Findings Citing § 200.327

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.

Condition The Institute does not have a written procurement policy. Additionally, the Institute does not perform suspension and debarment verification (e.g., checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) or equivalent excluded parties list) prior to entering into contracts or agreements with vendors, contractors, or subrecipients. Criteria Organizations that receive federal funding are generally required, under 2 CFR § 200.318–200.327 (Uniform Guidance), to: • Maintain written procurement procedures that conform to applicable federal, state, and local laws; • Ensure procurement transactions are conducted in a manner providing full and open competition; • Verify that contractors and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded from participating in federal programs, per 2 CFR § 200.214 and 2 CFR Part 180. Cause The Institute has not formalized its procurement practices in a written policy and staff is not currently required to check suspension and debarment status as part of the vendor selection or contracting process. Effect Without a written procurement policy, the Institute lacks a consistent, auditable standard for procurement decisions, increasing the risk of non-compliance, favoritism, or inconsistent practices across departments. The absence of suspension and debarment checks creates risk that the Institute could enter into agreements with parties who are legally excluded from receiving federal funds, potentially resulting in disallowed costs, reputational harm, or loss of funding. Recommendation The Institute should develop and formally adopt a written procurement policy that addresses methods of procurement, competition requirements, documentation standards, and conflict-of-interest provisions consistent with 2 CFR § 200.318–200.327. The Institute should also implement a documented procedure requiring suspension and debarment verification (via SAM.gov or equivalent) for all vendors, contractors, and subrecipients prior to contract execution, and retain evidence of this check in procurement files. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding and recommendation. The Institute is formalizing its procurement practices in a written procurement policy consistent with applicable Uniform Guidance requirements. The policy addresses procurement methods, competition, documentation, conflicts of interest, and suspension and debarment requirements for procurements in accordance with federal regulations. The Institute contracted with Visual Compliance to assist with verifying vendors against all available U.S. debarred and suspended lists before entering into covered contracts or agreements with vendors, contractors, or subrecipients. The Institute has developed and approved a Suspension and Debarment policy and staff are required to check suspension and debarment status as part of the vendor selection or contracting process. The Institute is developing a written procurement policy. Evidence of the verification will be retained with the applicable procurement or agreement documentation.

Reporting Federal Agency: Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: Economic Development Initiative, Community Project Funding, and Miscellaneous Grants Assistance Listing Number: 14.251 Award Period: February 5, 2024 – August 31, 2031 Type of Finding: • Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance • Other Matter Criteria or specific requirement: Per 2 CFR 200.327–200.329 and applicable award terms, nonfederal entities are required to submit accurate and timely financial and performance reports as specified by the federal awarding agency. Condition: Four (4) of four (4) reports tested were not submitted by the required deadlines. Questioned costs: None. Context: We tested 4 required reports for the major program; none (0 of 4) were submitted in accordance with required deadlines. Cause: The deficiency appears to be due to inadequate monitoring of reporting deadlines and the absence of a formal review or tracking process to ensure timely submission. Effect: Failure to submit reports timely may result in noncompliance with grant requirements, potential delays in funding, and increased risk of additional oversight by the awarding agency. Repeat finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization implement a formal reporting calendar and review control process to track due dates, ensure timely submission, and retain documentation of report filings in accordance with federal requirements. View of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.

Federal Agency: Environmental Protection Agency Award Name: Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Assistance Listing Number: 66.468 Award Year: 2022 Compliance Requirement: Procurement Type of Finding : Compliance Internal Control over Compliance – Significant Deficiency Criteria or Specific Requirement 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 and Context During testing of one contract for the program, we noted that the selected contract 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 in accordance with the Uniform Guidance, particularly as it relates to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act and the Clean Air Act and the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Cause The Town’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 or Potential 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. Recommendation The Town 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.

Finding Type: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Major Programs Assistance Listing #: 84.116Z Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education Award Year: July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025 Criteria: Under 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327, non-Federal entities must maintain and follow documented procurement procedures that conform to applicable Federal law and standards. Specifically, 2 CFR 200.320 requires entities to obtain price or rate quotations from an adequate number of qualified sources for purchases falling under the simplified acquisition threshold (small purchases). Additionally, under 2 CFR 180.220 and 2 CFR 180.300, non-Federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. For procurement contracts, a covered transaction is any contract expected to equal or exceed $25,000. Entities must verify that the vendor is not excluded or disqualified by checking the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) Exclusions, collecting a certification, or adding a clause to the covered transaction. Condition: During our testing of Procurement, Suspension, and Debarment, we noted the following deficiencies: 1. Procurement: The University’s procurement policies and practices did not meet minimum federal requirements. The University failed to obtain or document an adequate number of quotes for small purchases exceeding the micro-purchase threshold. 2. Suspension and Debarment: The University did not have controls in place to verify the suspension and debarment status of vendors. Management did not check the SAM.gov exclusions list, obtain vendor certifications, or include required clauses in contracts for covered transactions exceeding $25,000. Cause: Internal controls over Procurement and Suspension and Debarment were not properly designed or implemented. Management was unaware of the specific federal requirements regarding small purchase quotation documentation and the mandate to verify vendor exclusion status for contracts over $25,000. Effect or Potential Effect: By failing to obtain adequate quotes, the University cannot ensure that federal funds were used to obtain the most advantageous pricing, potentially resulting in overpayments for goods and services. By failing to verify suspension and debarment status, the University is at high risk of entering into covered transactions with federally excluded or debarred parties. Questioned Costs: $526,874 represents the total sum of federal funds disbursed to vendors in our sample where required procurement procedures and/or suspension and debarment verifications were not performed.

2025-009 – Procurement Suspension and Debarment – Material Weakness in Internal Controls over Compliance and Material Noncompliance Department of Education Federal Assistance Listing Number: 84.031 Federal Program Name: Higher Education Institutional Aid Federal Award Number: P031S210057, P031C210038 Award Year: 2024-25, 2023-24, 2022-23, 2021-22 Criteria – Non-federal entities other than states, including those operating federal programs as subrecipients of states, must follow the procurement standards set out at 2 CFR 200.318 through 200.327. Non-federal entities are prohibited from contracting with or making subawards under covered transactions to parties that are suspended or debarred. “Covered transactions” include contracts for goods and services awarded under a non-procurement transaction (e.g., grant or cooperative agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000 or meet certain other criteria as specified in 2 CFR 180.220 Condition/context – Out of a sample of 2 procurement transactions selected for testing, for 1 transaction management was unable to provide supporting documentation for a signed contract, review and approval of purchase, or that the correct procurement policies were followed based on the contract value. Additionally, the University was unable to provide support that either vendor was reviewed for suspension and debarment prior to contract approval. Our sample was not, and was not intended to be, statistically valid. Questioned costs – The University asserted that the amount charged to the grant for the contractor was $63,174 however we were unable to obtain a signed contract or verify the total disbursements for the year. Cause/effect – The University does not have the proper controls in place to ensure procurement transactions adhere to the standards set out in 2 CFR 200.318 through 200.327, or to ensure covered transactions are being reviewed in accordance with 2 CFR 180.220. The lack of controls increases the risk of the University entering into transactions that do not meet the applicable standards, or with entities who may be suspended or debarred from receiving payments from federal funds. Repeat finding – No Recommendation – We recommend the University review their current control policies and procedures, and ensure controls are designed and implemented that satisfy the requirements outlined in 2 CFR 200.318 through 200.327 and 2 CFR 180.220. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Heritage University agrees with the recommendation and is reviewing its current procurement policies, procedures, and internal controls as they relate to purchases made with federal funds.

Material weakness in internal controls over compliance and instances of noncompliance related to procurement. Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Program Titles: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Award Number: EL-23-AR-47-048; HCS-24-AR-2107-048 Project Period: July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2026 Criteria Under 2 CFR § 200.318, a recipient must maintain and use documented procedures for procurement transactions under a federal award or subaward that are consistent with the standards identified under Uniform Guidance. In addition, recipient 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. Condition/Context for Evaluation During the audit for the year ending June 30, 2025, it was noted that the Agency's procurement policy was not in compliance with Uniform Guidance. In addition, there were two selections out of four selections when the Agency was not following its own procurement policy. This is not considered a statistical sample. Cause Housing Hope's procurement policy did not include all the requirements outlined in 2 CFR 200.317 through 200.327. Effect or Potential Effect The Agency did not fully comply with the requirements regarding procurement. Questioned Costs Not applicable as finding relates to a policy not being in compliant. Repeat Finding Not applicable Recommendation We recommend that the Agency update their procurement policy to ensure procurement requirements are in line with Uniform Guidance and that proper documentation is retained for all procurements. Views of Responsible Officials of Auditee Management concurs with the finding and has provided the accompanying management corrective action.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2024-001: Internal Controls over Compliance for Procurement Suspension & Debarment U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds – ALN 21.027 Criteria: Per 2 CFR sections 200.318 through 200.327, [entities] must use their own documented procurement procedures, which reflect applicable state and local laws and regulations, provided that the procurements conform to applicable federal statutes and the procurement requirements identified in 2 CFR Part 200. Further, when a non-federal entity enters into a covered transaction with an entity at a lower tier, the non-federal entity must verify that the entity, as defined in 2 CFR section 180.995 and agency adopting regulations, is not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. Condition: The City did not follow its Grant Standard Operating procedures for validating that a contractor was not suspended or debarred or otherwise excluded from participating in the transaction. Cause: The contract agreement was finalized without validation that all proper procurement procedures had been followed. Effect: By not following the City’s procedures in place, it puts the City at risk of doing business with companies who are suspended, debarred or otherwise excluded from doing business with the federal government. Questioned Costs: $0 Context: The auditor tested one procurement transaction entered into during 2024 using COVID- 19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. The City’s Grant Standard Operating procedures over suspension and debarment were not followed for this one procurement. Identification of Repeat Finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the City perform a separate individual check of contract files to ensure the City’s Grant Standard Operating procedures are followed and documented prior to entering into a contract agreement with covered contractors. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management agrees with this finding and is in the process of developing internal controls to ensure timely and appropriate actions are taken on the deficiency noted. Additional details can be found in the City of Bloomington’s Corrective Action Plan.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Department of Treasury, State of Iowa Department of Management, Federal Financial Assistance Listing 21.029, 526659 Coronavirus Capital Projects Fund Procurement, Suspension & Debarment Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Material Noncompliance Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303(a) 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 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. 2 CFR 200 Appendix II requires certain provisions be included in contracts if criteria are applicable. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.214 requires recipients to restrict the subawards and contract with certain parities that are debarred, suspended, or excluded from ineligible participation in Federal assistance programs or activities. Condition: Testing of the federal program identified the following: • The Cooperative’s formally documented procurement policy was missing one required element as it relates to the methods of procurement. • One instance where the Cooperative followed a bid process, however, the documentation was not retained to support the selection. Additionally, the contract with the vendor was missing required contract provisions in accordance with Uniform Guidance. • One instance where the Cooperative did not follow the procurement process as detailed in the procurement policy and did not have any formal documentation or contract in place with the vendor. • Two instances where the Cooperative entered into a contract with a vendor over $25,000 and there was no review performed to ensure the vendor was not suspended or debarred. Cause: Contract provisions were not evaluated compared to Uniform Guidance contract requirements. Contracts entered were not evaluated in accordance with Uniform Guidance as it relates to suspension and debarment. Effect: Ineffective controls over this are of compliance could result in a reasonable possibility the Cooperative would be noncompliant with the compliance requirements outlined above. Additionally, the cooperative may enter into a covered transaction with a vendor that is suspended or debarred. Questioned Costs: None reported. Context/Sampling: A nonstatistical sample of 2 out of 4 vendors were selected for testing. Repeat Finding form Prior Year: No Recommendation: We recommend the Cooperative update their procurement policy to ensure it includes the required elements as it relates to the methods of procurement. In addition, we suggest that management implement procedures and control processes related to the review of contracts to ensure the procurement methods are being followed as it relates to covered transactions and those contracts include the required Uniform Guidance provisions. Also, management should ensure vendors are not suspended or debarred from doing business with the federal government. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.

FINDING 2024-002 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): BAN-2 Compliance Requirement: Procurement and Suspension and Debarment Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters Condition and Context As part of sound management of the federal award, the City was responsible for implementing a system of internal controls that would ensure compliance with the applicable requirements. The City 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. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 16 CITY OF HUNTINGBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Federal regulations allow for informal procurement methods when the value of the procurement for property or services does not exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, which is set at $250,000 unless a lower, more restrictive threshold is set by a nonfederal entity. As Indiana Code has set a more restrictive threshold of $150,000, informal procurement methods are permitted when the value of the procurement does not exceed $150,000. This informal process allows for methods other than the formal bid process. The informal process is divided between two methods based on thresholds, micro-purchases, typically for those purchases $10,000 or under, and small purchase procedures for those purchases above the micropurchase threshold but below the simplified acquisition threshold. Micro-purchases may be awarded without soliciting competitive price rate quotations. If small purchase procedures are used, then price or rate quotations must be obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources. Procurement - Simplified Acquisition During the audit period, the City had two vendors with purchases over the $150,000 threshold that were considered simplified acquisition procurements. Both vendors were tested. For one vendor, the City could not provide the procurement history or the rationale for the method of procurement, the selection of vendor, or the basis for price. The total amount spent with this vendor was $2,391,895. Procurement - Policy The City provided its purchasing policy for review, but it did not include the applicable federal regulations, such as procedures to avoid the acquisition of unnecessary or duplicative items and procedures to ensure that all solicitations incorporate a clear and accurate description of the technical requirements for the material, product, or service to be procured. Additionally, the City did not maintain written standards of conduct covering conflicts of interest and governing actions of its employees engaged in the selection, award, and administration of contracts. Suspension and Debarment Prior to entering into subawards and covered transactions with, recipients are required to verify that such contracts and subrecipients are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded. "Covered transactions" include, but are not limited to, contracts for goods and services awarded under a nonprocurement transaction (i.e., grant agreement) that are expected to equal or exceed $25,000. The verification is to be done by checking the Excluded Parties List System (EPLS), collecting a certification from that person, or adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person. A population of four covered transactions for goods or services were paid from USDA award funds during the audit period. A sample of two vendors were selected for testing. Of the two vendors tested, one vendor was not verified to not be suspended nor debarred or otherwise excluded or disqualified from participating in federal assistance programs or activities. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the same single vendor for both the simplified acquisition and the suspension and debarment issues as noted above. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 CITY OF HUNTINGBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (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. . . ." 2 CFR 200.320(b) states in part: "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. . . . (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. . . ." 2 CFR 180.300 states: "When you enter into a covered transaction with another person at the next lower tier, you must verify that the person with whom you intend to do business is not excluded or disqualified. You do this by: (a) Checking SAM Exclusions; or (b) Collecting a certification from that person; or (c) Adding a clause or condition to the covered transaction with that person." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 CITY OF HUNTINGBURG SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Cause The vendor in question was an engineering firm that the City originally hired to do a study at $40,000 in 2018 related to the wastewater treatment plant project. Through the years, the City did amendments to the contract to include more engineering services and did not advertise for bids or verify that the engineering firm was not suspended or debarred from receiving federal funds. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the City cannot ensure that the services obtained provided full and open competition or the basis of the price. In addition, the City cannot ensure the vendors paid were eligible to participate in federal programs. Any program funds the City used to pay vendors that have been suspended or debarred would be unallowable, and the funding agency could potentially recover them. 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 funding to the City. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that the City'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. We recommended that management of the City establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure contractors and subrecipients, as appropriate, are not suspended, debarred, or otherwise excluded prior to entering into contracts or subawards. We also recommended strengthening its policies and procedures to ensure appropriate supporting documentation for federal programs is retained to be presented for audit. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.