City did not follow its Grant Standard Operating procedures for validating that a contractor was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. Cause: The contract agreement was finalized without validation that all proper procurement procedures had been followed. Effect: By not following the City’s procedures in place, it puts the City at risk of doing business with companies who are suspended, debarred or otherwise excluded from doing business with the federal government. Questioned Costs: $0 Context: The auditor tested one procurement transaction entered into during 2024 using COVID- 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. The City’s Grant Standard Operating procedures over suspension and debarment were not followed for this one procurement. Identification of Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the City perform a separate individual check of contract files to ensure the City’s Grant Standard Operating procedures are followed and documented prior to entering into a contract agreement with covered contractors. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this finding and is in the process of developing internal controls to ensure timely and appropriate actions are taken on the deficiency noted. Additional details can be found in the City of Bloomington’s Corrective Action Plan.

2024-003: Lack of Procurement Policy – Significant Deficiency AL 66.468 Base Capitalization Grants for Drinking Water State Revolving Funds Criteria 2 CFR Part 200.318 states that a non-Federal entity must have and use documented procedures, consistent with state, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of 2 CFR part 200.317 through 200.327. Condition The City does not have a written procurement policy in place. Cause The City has not written and approved a procurement policy. Effect Non-compliance with Procurement Suspension & Debarment compliance requirements. Questioned Costs $0 Recommendation We recommend for the City to create and implement a procurement policy that adheres to state and local regulations as well as 2 CFR Part 200.317 through 200.327. Views of Responsible Officials A procurement policy will be developed and approved by the City Council. Repeat Finding This is a new finding.

FINDING 2024-003 Subject: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities - Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Federal Agency: Department of Agriculture Federal Program: Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities Assistance Listings Number: 10.760 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY2024 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2023-002. Condition and Context As part of sound management of the federal award, the Town was responsible for implementing a system of internal controls that would ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. The Town had not properly designed or implemented such a system, which would include appropriate segregation of duties, that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. The Town entered into contracts with three vendors in a prior year to provide goods and services for the duration of the Town's wastewater plant construction project. The total contract expenditures for all three vendors fell under the simplified acquisition threshold. The Town paid all three vendors with grant funds during the audit period, and all three were selected for testing accordingly. For two of the vendors, the Town properly procured the goods and services through the bidding process. For the third vendor, with disbursements totaling $106,269 in 2024, the Town was unable to provide any documentation that the procurement method used was appropriate or that the procurement provided full and open competition or rationale to support the determination to limit competition. Additionally, the history of the procurement, including rationale for the method of procurement, selection of the vendor, and the basis for the price, was not adequately documented. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to one vendor throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.318 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity must have and use documented procurement procedures, consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards of this section, for the acquisition of property or services required under a Federal award or subaward. The non-Federal entity's documented procurement procedures must conform to the procurement standards identified in §§ 200.317 through 200.327. . . . (i) The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.320 states in part: ". . . (b) Formal procurement methods. When the value of the procurement for property or services under a Federal financial assistance awards exceeds the SAT, or a lower threshold established by a non-Federal entity, formal procurement methods are required. Formal procurement methods require following documented procedures. Formal procurement methods also require public advertising unless a non-competitive procurement can be used in accordance with § 200.319 or paragraph (c) of this section. The following formal methods of procurement are used for procurement of property or services above the simplified acquisition threshold or a value below the simplified acquisition threshold the non-Federal entity determines to be appropriate: (1) Sealed bids. A procurement method in which bids are publicly solicited and a firm fixed-price contract (lump sum or unit price) is awarded to the responsible bidder whose bid, conforming with all the material terms and conditions of the invitation for bids, is the lowest in price. The sealed bids method is the preferred method for procuring construction, if the conditions. (i) In order for sealed bidding to be feasible, the following conditions should be present: (A) A complete, adequate, and realistic specification or purchase description is available; (B) Two or more responsible bidders are willing and able to compete effectively for the business; and (C) The procurement lends itself to a firm fixed price contract and the selection of the successful bidder can be made principally on the basis of price. (ii) If sealed bids are used, the following requirements apply: (A) Bids must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified sources, providing them sufficient response time prior to the date set for opening the bids, for local, and tribal governments, the invitation for bids must be publicly advertised; (B) The invitation for bids, which will include any specifications and pertinent attachments, must define the items or services in order for the bidder to properly respond; (C) All bids will be opened at the time and place prescribed in the invitation for bids, and for local and tribal governments, the bids must be opened publicly; (D) A firm fixed price contract award will be made in writing to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder. Where specified in bidding documents, factors such as discounts, transportation cost, and life cycle costs must be considered in determining which bid is lowest. Payment discounts will only be used to determine the low bid when prior experience indicates that such discounts are usually taken advantage of; and (E) Any or all bids may be rejected if there is a sound documented reason. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Proposals. A procurement method in which either a fixed price or cost-reimbursement type contract is awarded. Proposals are generally used when conditions are not appropriate for the use of sealed bids. They are awarded in accordance with the following requirements: (i) Requests for proposals must be publicized and identify all evaluation factors and their relative importance. Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of qualified offerors. Any response to publicized requests for proposals must be considered to the maximum extent practical; (ii) The non-Federal entity must have a written method for conducting technical evaluations of the proposals received and making selections; (iii) Contracts must be awarded to the responsible offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the non-Federal entity, with price and other factors considered; and (iv) The non-Federal entity may use competitive proposal procedures for qualifications based procurement of architectural/engineering (A/E) professional services whereby offeror's qualifications are evaluated and the most qualified offeror is selected, subject to negotiation of fair and reasonable compensation. The method, where price is not used as a selection factor, can only be used in procurement of A/E professional services. It cannot be used to purchase other types of services though A/E firms that are a potential source to perform the proposed effort. (c) Noncompetitive procurement. There are specific circumstances in which noncompetitive procurement can be used. Noncompetitive procurement can only be awarded if one or more of the following circumstances apply: (1) The acquisition of property or services, the aggregate dollar amount of which does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The item is available only from a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from publicizing a competitive solicitation; (4) The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity expressly authorizes a noncompetitive procurement in response to a written request from the non-Federal entity; or (5) After solicitation of a number of sources, competition is determined inadequate." Cause The vendor in question was an engineering firm that the Town has utilized for various projects over the course of many years. For continuity purposes, the Town chose to limit competition when awarding the contract but was unaware of the requirements necessary to do so. Since this was a multi-year award for which the Town entered into the contract in a prior year, the Town was unable to correct the noncompliance for the current audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 20 TOWN OF PAOLI SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, noncompliance remained undetected. As a result, proper procurement procedures were not adhered to for all vendors. Without following the required methods for procurement, the Town could be overpaying for services. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funds to the Town. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the Town's management establish a proper system of internal controls to ensure expenditures made from federal awards use the appropriate procurement method and retain the documentation to support the procurement methods used in order to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the federal award. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.

Significant Deficiency/Noncompliance 2 CFR sections 200.317 - 200.327 set the procurement standards to be followed when expending federal monies. During the testing of compliance with the procurement standards, it was noted that five out of nineteen of the vendors/contracts tested were not properly procured in accordance with the procurement standards. Not following the procurement standards may result in not receiving the best prices and result in underutilizing federal monies due to paying higher prices than needed. We recommend the City review the procurement standards and establish policies and procedures in order ensure the procurement standards are followed when expending federal monies. Officials Response: See Corrective Action Plan

Finding – Procurement, Suspension and Debarment; Special Education – Special Olympics Education Programs; Assistance Listing Number 84.380, 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 Award Years, U.S. Department of Education, passed through Special Olympics, Inc. Criteria or Specific Requirement The recipient must maintain and use documented (written) procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal Award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procedures must be consistent with applicable State, and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200.317-200.327) Condition and Context The Organization has a written (documented) purchasing policy in place, but it does not include all required elements for a procurement policy in accordance with Federal statutes. Cause The Organization has not created and developed a written procurement policy in accordance with Federal procurement statutes.Effect The purchase of goods, property or services may not be in accordance with Federal procurement requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding Not a repeat finding. Questioned Costs None. Recommendation We recommend that management develop a written procurement procedures policy in accordance with the requirements at 2 CFR 200.317-200.327 and ensure that procurement procedures follow this policy when procurement transactions are conducted using federal awards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions See Corrective Action Plan.

Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.

Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.

Finding 2024-003 – Material Weakness Award No.: Assistance List No. 15.555 and No. 15.074 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. AL No. 15.074 Passed-through the Del Puerto Water District. Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment. Condition: The following conditions were noted during the single audit: The District was not able to provide evidence that procurements for the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project and Poso Canal Bridge Replacement Project design contractors under AL 15.555 met the requirements for adequate price competition and was unable to provide documentation confirming the sole-source solicitations met the requirements of Uniform Guidance. Specifically the District was unable to provide evidence it received enough statements of qualification to have adequate price competition or complied with one or more provisions of Section 200.210(c) that allows a sole source agreement to occur. It would appear the District would need evidence that the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but was not able to provide documentation of approvals of sole source procurements by the grantors. The District also was unable to provide documentation of the advertisement of the solicitation of requests for qualifications for the Fish Screen and Control Structure Project. The District was not able to provide adequate documentation that the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project contract under AL 15.555 and Orestimba Creek Recharge and Recovery Expansion Project contract under AL 15.074 complied with Section 200.327 and appendix II to this part requiring federal contract provisions to be included in the approved contract. This resulted in the District not having evidence that the contractor certified it was in compliance with all required federal provisions. Criteria: Uniform Guidance states the following: Section 200.318(i) states that “The non-Federal entity must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of procurement. These records will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following: Rationale for the method of procurement, selection of contract type, contractors selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price.” Section 300.320(c) states “There are specific circumstances in which the recipient or subrecipient may use a noncompetitive procurement method. The noncompetitive procurement method may only be used if one of the following circumstances applies: (1) The aggregate amount of the procurement transaction does not exceed the micro-purchase threshold (see paragraph (a)(1) of this section); (2) The procurement transaction can only be fulfilled by a single source; (3) The public exigency or emergency for the requirement will not permit a delay resulting from providing public notice of a competitive solicitation; (4) The recipient or subrecipient requests in writing to use a noncompetitive procurement method, and the Federal agency or pass-through entity provides written approval; or (5) After soliciting several sources, competition is determined inadequate. The provisions of the Brooks Act (49 United State Code, Section 1104) require local agencies to award federally funded engineering and design related contracts, otherwise know as A&E contracts, on the basis of fair and open competitive negotiations, demonstrated competence, and professional qualifications (23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 172) at a fair and reasonable price (48 CFR 31.201-3). Both federal regulation and California state law (Government Code 4525-4529 et a) require selection of A&E consultant services on the basis of demonstrated competence and professional qualifications. Procurement by noncompetitive proposals may be used only when the award of a contract is infeasible under small purchase procedures, sealed bids or competitive proposals, as cited above. Section 200.327 states “The non-federal entity’s contracts must contain the applicable provisions described in appendix II to this part.” Appendix II contains requirements to include in federally funded contracts termination for cause and convenience provisions, Equal Employment Opportunity provisions, Davis-Bacon Act provisions, Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act provisions, Clean Air Act provisions, debarment and suspension provisions, Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment provisions, and other provisions, as applicable. Cause: The current staff was not able to find procurement documentation prepared before they were hired. Effect: The District was unable to provide evidence that it was in compliance with the requirement to maintain documentation indicating the procurement was in compliance with Uniform Guidance Sections 200.318 to 200.327 and appendix II to this part. Context: The original procurement for the consulting firm for the Mendota Pool Fish Screens and Control Structure project was performed in September 2018 and awarded in late October 2018. This procurement precedes the current staff. Staff indicated the grantor approved the Mendota Pool Fish Screen and Control Structure Project sole source procurement and the Board Resolution approving the agreement indicated the grantor approved the sole source procurement, but staff was not able to provide proof of written approval by the grantor. Recommendation: We recommend management implement additional controls over the procurement process that ensures each procurement complies with Uniform Guidance Section 200.318 to 200.326, including training of staff working on procurements of the documentation retention and other requirements under the Uniform Guidance. We further recommend the District establish a procurement folder on its server with subfolder for each individual procurement where documentation of each procurement is maintained, including advertising of the procurement, requests for proposals/qualifications with language that satisfies Uniform Guidance requirements, proposals received, executed contracts, certifications of compliance with federal contracting provisions by the contractor if not part of the proposal or executed contracts, documented quantitative and qualitative analysis indicating why the recommended bid was selected for approval, management report to board recommending which bid should be approved, board resolution approving the winning bid and for contracts under $250,000 a memo or form documenting bids received and reason for selecting the bid, including reasons for not selecting the lowest bid if applicable. If a sole source procurement method is used, documentation showing the sole source procurement is allowable under criteria listed in Section 300.320(c) should be retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management’s response and planned corrective action is included in the Corrective Action Plan included at the end of the report.

SECTION III - FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS FOR FEDERAL AWARDS Finding 2024-001: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment (Significant Deficiency) Federal Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury Assistance Listing Number and Title: 21.027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal award year: 2024 Criteria: Per 2 CFR §200.318, General procurement Standards, a recipient or subrecipient of Federal awards must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including for acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the standards identified in sections 200.317 through 200.327, as appropriate. The recipient or subrecipient must maintain records sufficient to detail the history of each procurement transaction. These records must include the rationale for the procurement method, contract type selection, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. In addition, 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 is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by: (1) checking SAM.gov Exclusions, (2) collecting a certification from that entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity (2 CFR §180.300). Condition/Context: From a sample of five (5) procurement transactions, there was no evidence that management performed simplified acquisition procedures relating to obtaining price and rate quotations from an adequate number of qualified sources for three (3) of the transactions tested. Further, for these three (3) transactions, there was no evidence that management completed procedures to verify whether the vendors were suspended or debarred. Cause: The USGA has significant prior history and experience in conducting competitive procurement processes for projects relating to improvements made to golf courses. Based on the USGA’s familiarity with vendors that perform such services, including knowledge of vendor pricing, qualifications, and other relevant factors, simplified acquisition procedures and suspension and debarment verification were not consistently performed. Effect: Procurement transactions could be conducted in a manner that does not provide full and open competition. Further, covered transactions could be entered into with an entity that is suspended or debarred. Questioned Costs: None identified Identified as a Repeat Finding: No Recommendations: We recommend that the USGA strengthen its policies and procedures relating to documentation of procurement decisions and suspension and debarment verifications. Vies of Responsible Officials: Refer to Corrective Action Plan.

Finding 2024-001 Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Agency and Award: Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Program: Economic Development Imitative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Assistance Listing Number: 14.251 Federal Award Identification Number: B-23-CP-CA-0141 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.318 states non-federal entities must have and use documented procurement procedures that conform to 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. They must use their own documented procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. These standards require non-federal entities to maintain written procedures for procurement transactions to ensure full and open competition, proper cost analysis, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. Condition and context: ASMYCA does not have an internal procurement policy established. Without a formal procurement policy, ASYMCA lacks a consistent framework for vendor selection, contract negotiation, and cost justification. Cause: ASYMCA’s management did not retain evidence in compliance with the above criteria regarding procurement. Effect: ASYMCA’s documentation was lacking evidence of an internal procurement policy. This may lead to inconsistent procurement practices, potential favoritism, increased risk of unallowable costs, or overpayment for goods and services. Questioned costs: None Repeat finding: No Recommendation: ASYMCA develop and implement a formal procurement policy as soon as possible. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with this finding and a response is included in the corrective action plan.

Department of Homeland Security, Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, Federal Financial Assistance Listing 97.039, DR-4457-IA-0040 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Procurement, Suspension & Debarment Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance and Noncompliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) establishes that the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal awards that provides assurance that the entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. 2 CFR 200.318 maintains that recipients must have and use documented procurement policies and must conform procurement standards in sections 200.317 through 200.327. Condition: The cooperative’s procurement policy had not identified the dollar thresholds of procurement within the methods of procurement. In addition, one contract selected for testing was missing one of the required contract provisions. Cause: The cooperative’s procurement policy is very thorough and identifies the methods of procurement, however, management had not identified the thresholds of procurement included within the policy. Effect: The Cooperative’s policy was missing required information Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 7 transactions out of 29 transactions were selected for testing, which accounted for $1,134,758 of $3,548,469 federal program expenditures. Repeat Finding form Prior Year: No Recommendation: We recommend the Cooperative review their procurement policy to ensure it includes the dollar thresholds for each of the procurement methods. In addition, we suggest the Cooperative review their contracts to ensure it includes all the required contract provisions. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.

2024-002 Procurement Federal Agency U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Assistance Listing Numbers 21.027 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria [ X ] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [ X ] Material Weakness Entities receiving federal awards must have and follow documented procurement policies. Title 2 CFR 200.320 outlines acceptable methods of procurement and establishes applicable threshold requirements. Condition During our review of federally funded purchases, we noted several instances where procurement transactions were not conducted in accordance with these federal guidelines. For purchases falling between the micro-purchase threshold and the simplified acquisition threshold, the District did not retain documentation to demonstrate that price quotations were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Additionally, for purchases exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the District was unable to provide documentation showing that the required number of bids were solicited. In one instance, a sole source acquisition was made without sufficient written justification, as required by 2 CFR 200.320(c), which permits noncompetitive procurement only under specific and well-documented circumstances. Furthermore, the District could not provide documentation verifying that vendors were screened against the federal System for Award Management (SAM.gov) to confirm that they were not suspended or debarred from participating in federal programs. Lastly, the District could not demonstrate that it performed conflict of interest checks to ensure that employees or officers participated in the selection, award or administration of a contract where conflicts of interest exist. This finding appears to be a systemic problem. Cause The District’s procurement policy was not compared with the federal regulations when it was developed. Management did not follow its established procurement policy and documentation was not maintained evidencing its compliance with the policy. Effect Noncompliance with federal procurement requirements increases the risk of unallowable costs, noncompetitive vendor selection, and potential questioned costs. This could result in financial penalties or the need to return federal funds. The absence of conflict of interest checks also exposes the District to the risk of biased procurement decisions and compromised integrity. Recommendation The District should update and enforce procurement policies and procedures to fully comply with 2 CFR 200.318–200.327. These procedures must include documented competitive procurement processes, appropriate documentation retention, sole source justification protocols, and mandatory screening of vendors through SAM.gov. Written standards of conduct should be maintained and enforced to prevent conflicts of interest. Additionally, all staff involved in procurement should receive comprehensive training on federal procurement requirements and internal control responsibilities. The District should also implement a monitoring process to ensure ongoing compliance with these requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions Two new policies will be implemented; a board policy to cover board approvals for the bidding of large projects and an internal policy and procedure which spells out additional requirements, like requiring three written bids for large purchases. In addition, all members of the Board of Directors and senior leadership team will sign Conflict of Interest statements on an annual basis to confirm that they do not have any potential conflicts that could impact purchasing decisions.

2024-002 Procurement Federal Agency U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Assistance Listing Numbers 21.027 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria [ X ] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [ X ] Material Weakness Entities receiving federal awards must have and follow documented procurement policies. Title 2 CFR 200.320 outlines acceptable methods of procurement and establishes applicable threshold requirements. Condition During our review of federally funded purchases, we noted several instances where procurement transactions were not conducted in accordance with these federal guidelines. For purchases falling between the micro-purchase threshold and the simplified acquisition threshold, the District did not retain documentation to demonstrate that price quotations were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Additionally, for purchases exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the District was unable to provide documentation showing that the required number of bids were solicited. In one instance, a sole source acquisition was made without sufficient written justification, as required by 2 CFR 200.320(c), which permits noncompetitive procurement only under specific and well-documented circumstances. Furthermore, the District could not provide documentation verifying that vendors were screened against the federal System for Award Management (SAM.gov) to confirm that they were not suspended or debarred from participating in federal programs. Lastly, the District could not demonstrate that it performed conflict of interest checks to ensure that employees or officers participated in the selection, award or administration of a contract where conflicts of interest exist. This finding appears to be a systemic problem. Cause The District’s procurement policy was not compared with the federal regulations when it was developed. Management did not follow its established procurement policy and documentation was not maintained evidencing its compliance with the policy. Effect Noncompliance with federal procurement requirements increases the risk of unallowable costs, noncompetitive vendor selection, and potential questioned costs. This could result in financial penalties or the need to return federal funds. The absence of conflict of interest checks also exposes the District to the risk of biased procurement decisions and compromised integrity. Recommendation The District should update and enforce procurement policies and procedures to fully comply with 2 CFR 200.318–200.327. These procedures must include documented competitive procurement processes, appropriate documentation retention, sole source justification protocols, and mandatory screening of vendors through SAM.gov. Written standards of conduct should be maintained and enforced to prevent conflicts of interest. Additionally, all staff involved in procurement should receive comprehensive training on federal procurement requirements and internal control responsibilities. The District should also implement a monitoring process to ensure ongoing compliance with these requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions Two new policies will be implemented; a board policy to cover board approvals for the bidding of large projects and an internal policy and procedure which spells out additional requirements, like requiring three written bids for large purchases. In addition, all members of the Board of Directors and senior leadership team will sign Conflict of Interest statements on an annual basis to confirm that they do not have any potential conflicts that could impact purchasing decisions.

2024-002 Procurement Federal Agency U.S. Department of the Treasury Federal Assistance Listing Numbers 21.027 – Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria [ X ] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [ X ] Material Weakness Entities receiving federal awards must have and follow documented procurement policies. Title 2 CFR 200.320 outlines acceptable methods of procurement and establishes applicable threshold requirements. Condition During our review of federally funded purchases, we noted several instances where procurement transactions were not conducted in accordance with these federal guidelines. For purchases falling between the micro-purchase threshold and the simplified acquisition threshold, the District did not retain documentation to demonstrate that price quotations were obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Additionally, for purchases exceeding the simplified acquisition threshold, the District was unable to provide documentation showing that the required number of bids were solicited. In one instance, a sole source acquisition was made without sufficient written justification, as required by 2 CFR 200.320(c), which permits noncompetitive procurement only under specific and well-documented circumstances. Furthermore, the District could not provide documentation verifying that vendors were screened against the federal System for Award Management (SAM.gov) to confirm that they were not suspended or debarred from participating in federal programs. Lastly, the District could not demonstrate that it performed conflict of interest checks to ensure that employees or officers participated in the selection, award or administration of a contract where conflicts of interest exist. This finding appears to be a systemic problem. Cause The District’s procurement policy was not compared with the federal regulations when it was developed. Management did not follow its established procurement policy and documentation was not maintained evidencing its compliance with the policy. Effect Noncompliance with federal procurement requirements increases the risk of unallowable costs, noncompetitive vendor selection, and potential questioned costs. This could result in financial penalties or the need to return federal funds. The absence of conflict of interest checks also exposes the District to the risk of biased procurement decisions and compromised integrity. Recommendation The District should update and enforce procurement policies and procedures to fully comply with 2 CFR 200.318–200.327. These procedures must include documented competitive procurement processes, appropriate documentation retention, sole source justification protocols, and mandatory screening of vendors through SAM.gov. Written standards of conduct should be maintained and enforced to prevent conflicts of interest. Additionally, all staff involved in procurement should receive comprehensive training on federal procurement requirements and internal control responsibilities. The District should also implement a monitoring process to ensure ongoing compliance with these requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions Two new policies will be implemented; a board policy to cover board approvals for the bidding of large projects and an internal policy and procedure which spells out additional requirements, like requiring three written bids for large purchases. In addition, all members of the Board of Directors and senior leadership team will sign Conflict of Interest statements on an annual basis to confirm that they do not have any potential conflicts that could impact purchasing decisions.