Criteria: The Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Part 200.318 requires that the Agency have documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward. Condition: The Agency has a procurement policy in place; however, it is not fully aligned with the procurement standards set forth in 2 CFR Part 200.317–200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Specifically, the policy does not incorporate all required procurement methods or procedures, such as competitive bidding (sealed bids), even though no purchases during the audit period met the threshold requiring formal bidding. Cause: The Agency's current policy has not been updated to fully address the specific requirements of 2 CFR Part 200.317–200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Effect: The Agency is not in compliance with 2 CFR Part 200.317–200.327 of the Uniform Guidance. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context: Not applicable. Repeat Finding: Not applicable. Recommendation: Although there were no purchases in the audit period meeting the threshold for competitive bidding, we recommend that the Agency review and revise its procurement policy to ensure compliance. This should include procedures for all procurement methods including sealed bids. View of Responsible Officials: Refer to management’s corrective action plan.
2025-001 U.S. Department of Education, Assistance Listing #84.027/84.173 Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Program and U.S. Department of Treasury, Assistance Listing #21.027 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLRF) Program for the period of July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025 Criteria: Uniform Guidance section 2 CFR §200.317-200.327 Procurement Standards, requires purchases exceeding the micro-purchase threshold of $10,000 to follow small purchase procedures, which require obtaining price or rate quotations from an adequate number of qualified sources (§200.320) prior to entering into a contract. In addition, 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR §200.214 require non-federal entities to verify if contractors are suspended or debarred (e.g., Sam.gov check or certification) and include appropriate contract clauses in applicable contracts. Condition: The School Department did not obtain price or rate quotations for two projects that exceeded the micro-purchase threshold. Additionally, the Department did not perform, or document required suspension and debarment procedures for the contractor (e.g., verification against SAM.gov, obtaining certifications, or including contract clauses). The City did not perform, or document required suspension and debarment procedures for the contractor (e.g., verification against SAM.gov, obtaining certifications, or including contract clauses) for three of the six contracts tested. Cause: School staff were not aware the projects would be funded with federal funds and did not ensure compliance with federal requirements for competitive pricing and suspension/debarment verification. City staff were not aware projects covered under the SLRF definition of “revenue replacement”, which excludes most procurement requirements, are still required to follow 2 CFR Part 180 and 2 CFR §200.214. Effect: Failure to obtain competitive quotes and verify contractor eligibility to receive Federal funds increases the risk of noncompliance, inefficient use of federal funds, and potential disallowance of costs. Known Questioned Costs: $61,891 for #84.027/84.173; $51,750 for #21.027 Likely Questioned Costs: $12,799 for #21.027 Recommendation: We recommend training staff on procurement and suspension/debarment requirements and implementing a pre-award compliance checklist. We also recommend increasing communication between grant personnel and facilities management personnel so all parties are aware which projects will be funded with federal funds.
Finding 2025-003: Inadequate Procurement Documentation Criteria: 2 CFR 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, §§200.317-200.327, requires non-federal entities receiving federal awards to maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award or subaward. In addition, Oregon Revised Statute 279A generally requires Oregon corporations to comply with the procurement guidance set forth in 2 CFR 200 §§200.317-200.327. Condition and Context: Management was unable to provide documentation in support of proper procurement procedures, to include a bid process and checks for vendor suspension or debarment. Questioned Costs: None noted. Cause: Ineffective design and implementation of an Organization procurement policy. Effect or Potential Effect: An effective procurement policy prevents or detects and corrects potential conflicts of interest and lack of competition in the bidding process. An ineffective procurement policy can potentially result in misuse or misappropriation of federal and state funds. Repeat Finding: Repeat of finding 2024-007. Recommendations: The Organization should continue to design and implement a procurement policy that is effective for the Organization and its structure. The Organization should document the policy, have it reviewed and approved by the Board of Directors, and disseminate the policy to employees with responsibility for finding and overseeing contractors. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: See Corrective Action Plan.
2025-002 Improve Procurement Procedures Federal Program(s) Information Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education Pass-Through Entity: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Award Name: Special Education Grants to States Assistance Listing Number: 84.027 Award Year: 2024, 2025 Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Material Weakness Criteria or Specific Requirement OMB’s Uniform Administrative Requirement, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (UG) requires that grant recipients follow procurement procedures for the acquisition of property or services under a federal award. Management is also responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls over compliance with federal requirements that have a direct and material effect on a federal program. A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis. In addition, per Uniform Guidance (2 CFR § 200.327 and 2 CFR Part 200, Appendix II), all contracts made by non-federal entities under federal awards must contain specific provisions as applicable, such as those for the Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment and others. These provisions are required to ensure compliance with federal program requirements for procurement. Condition and Context A sample of procurement transactions were tested in order to determine if appropriate procedures were performed in line with Uniform Guidance procurement requirements. As a result of our testing, it was determined that one of our four selections for services paid for by the Special Education Cluster grants did not follow UG procurement procedures and instead relied on state exemptions. In addition, two of our four selections did not contain the required Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment contract provision for contracts in excess of $100,0000. Cause The City’s procurement processes did not include sufficient controls to ensure that all federally required contract provisions were incorporated into every contract funded with federal awards and that the more restrictive procurement policies were followed. Effect or Potential Effect Due to the weaknesses in internal control noted above, there is a risk that procurements may be awarded to vendors in a manner that is not consistent with federal procurement requirements. Lack of inclusion of all required federal contract provisions increases the risk of noncompliance with Uniform Guidance and could lead to disputes or enforcement issues if regulatory or compliance matters arise. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs for the vendor not appropriately procured are as follows. No questioned costs were reported as it relates to the missing contract provision as the requirement is administrative in nature. AL Number(s) Name of Federal Program or Cluster Questioned Costs 84.027 Special Education Grants to States $384,018 Identification as a Repeat Finding This is a repeat of finding 2024-002 in the prior year. Recommendation The City should address the weaknesses in internal controls noted above in order to ensure that federal procurements are conducted in accordance with federal and state requirements. In addition, the City should enhance its procurement procedures to ensure all contracts funded by federal awards include every provision required by Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200 as applicable. Regular review of contract templates and procurement checklists should be implemented to support compliance. View of Responsible Officials Management’s corrective action plan is included at the end of this report after the Summary Schedule of Prior Year Findings.
FINDING REFERENCE NUMBER 2025-008 FEDERAL PROGRAMS (ALN – 84.027) SPECIAL EDUCATION – GRANTS TO STATES (IDEA, PART B) – SPECIAL EDUCATION CLUSTER (IDEA) (ALN – 84.173) SPECIAL EDUCATION – PRESCHOOL GRANTS (IDEA PRESCHOOL) – SPECIAL EDUCATION CLUSTER (IDEA) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AWARD NUMBERS H027A230003 (07/01/2023 – 09/30/2024); H027A240003 (07/01/2024 – 09/30/2025); H173A230003 (07/01/2023 – 09/30/2024); H173A240003 (07/01/2024 – 09/30/2025); COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT PROCUREMENT AND SUSPENSION AND DEBARMENT TYPE OF FINDING INTERNAL CONTROL AND COMPLIANCE – MATERIAL WEAKNESS AND MATERIAL NONCOMPLIANCE CRITERIA 2 CFR Section 200.317, establishes that when conducting procurement transactions under a Federal award, a State or Indian Tribe must follow the same policies and procedures it uses for procurements with non-Federal funds. 2 CFR §200.318(a)(i) establishes that 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 §§ 200.317 through 200.327. 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. STATEMENT OF CONDITION As part of our audit procedures over procurement process, we requested a list of all procurement procedures performed related to professional services and direct services to participants. No information was provided related to procurement procedures. In relation to quotation process, we selected a sample of forty (40) transactions for which a quotation process should have been performed. We found the following deficiencies: 1. In one quotation process, we were not provided with the document listing the bidders, evidence of the bidder selection, and the reasons for that selection. 2. In another quotation process, the requisition specifying the goods for which quotations were requested did not correspond to the fiscal year and made no reference to the quotations submitted. In addition, we requested a detailed list of all contracts formalized during the year and financed with IDEA funds. When selecting a sample of twenty-five (25) contracts, we were informed that several were financed with State funds. We requested the list of IDEA program contracts again, but it was not provided. This constitutes a scope limitation. QUESTIONED COSTS None. PERSPECTIVE INFORMATION After we requested all the supporting information related to procurement processes and contracts, the PRDE was not able to provide the basic documentation for the procurement performed and a list of contracts with IDEA funding during a reasonable period of time. This is a systemic deficiency that should properly be corrected, and the information should be available for audit process. The samples were statistically valid samples. STATEMENT OF CAUSE The IDEA program performs a procurement process related to specific services for which no evidence of the procurement performed was provided. The PRDE does not maintain a detail of contracts financed with IDEA funding. In addition, quotations for some purchases are performed through the Purchase Department of the PRDE, and no proper controls over the documentation are maintained POSSIBLE ASSERTED EFFECT Due to the lack of filing documentation related to the procurements performed and formalized contracts, we were unable to ascertain compliance with the procurement and suspension and debarment process. In relation to the quotation process, PRDE is not maintaining proper documentation to demonstrate compliance with procurement. IDENTIFICATION OF REPEAT FINDING This is a repeat finding (Finding Reference Number 2024-009). RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the PRDE review its internal control procedures for filings to ensure that all procurement documentation is readily available to any auditor or entity tasked with assessing the procurement process.
2025-001 - Procurement, Debarment and Suspension Federal Program Information: U.S. Department of the Treasury, passed through the Vermont Department of Public Safety CFDA - 21.027 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Criteria: The following CFRs apply to this finding: 2 CFR 200.214, 2 CFR section 200.317-200.327 Condition: During audit procedures it was identified that the Town did not check sam.gov to confirm that the contractor was not debarred or suspended from receiving federal funds nor did they request a Suspension and Debarment certification from the contractor. Cause: The Town does not have the necessary internal controls over compliance. Effect: Contracts may be awarded to contractors that are debarred or suspended from working on federally funded projects. Identification of Questioned Costs: None Identified. Context: Two contracts were reviewed out of three. This is not a statistically valid sample. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Town revise its procurement policy to fully incorporate all elements required by 2 CFR §200.317-200.327. Views of Responsible Officials and Corrective Action Plan: Please see the Corrective Action Plan.
2025-004: FEDERAL PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES Program: Child Nutrition Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Agency: Arizona Department of Education Grantor Number: ADE ED09-0001 Questioned Costs: $-0- Type of Finding: Noncompliance (Other Matter), significant deficiency in internal control Compliance Requirement: I. Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Condition: During testing of procurement activities within the Child Nutrition Cluster, we selected three purchases for review. For all three purchases tested, the District did not perform and document the procurement procedures required under federal regulations to obtain written price quotations. Specifically, the District was unable to provide evidence demonstrating that applicable procurement requirements, including obtaining and documenting competition as required by federal procurement standards, were followed prior to making the purchases. Criteria or Specific Requirement: Title 2 CFR §200.318 through §200.327 requires non-federal entities expending federal awards to establish and follow documented procurement procedures that reflect applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. These procedures must ensure full and open competition and maintain sufficient records to detail the history of the procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, contractor selection, and the basis for contract pricing. Cause: District personnel responsible for procurement and federal program administration did not consistently apply and document procurement procedures for purchases charged to the Child Nutrition Cluster. The District did not maintain documentation to support that three written quotes were maintained to support the purchases or that other applicable methods of procurement were utilized (cooperative purchases, RFPs, etc.) Additionally, management's monitoring controls were not sufficient to ensure compliance with federal procurement requirements prior to the expenditure of federal funds. Effect: Failure to follow and document required procurement procedures increases the risk that purchases may not be made in accordance with federal requirements, potentially limiting competition and resulting in questioned costs, repayment of federal funds, or other sanctions from grantor agencies. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the District strengthen internal controls over procurement compliance by implementing procedures to ensure all purchases made with federal funds are reviewed for compliance with applicable procurement requirements before purchases are finalized, maintaining documentation supporting the procurement method utilized, solicitation of bids or quotes when required, vendor selection, and price determination. Views of Responsible Officials: The District concurs with this recommendation. See the corrective action plan in a separately published document.
2025-005: FEDERAL PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES Program: Child Nutrition Cluster Federal Assistance Listing Number: 10.553, 10.555, 10.559 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Agency: Arizona Department of Education Grantor Number: ADE ED09-0001 Questioned Costs: $-0- Type of Finding: Noncompliance (Other Matter), significant deficiency in internal control Compliance Requirement: I. Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment Condition: During testing of procurement activities within the Child Nutrition Cluster, we selected three purchases for review. For all three purchases tested, the District did not perform and document the procurement procedures required under federal regulations to obtain written price quotations. Specifically, the District was unable to provide evidence demonstrating that applicable procurement requirements, including obtaining and documenting competition as required by federal procurement standards, were followed prior to making the purchases. Criteria or Specific Requirement: Title 2 CFR §200.318 through §200.327 requires non-federal entities expending federal awards to establish and follow documented procurement procedures that reflect applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. These procedures must ensure full and open competition and maintain sufficient records to detail the history of the procurement, including the rationale for the method of procurement, contractor selection, and the basis for contract pricing. Cause: District personnel responsible for procurement and federal program administration did not consistently apply and document procurement procedures for purchases charged to the Child Nutrition Cluster. The District did not maintain documentation to support that three written quotes were maintained to support the purchases or that other applicable methods of procurement were utilized (cooperative purchases, RFP’s, etc.) Additionally, management's monitoring controls were not sufficient to ensure compliance with federal procurement requirements prior to the expenditure of federal funds. Effect: Failure to follow and document required procurement procedures increases the risk that purchases may not be made in accordance with federal requirements, potentially limiting competition and resulting in questioned costs, repayment of federal funds, or other sanctions from grantor agencies. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the District strengthen internal controls over procurement compliance by implementing procedures to ensure all purchases made with federal funds are reviewed for compliance with applicable procurement requirements before purchases are finalized, maintaining documentation supporting the procurement method utilized, solicitation of bids or quotes when required, vendor selection, and price determination. Views of Responsible Officials: The District concurs with this recommendation. See the corrective action plan in a separately published document.
CORONAVIRUS STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS – 21.027 Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Treasury (TREAS) Federal Award Fiscal Years: 2021 to 2025 Federal Award Number: SLFRP0136 Pass-through Entity: Rhode Island Department of Administration (DOA), Pandemic Recovery Office (PRO) Administered by: Rhode Island Commerce Corporation (RICC) Compliance Requirement: Procurement, Suspension and Debarment RHODE ISLAND COMMERCE CORPORATION – IMPROVE INTERNAL CONTROLS AND COMPLIANCE WITH PROCUREMENT Criteria: Per Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.327 and 2 CFR Part 200, Appendix II), all contracts made by non-federal entities under federal awards must contain specific provisions as applicable, such as those for equal employment opportunity, Davis-Bacon, termination for cause, compliance with laws and regulations, and others. These provisions are required to ensure compliance with federal program requirements for procurement. Condition: During testing of contracts for the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) program, we noted that contracts selected for testing did not contain all the required provisions outlined in Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200. While services were otherwise procured appropriately, documentation of the required contract clauses was not consistent across all contracts selected for review. Cause: The Corporation’s procurement processes did not include sufficient controls to ensure that all federally required contract provisions were incorporated into every contract funded with federal awards. Effect: Lack of inclusion of all required federal contract provisions increases the risk of noncompliance with Uniform Guidance and could lead to disputes or enforcement issues if regulatory or compliance matters arise. No questioned costs were identified, as the services procured were determined to be allowable and otherwise appropriate. Questioned Costs: None Valid Statistical Sampling: Not Applicable RECOMMENDATION 2025-040 The Corporation should enhance its procurement procedures to ensure all contracts funded by federal awards include every provision required by Appendix II to 2 CFR Part 200 as applicable. Regular review of contract templates and procurement checklists should be implemented to support compliance.
Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Federal Financial Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of the Treasury Award Number and Year: 2021 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Material 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. Title 2 CFR Section 200.214 of the Uniform Guidance states that the City must comply with 2 CFR part 180, which implements Executive Orders 12549 and 12689. 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. Per 2 CFR Section 180.300, when a non-Federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-Federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. This verification may be accomplished by (1) checking the System for Award Management (SAM) Exclusions maintained by the General Services Administration (GSA) and available at https://www.sam.gov/SAM/, (2) collecting a certification from the entity, or (3) adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that entity. 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 City’s provisions for procurement requirements, we noted the following: • For seven (7) out of seven (7) contracts selected for testing, the City did not include the applicable provisions described in 2 CFR 200 Appendix II. • For seven (7) out of seven (7) contracts tested, we noted that there was no evidence that the City verified that the contracted entities were not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in federal programs prior to entering the contract. Cause: The City did not follow their policy to verify the information described in the conditions prior to entering the transactions. The City’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 seven (7) out of fifteen (15) procurement contracts were tested. This represented a total of $23,361,562 in contracted services under the grant. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No. Recommendation: We recommend the City strengthen its policies and procedures to ensure that the verification of the debarment and suspension is documented and retained and that contracts include all applicable provisions of 2 CFR 200 Appendix II. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management agrees. See separately issued Corrective Action Plan.
FINDING 2025-005 – Noncompliance with Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Requirements Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program: Maternal Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Assistance Listing Number: 93.870 Compliance Requirements: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance and Instance of Noncompliance Criteria The Uniform Guidance requires recipients and subrecipients to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award or subaward, including the acquisition of property or services. These documented procurement procedures must be consistent with applicable state, local, and tribal laws and regulations, as well as the federal procurement standards included in 2 CFR §§ 200.317 through 200.327. In addition, recipients and subrecipients are required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards to provide reasonable assurance that the federal award is managed in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Audit findings are required to be reported for significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in internal control over major programs and for material noncompliance related to major programs. Condition During our audit of the federal program identified above, we noted the entity did not have documented procurement procedures in place as required by the applicable Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement. Specifically, management was unable to provide written procurement policies and procedures addressing procurement transactions charged to federal awards. The entity’s procedures did not document the required procurement methods, approval requirements, documentation standards, conflict-of-interest considerations, or suspension and debarment verification procedures applicable to federally funded purchases. As a result, the entity was not in compliance with the requirement to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award. Cause The condition appears to have resulted from the entity not formally updating or adopting written procurement procedures to address federal procurement requirements. While management may have followed informal purchasing practices, those practices were not formally documented, approved, or consistently communicated to personnel responsible for procurement activities under federal awards. Additionally, responsible personnel may not have been sufficiently familiar with the federal procurement documentation requirements applicable to federal awards. Effect or Potential Effect Failure to maintain documented procurement procedures increases the risk that procurement transactions charged to federal awards may not be performed in accordance with federal requirements. This could result in purchases that are not properly authorized, not adequately supported, not subject to required competition, or made with vendors that should have been excluded from participation in federal programs. The lack of documented procedures also increases the risk that suspension and debarment verification procedures may not be consistently performed or retained, which could result in federal funds being used for transactions with suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded parties. Although no questioned costs were identified as a result of this finding, the absence of documented procurement procedures represents noncompliance with federal procurement requirements and a deficiency in internal control over compliance. Questioned Costs None noted Context The federal program was audited as a major program for the year ended June 30, 2025. During our procedures over the Procurement and Suspension and Debarment compliance requirement, we requested the entity’s written procurement policies and procedures applicable to federal awards. Management was unable to provide documented procurement procedures that addressed the required federal procurement standards. Accordingly, the entity did not demonstrate compliance with the requirement to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for federally funded procurement transactions. Repeat Finding This is not a repeat finding. Sampling Method Not applicable Recommendation We recommend management develop, formally approve, and implement written procurement policies and procedures applicable to federal awards. At a minimum, the procedures should address: • The procurement methods allowed under federal requirements. • Required documentation for procurement decisions. • Approval levels and responsibilities for federally funded purchases. • Competition and price/cost analysis requirements, when applicable. • Conflict-of-interest standards for employees involved in procurement. • Required suspension and debarment verification procedures. • Documentation retention requirements for procurement files. • Periodic review procedures to ensure procurement practices comply with federal requirements. We also recommend management provide training to employees responsible for initiating, approving, and documenting procurement transactions charged to federal awards.
Federal Program: ALN 93.600 Head Start Program Category: Compliance/ internal control significant deficiency Compliance requirements: Procurement and Suspension/Debarment Condition: BGCPR did not follow its procurement policies in compliance with applicable State and Federal procurement requirements. Criteria: BGCPR’s Fiscal Policy Manual — VI. Cash Disbursements & Expense Allocations, Incoming Invoice Processing, item 2 established that vendors must be created in the Workflow system in accordance with established procedures. Documentation for new vendors must be obtained and reviewed for completeness and accuracy and must include, at a minimum, Form W-9, the new vendor form, and a valid Merchant Registration Certificate issued by the applicable local governmental agency. 2 CFR § 200.318(a) requires recipients and subrecipients to maintain and use documented procurement procedures for procurement transactions under a Federal award or subaward, including the acquisition of property or services. These procedures must be consistent with applicable State, local, and tribal laws and regulations and the Federal procurement standards. 2 CFR § 200.318(h) requires recipients and subrecipients to award contracts only to responsible contractors possessing the ability to perform successfully under the terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration must be given to contractor integrity, public policy compliance, proper classification of employees, past performance, and financial and technical resources. 2 CFR § 200.318(i) requires recipients and subrecipients to 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. Under 2 CFR § 200.319(a), procurement transactions must provide full and open competition. When simplified acquisition procedures apply, § 200.320(a)(2)(i) requires price or rate quotations from an adequate number of qualified sources; noncompetitive procurement is permitted only under the circumstances in § 200.320(c) and must be supported by the procurement record. Under 2 CFR § 200.214 and Appendix II(H) to Part 200, contract awards must not be made to parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded in SAM. Section 200.327 requires contracts under Federal awards to contain the applicable provisions in Appendix II. Cause: BGCPR did not consistently apply its procurement policies and did not have an effective pre-award and supervisory review control to confirm vendor eligibility, required competition and approvals, complete procurement documentation, and applicable contract provisions before purchase commitments and payments were made. Context: Of 21 procurement transactions tested: 7 samples did not have an available supplier merchant registration certificate; 5 samples did not evidence the required quotation process and/or purchase order and did not include a documented justification; and 3 samples had contracts of which 2 samples did not include a debarment and suspension provision. Effect or potential effect: The absence of required vendor documentation, competition support, purchase orders or documented justification, and debarment and suspension controls increases the risk that purchases may be made from unauthorized or excluded vendors, may not provide full and open competition, and may be unsupported or subject to questioned costs under the Federal award. Recommendation: We recommend that management strengthen and enforce procurement controls by: (1) requiring a current Puerto Rico Merchant Registration Certificate before award or purchase; (2) documenting the required quotations and purchase order, or an approved justification citing the allowable basis for a noncompetitive procurement; (3) performing and retaining a dated SAM.gov exclusion search before contract award and renewal; (4) using standardized contracts containing all applicable Federal provisions, including debarment and suspension language; and (5) requiring documented supervisory review of a procurement checklist before approval and payment. Views of officials responsible: BGCPR agrees with the deficiency identified, mostly attributable to employee turnover within the Finance Division. As a result of this, during fiscal year 2026-2027 BGCPR will implement procedures to ensure proper procurement process including the following: a. Review the procurement check list to ensure that all required documentation is included within and ensure revision before a purchase order is issued to the vendor. b. Training to the personnel to guarantee that policy and procedures are implemented as required. c. Enforce standardized procedures to ensure that all approvals are consistently documented and maintained in accordance with policy or grant requirements. Anticipated completion date: September 30, 2026
Finding: This is a new finding relating to a significant deficiency in internal control over compliance in relation to the procurement suspension and debarment requirements of the above noted major federal program. Criteria: The 2025 Uniform Guidance compliance supplement issued by the Office of Management and Budget in November of 2025 outlines the period of performance compliance guidelines and requirements of the above noted major federal program. It states, “Recipients may use award funds to enter into contracts to procure goods and services necessary to implement one or more of the eligible purposes outlined in 42 USC sections 802(c) and 803(c) and Treasury's 2021 Interim Final Rule, 2022 Final Rule, and 2023 Interim Final Rule. As such, except as noted in the next paragraph, recipients are expected to have procurement policies and procedures in place that comply with the procurement standards outlined in the Uniform Guidance. In July 2022, Treasury released SLFRF FAQ 13.15, which explains that only a subset of the requirements in Subparts D and E of the Uniform Guidance apply to recipients' use of award funds under the revenue loss eligible use category. The requirements of 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327 are not included in the list of requirements applicable to such funds.” However, Subpart C of the Uniform Guidance 2 CFR section 200.214 states, “Recipients and subrecipients are subject to the nonprocurement debarment and suspension regulations implementing Executive Orders 12549 and 12689, as well as 2 CFR part 180. The regulations in 2 CFR part 180 restrict making Federal awards, subawards, and contracts with certain parties that are debarred, suspended, or otherwise excluded from receiving or participating in Federal awards.” Condition: As part of the current fiscal year audit, the Bid Ordinance and Charter of the Town were reviewed to determine if there were any documented internal control policies and procedures requiring the review and documentation of whether a vendor for goods and services which were being funded through federal award programs were either suspended or debarred from receiving or participating in federal awards. We were unable to find any documented internal control policies or procedures requiring a review for the suspension and debarment status of potential vendors for goods and services which were being funded through federal award programs. In addition, in relation to the project contracts entered into under the above noted major federal program a request was made for the backup documentation relating to the actual bid process that was followed such as copies of the request for bids, the bid specifications, the bids received and the actual approval of each bid. A request was also made relating to whether the bid process was waived for any of these project contracts and if such a waiver was made a copy of the meeting minutes of the Board of Selectmen of the Town approving such a waiver was requested. Part of the intent of requesting these bid related documents was to review the provided information to determine if any suspension and debarment review was made and documented. No information could be provided in relation to these requests. Questioned Costs: There are no questioned costs relating to this significant deficiency in internal control over compliance in relation to this procurement suspension and debarment finding. Context: The procurement suspension anddebarment compliance requirements relating to the above noted major federal programingeneral state that vendors who have been suspended or disbarred can not receive or participate in federal awards. We feel that not being able to provide some formof documentation showing that vendors for which goods or services were purchasedwith funds relating to the above noted major federal program were reviewed to determine if they were suspended or debarred from receiving or participating in federal awards indicates a significant deficiency in internal control over compliance in relation to the procurement suspension and debarment compliance requirement. Effect: During our review of the vendors being used in relation to the seven reported projects of the above noted major federal program, none were noted as being suspended or disbarred. However, the lack of adequate internal controls over these compliance requirements could provide an opportunity for noncompliance. Any funds found to have been paid to vendors who have been suspended or debarred from receiving or participating in federal awards could be required to be returned to the funding source. Cause: We were unable to determine why neither the provided bid ordinance or town charter included any internal controls relating to the review and documentation of the reviews of vendors in relation to their potential status of being suspended or disbarred from receiving or participating in federal awards. In addition, we did review certain contracts that were entered into in relation to the above noted major federal program and we were unable to find any references or clauses relating specifically to suspension and debarment. We were unable to determine why no references could be located within these reviewed contracts. Recommendation: We recommend that the Town more closely monitor vendors receiving and participating in federal award programs relating to procurement suspension anddebarment compliance requirements. In addition, we recommend that specific internal control policies and procedures be created, documented and implemented to ensure compliance in relation to all applicable procurement suspension and debarment requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: We have discussed this finding with our auditor and we do understand the importance of an adequate system of internal control policies and procedures relating to federal award program procurement suspension and debarment requirements. We do intend to review our bid ordinance and town charter, as time allows, to determine if any specific changes or modifications to these two documents should be made in relation to this compliance requirement.
Compliance Over Procurement and Suspension and Debarment U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Child Nutrition Cluster ALN 10.555 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.318(a) requires that non-Federal entities use their own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in 2 CFR 200.318 through 200.327. Accordingly, the entity is required to comply with the Louisiana Public Bid Law, LA R.S. 38:2211 et seq., which governs the procurement of goods and services using public funds. Under Louisiana Public Bid Law, purchases meeting applicable bid thresholds must be made by obtaining quotes or through a formal public bid process, as applicable, to ensure that public funds are expended through a transparent, competitive procurement process. Condition: During our testing of Procurement and Suspension and Debarment for the Child Nutrition Cluster, we selected a sample of 5 vendors from a population of 14 vendors utilized during the fiscal year. For one vendor selected, the School Board made purchases totaling $33,000 without obtaining the required competitive bids or quotes in accordance with Louisiana Public Bid Law. Cause: The School Board did not obtain competitive bids or quotes prior to making purchases from the vendor in question, as required under Louisiana Public Bid Law. This condition indicates a deficiency in the School Board’s procurement controls, including the lack of an adequate review process to ensure that purchases meeting applicable bid thresholds are supported by the required quotes or subjected to a formal competitive bid process before a vendor is selected and a commitment is made. Effect: By failing to obtain competitive bids or quotes as required, the School Board cannot demonstrate that the $33,000 in purchases from this vendor represent the best value to the program or that public funds were expended through a fair and open competitive process as required by Louisiana Public Bid Law and 2 CFR 200.318(a). The $33,000 represents known and questioned costs subject to a potential disallowance by the federal awarding agency. Regarding likely questioned costs: our testing covered 5 of 14 vendors (35.7% of the vendor population). The exception was identified within the tested population; however, because procurement noncompliance in this context was vendor-specific rather than transaction-rate-based, the likely questioned costs are limited to the $33,000 associated with the identified vendor. No extrapolation to the untested vendor population has been made, as the noncompliance relates to a discrete procurement decision rather than a systemic per-transaction error. Recommendation: We recommend that management implement a formal procurement review process to ensure that all purchases meeting or exceeding applicable bid thresholds under Louisiana Public Bid Law are supported by the required quotes or subjected to a competitive bid process prior to vendor selection and commitment of funds. Management should develop or strengthen written procurement policies and procedures that clearly identify bid thresholds, required procurement methods, and documentation retention requirements, consistent with 2 CFR 200.318-200.327. Management should also consult with legal counsel and the federal awarding agency regarding the appropriate disposition of the $33,000 in questioned costs identified. Repeat Finding: No. View of Responsible Officials: Prior to purchases being made, the Child Nutrition Program Supervisor will check for suspension and debarment of vendors. The accounts payable accountant will also review for suspension and debarment prior to the payment being made. Evidence of review will be maintained in an appropriately labeled file each year. See response to finding 2025-018 above.
Controls Over Procurement and Suspension and Debarment U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Child Nutrition Cluster ALN 10.555 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.318(a) requires that non-Federal entities use their own documented procurement procedures which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable Federal law and the standards identified in 2 CFR 200.318 through 200.327. The entity is also required to maintain procurement records sufficient to document the history of each procurement transaction, including the procurement method, contract type selection, contractor selection or rejection, and the basis for the contract price. Condition: During our testing of procurement and suspension and debarment for the Child Nutrition Cluster, we selected a sample of 5 vendors/contracts from a population of 14 vendors utilized during the fiscal year. For one vendor selected, the School Board was unable to provide a complete contract file containing evidence that the contract terms were properly reviewed and/or approved prior to execution. The file also did not contain sufficient documentation to demonstrate that the procurement file was complete and reviewed for compliance with applicable procurement and suspension and debarment requirements. Cause: The School Board had policies and procedures in place to ensure contract files included required documentation, including evidence of review and approval of contract terms. However, the policies and procedures were not consistently followed. As a result, the contract file did not contain sufficient documentation to demonstrate that the required review and approval procedures were performed. Effect: Without a complete contract file, the School Board cannot demonstrate that the contract terms were properly reviewed and approved, that the procurement was complete in accordance with applicable requirements, or that suspension and debarment procedures were adequately documented. This increases the risk that federally funded contracts may be awarded to vendors that are suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participation in federal programs. Recommendation: We recommend that management strengthen the application of its existing procurement and contract review procedures to ensure they are consistently followed for all federally funded purchases. Contract files should be reviewed for completeness prior to contract execution and payment to ensure they include evidence of contract term review and approval, procurement support, and suspension and debarment verification. We also recommend that management periodically monitor contract files for compliance with established policies and procedures. Repeat Finding: No. View of Responsible Officials: Prior to purchases being made, the Child Nutrition Program Supervisor will check for suspension and debarment of vendors. The accounts payable accountant will also review for suspension and debarment prior to payment being made. Evidence of review will be maintained in an appropriately labeled file each year.
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.