Federal Program: Workforce Investment Opportunity Act Cluster Assistance Listing 17.258 WIOA Adult Program Assistance Listing 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities Assistance Listing 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Pass-Through Entity Identifying Number: 05-P19-Youth-81/05-P20-Youth-81 05-F20-Adult-81/05-F21-Adult-81/05-F22-Adult-81 05-F20-DLW-81/05-F21-DLW-81/05-F22-DLW-81 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor 2022-002 Criteria or specific requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring (2 CFR 200.331 and 20CFR 683.210) and Activities Allowed or Unallowed (2 CFR 200, Subpart E) – Management is responsible for ensuring compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. Condition: An ongoing investigation by a state agency on the WIOA program for the 2021 program year (fiscal 2022) has alleged a potential violation of cost allowable under federal awards. The reports state that there are questioned costs of approximately $775,000. Questioned Costs: $775,000 Context: The Organization operated without a legally binding agreement for WIOA Title I and One-stop Operator Services for over 10 months after the expiration of the previous contract. This results in questioned costs of $725,000. In addition, there was not sufficient documentation to support the allocation basis for certain expenditures charged to WIOA that resulted in additional questioned costs. Effect: The noncompliance could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. Cause: Proper allowable costs policies and procedures were not in place according to the state agency. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen controls and processes related to the allowable costs policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management is considering its options for further appeals to the Department of Labor for review.
Federal Program: Workforce Investment Opportunity Act Cluster Assistance Listing 17.258 WIOA Adult Program Assistance Listing 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities Assistance Listing 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Pass-Through Entity Identifying Number: 05-P19-Youth-81/05-P20-Youth-81 05-F20-Adult-81/05-F21-Adult-81/05-F22-Adult-81 05-F20-DLW-81/05-F21-DLW-81/05-F22-DLW-81 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor 2022-002 Criteria or specific requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring (2 CFR 200.331 and 20CFR 683.210) and Activities Allowed or Unallowed (2 CFR 200, Subpart E) – Management is responsible for ensuring compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. Condition: An ongoing investigation by a state agency on the WIOA program for the 2021 program year (fiscal 2022) has alleged a potential violation of cost allowable under federal awards. The reports state that there are questioned costs of approximately $775,000. Questioned Costs: $775,000 Context: The Organization operated without a legally binding agreement for WIOA Title I and One-stop Operator Services for over 10 months after the expiration of the previous contract. This results in questioned costs of $725,000. In addition, there was not sufficient documentation to support the allocation basis for certain expenditures charged to WIOA that resulted in additional questioned costs. Effect: The noncompliance could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. Cause: Proper allowable costs policies and procedures were not in place according to the state agency. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen controls and processes related to the allowable costs policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management is considering its options for further appeals to the Department of Labor for review.
Federal Program: Workforce Investment Opportunity Act Cluster Assistance Listing 17.258 WIOA Adult Program Assistance Listing 17.259 WIOA Youth Activities Assistance Listing 17.278 WIOA Dislocated Worker Formula Grants Pass-Through Entity Identifying Number: 05-P19-Youth-81/05-P20-Youth-81 05-F20-Adult-81/05-F21-Adult-81/05-F22-Adult-81 05-F20-DLW-81/05-F21-DLW-81/05-F22-DLW-81 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor 2022-002 Criteria or specific requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring (2 CFR 200.331 and 20CFR 683.210) and Activities Allowed or Unallowed (2 CFR 200, Subpart E) – Management is responsible for ensuring compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements. Condition: An ongoing investigation by a state agency on the WIOA program for the 2021 program year (fiscal 2022) has alleged a potential violation of cost allowable under federal awards. The reports state that there are questioned costs of approximately $775,000. Questioned Costs: $775,000 Context: The Organization operated without a legally binding agreement for WIOA Title I and One-stop Operator Services for over 10 months after the expiration of the previous contract. This results in questioned costs of $725,000. In addition, there was not sufficient documentation to support the allocation basis for certain expenditures charged to WIOA that resulted in additional questioned costs. Effect: The noncompliance could have a direct and material effect on the financial statements. Cause: Proper allowable costs policies and procedures were not in place according to the state agency. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen controls and processes related to the allowable costs policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management is considering its options for further appeals to the Department of Labor for review.
Finding 2022-006 Internal Control and Compliance over Subrecipient Monitoring Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number(s): 17.258, 17.259, 17.278 Federal Program Name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-Through Entity: California Employment Development Department Federal Award Number and Award Year: AA311008 - FY21-22 Criteria: Title 2 - Grants and Agreements. Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements. Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance. Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements. Standards for Financial and Program Management. §200.303 Internal controls (2 CFR 200.303): The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Title 2: Grants and Agreements, Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements, Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities (2 CFR 200.331): All pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. i. Subrecipient name (which must match the name associated with its unique entity identifier); ii. Subrecipient's unique entity identifier; iii. Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); iv. Federal Award Date (see the definition of Federal award date in § 200.1 of this part) of award to the recipient by the Federal agency; v. Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; vi. Subaward Budget Period Start and End Date; vii. Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient; viii. Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity including the current financial obligation; ix. Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity; x. Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); xi. Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding xii. Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement; xiii. Identification of whether the award is R&D; and xiv. Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged) per § 200.414.; (2) All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; (3) Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; Title 2: Grants and Agreements, Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements, Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.332 Requirements for pass-through entities (2 CFR 200.332): All pass-through entities must: (a) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Condition: During our testing of the Imperial County Workforce Development Office’s (ICWDO) provisions for subrecipient monitoring under the WIOA Cluster, we noted the following instances: For one (1) of the one (1) subrecipient selected for testing, there was no review or approval over the monitoring procedures performed by ICWDO monitoring staff. The entire population of one (1) subrecipient. • The following information was not provided at the time of the subaward for one (1) of the one (1) subaward selected for testing: o Federal award identification number o Federal award date of award to recipient by the Federal agency o Name of federal awarding agency o Federal Financial Assistance Listing/CFDA Number o Identification of whether the award is research and development • The County did not document their evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance Cause: The County’s ICWDO department does not have a formal procedure in place for the department’s review and approval over the monitoring procedures performed by the department over its subrecipients. The ICWDO department did not ensure that the required award information and applicable requirements were communicated to the subrecipients and did not maintain documentation of their evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance. Effect: The County’s ICWDO department did not review and approve monitoring procedures performed over its subrecipients. Additionally, the ICWDO department did not maintain policies and procedures to align with the Subrecipient Monitoring requirements in 2 CFR 200.332 (a) and 200.332(b). Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: Yes. See Finding 2021-008. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified. Recommendation: Social Services should continue to monitor compliance with its policies to ensure case workers follow the established guidelines for redetermination of the recipients of need and amount of assistance and retain acceptable documentation to support the determinations. View of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: See separate Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2022-006 Internal Control and Compliance over Subrecipient Monitoring Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number(s): 17.258, 17.259, 17.278 Federal Program Name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-Through Entity: California Employment Development Department Federal Award Number and Award Year: AA311008 - FY21-22 Criteria: Title 2 - Grants and Agreements. Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements. Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance. Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements. Standards for Financial and Program Management. §200.303 Internal controls (2 CFR 200.303): The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Title 2: Grants and Agreements, Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements, Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities (2 CFR 200.331): All pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. i. Subrecipient name (which must match the name associated with its unique entity identifier); ii. Subrecipient's unique entity identifier; iii. Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); iv. Federal Award Date (see the definition of Federal award date in § 200.1 of this part) of award to the recipient by the Federal agency; v. Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; vi. Subaward Budget Period Start and End Date; vii. Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient; viii. Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity including the current financial obligation; ix. Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity; x. Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); xi. Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding xii. Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement; xiii. Identification of whether the award is R&D; and xiv. Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged) per § 200.414.; (2) All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; (3) Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; Title 2: Grants and Agreements, Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements, Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.332 Requirements for pass-through entities (2 CFR 200.332): All pass-through entities must: (a) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Condition: During our testing of the Imperial County Workforce Development Office’s (ICWDO) provisions for subrecipient monitoring under the WIOA Cluster, we noted the following instances: For one (1) of the one (1) subrecipient selected for testing, there was no review or approval over the monitoring procedures performed by ICWDO monitoring staff. The entire population of one (1) subrecipient. • The following information was not provided at the time of the subaward for one (1) of the one (1) subaward selected for testing: o Federal award identification number o Federal award date of award to recipient by the Federal agency o Name of federal awarding agency o Federal Financial Assistance Listing/CFDA Number o Identification of whether the award is research and development • The County did not document their evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance Cause: The County’s ICWDO department does not have a formal procedure in place for the department’s review and approval over the monitoring procedures performed by the department over its subrecipients. The ICWDO department did not ensure that the required award information and applicable requirements were communicated to the subrecipients and did not maintain documentation of their evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance. Effect: The County’s ICWDO department did not review and approve monitoring procedures performed over its subrecipients. Additionally, the ICWDO department did not maintain policies and procedures to align with the Subrecipient Monitoring requirements in 2 CFR 200.332 (a) and 200.332(b). Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: Yes. See Finding 2021-008. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified. Recommendation: Social Services should continue to monitor compliance with its policies to ensure case workers follow the established guidelines for redetermination of the recipients of need and amount of assistance and retain acceptable documentation to support the determinations. View of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: See separate Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2022-006 Internal Control and Compliance over Subrecipient Monitoring Information on the Federal Program: Assistance Listing Number(s): 17.258, 17.259, 17.278 Federal Program Name: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Labor Pass-Through Entity: California Employment Development Department Federal Award Number and Award Year: AA311008 - FY21-22 Criteria: Title 2 - Grants and Agreements. Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements. Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance. Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements. Standards for Financial and Program Management. §200.303 Internal controls (2 CFR 200.303): The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Title 2: Grants and Agreements, Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements, Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities (2 CFR 200.331): All pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the following information at the time of the subaward and if any of these data elements change, include the changes in subsequent subaward modification. When some of this information is not available, the pass-through entity must provide the best information available to describe the Federal award and subaward. Required information includes: (1) Federal award identification. i. Subrecipient name (which must match the name associated with its unique entity identifier); ii. Subrecipient's unique entity identifier; iii. Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN); iv. Federal Award Date (see the definition of Federal award date in § 200.1 of this part) of award to the recipient by the Federal agency; v. Subaward Period of Performance Start and End Date; vi. Subaward Budget Period Start and End Date; vii. Amount of Federal Funds Obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient; viii. Total Amount of Federal Funds Obligated to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity including the current financial obligation; ix. Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the pass-through entity; x. Federal award project description, as required to be responsive to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA); xi. Name of Federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, and contact information for awarding xii. Assistance Listings number and Title; the pass-through entity must identify the dollar amount made available under each Federal award and the Assistance Listings Number at time of disbursement; xiii. Identification of whether the award is R&D; and xiv. Indirect cost rate for the Federal award (including if the de minimis rate is charged) per § 200.414.; (2) All requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the Federal award; (3) Any additional requirements that the pass-through entity imposes on the subrecipient in order for the pass-through entity to meet its own responsibility to the Federal awarding agency including identification of any required financial and performance reports; Title 2: Grants and Agreements, Subtitle A - Office of Management and Budget Guidance for Grants and Agreements, Chapter II - Office of Management and Budget Guidance, Part 200 - Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards Subpart D - Post Federal Award Requirements, Subrecipient Monitoring and Management, §200.332 Requirements for pass-through entities (2 CFR 200.332): All pass-through entities must: (a) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring described in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, which may include consideration of such factors as: (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a Single Audit in accordance with Subpart F of this part, and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems; and (4) The extent and results of Federal awarding agency monitoring (e.g., if the subrecipient also receives Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency). Condition: During our testing of the Imperial County Workforce Development Office’s (ICWDO) provisions for subrecipient monitoring under the WIOA Cluster, we noted the following instances: For one (1) of the one (1) subrecipient selected for testing, there was no review or approval over the monitoring procedures performed by ICWDO monitoring staff. The entire population of one (1) subrecipient. • The following information was not provided at the time of the subaward for one (1) of the one (1) subaward selected for testing: o Federal award identification number o Federal award date of award to recipient by the Federal agency o Name of federal awarding agency o Federal Financial Assistance Listing/CFDA Number o Identification of whether the award is research and development • The County did not document their evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance Cause: The County’s ICWDO department does not have a formal procedure in place for the department’s review and approval over the monitoring procedures performed by the department over its subrecipients. The ICWDO department did not ensure that the required award information and applicable requirements were communicated to the subrecipients and did not maintain documentation of their evaluation of each subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance. Effect: The County’s ICWDO department did not review and approve monitoring procedures performed over its subrecipients. Additionally, the ICWDO department did not maintain policies and procedures to align with the Subrecipient Monitoring requirements in 2 CFR 200.332 (a) and 200.332(b). Identification as a Repeat Finding, If Applicable: Yes. See Finding 2021-008. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified. Recommendation: Social Services should continue to monitor compliance with its policies to ensure case workers follow the established guidelines for redetermination of the recipients of need and amount of assistance and retain acceptable documentation to support the determinations. View of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: See separate Corrective Action Plan.
2022-006 Subaward Monitoring Federal Program: Research and Development Cluster (ALN 47.041, Award Period 9/1/19 – 8/31/22) Federal Agency: National Science Foundation Criteria: Written documentation pertaining to the identification, risk assessment of and monitoring of sub awardees was not available as required by 2 CFR 200.331-333. Condition: The Organization lacked documentation to indicate compliance with subaward monitoring responsibilities required Per 2 CFR 200.331-333, including the policies and procedures to identify and assess risks and monitor subaward recipients as required by grant recipients. Cause: The Organization lacked written policies and procedures to execute appropriate subaward monitoring responsibilities. Effect: The organization is not compliant with 2 CFR 200.331-333 which requires the Organization to monitor that the sub awardee is maintaining adequate financial reporting, recordkeeping and compliance with respect to funds received. The Organization could not document sub-awardee risk assessment or monitoring or reviewed debarment or suspension of the sub-awardee. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: The finding is a repeat of Finding 2021-007 in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization establish policy and procedures to document how sub awardees are selected, monitored and perform required risk assessment pertaining to the selection of the sub awardee. Response: The Organization will establish appropriate procedures for sub awardee monitoring. Questioned Costs: None
Criteria Pursuant to Title 2, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the Uniform Guidance), “a non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with the Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition We noted that the Organization did not make case-by-case determinations of each agreement with parties to which the Organization passed through Federal program funds to determine whether they were deemed to be either subrecipients or contractors. Cause Management had not updated its policies and procedures to incorporate the relevant Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring and management policies. Effect The lack of subrecipient monitoring and management policies of the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance by the Organization with the stipulated requirements for pass-through entities, as well as noncompliance of subrecipient requirements by the entities receiving the pass-through funds from the Organization. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provisions of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to their policies and procedures manual to ensure compliance with Federal standards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurs with the recommendation. As part of our current policies and procedures review and revision process, we plan to incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR§ 200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to emphasize accountability and compliance in managing federal funds and subrecipients. Specifically and prospectively, effective November 1, 2024, the Organization’s practices will include: 1. Using a checklist for the determination of subrecipient or contractor classification as guidance, perform a comprehensive risk assessment before entering into any subrecipient agreement. 2. Provide identification details such as CFDA number, amount of federal funds obligated, and the award period for determined subrecipient awards. 3. Require subrecipients to submit programmatic and financial reports as specified in the subrecipient agreement. 4. As part of the subrecipient process, ensure subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds during a fiscal year undergo a single audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Review their audit reports and address any findings related to their federal awards, taking appropriate corrective actions. Retroactively, for the audit periods July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 and July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024, the Organization will perform a risk assessment of the existing subrecipient portfolio during this period to identify high-priority risks. The objective of this risk assessment review is to identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could adversely impact the Organization’s ability to achieve its strategic, operational, and quality assurance goals, ensuring that all products, services, and processes align with established standards and fulfill processes. The above reflects the current planned practices of the Organization and the overall financial policies and procedures are in the process of being updated to align to the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. The Organization has prioritized the completion and distribution of the updated financial policies and procedures by December 31, 2024.
Criteria Pursuant to Title 2, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the Uniform Guidance), “a non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with the Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition We noted that the Organization did not make case-by-case determinations of each agreement with parties to which the Organization passed through Federal program funds to determine whether they were deemed to be either subrecipients or contractors. Cause Management had not updated its policies and procedures to incorporate the relevant Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring and management policies. Effect The lack of subrecipient monitoring and management policies of the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance by the Organization with the stipulated requirements for pass-through entities, as well as noncompliance of subrecipient requirements by the entities receiving the pass-through funds from the Organization. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provisions of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to their policies and procedures manual to ensure compliance with Federal standards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurs with the recommendation. As part of our current policies and procedures review and revision process, we plan to incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR§ 200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to emphasize accountability and compliance in managing federal funds and subrecipients. Specifically and prospectively, effective November 1, 2024, the Organization’s practices will include: 1. Using a checklist for the determination of subrecipient or contractor classification as guidance, perform a comprehensive risk assessment before entering into any subrecipient agreement. 2. Provide identification details such as CFDA number, amount of federal funds obligated, and the award period for determined subrecipient awards. 3. Require subrecipients to submit programmatic and financial reports as specified in the subrecipient agreement. 4. As part of the subrecipient process, ensure subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds during a fiscal year undergo a single audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Review their audit reports and address any findings related to their federal awards, taking appropriate corrective actions. Retroactively, for the audit periods July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 and July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024, the Organization will perform a risk assessment of the existing subrecipient portfolio during this period to identify high-priority risks. The objective of this risk assessment review is to identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could adversely impact the Organization’s ability to achieve its strategic, operational, and quality assurance goals, ensuring that all products, services, and processes align with established standards and fulfill processes. The above reflects the current planned practices of the Organization and the overall financial policies and procedures are in the process of being updated to align to the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. The Organization has prioritized the completion and distribution of the updated financial policies and procedures by December 31, 2024.
Criteria Pursuant to Title 2, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the Uniform Guidance), “a non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with the Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition We noted that the Organization did not make case-by-case determinations of each agreement with parties to which the Organization passed through Federal program funds to determine whether they were deemed to be either subrecipients or contractors. Cause Management had not updated its policies and procedures to incorporate the relevant Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring and management policies. Effect The lack of subrecipient monitoring and management policies of the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance by the Organization with the stipulated requirements for pass-through entities, as well as noncompliance of subrecipient requirements by the entities receiving the pass-through funds from the Organization. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provisions of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to their policies and procedures manual to ensure compliance with Federal standards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurs with the recommendation. As part of our current policies and procedures review and revision process, we plan to incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR§ 200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to emphasize accountability and compliance in managing federal funds and subrecipients. Specifically and prospectively, effective November 1, 2024, the Organization’s practices will include: 1. Using a checklist for the determination of subrecipient or contractor classification as guidance, perform a comprehensive risk assessment before entering into any subrecipient agreement. 2. Provide identification details such as CFDA number, amount of federal funds obligated, and the award period for determined subrecipient awards. 3. Require subrecipients to submit programmatic and financial reports as specified in the subrecipient agreement. 4. As part of the subrecipient process, ensure subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds during a fiscal year undergo a single audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Review their audit reports and address any findings related to their federal awards, taking appropriate corrective actions. Retroactively, for the audit periods July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 and July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024, the Organization will perform a risk assessment of the existing subrecipient portfolio during this period to identify high-priority risks. The objective of this risk assessment review is to identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could adversely impact the Organization’s ability to achieve its strategic, operational, and quality assurance goals, ensuring that all products, services, and processes align with established standards and fulfill processes. The above reflects the current planned practices of the Organization and the overall financial policies and procedures are in the process of being updated to align to the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. The Organization has prioritized the completion and distribution of the updated financial policies and procedures by December 31, 2024.
Criteria Pursuant to Title 2, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the Uniform Guidance), “a non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with the Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition We noted that the Organization did not make case-by-case determinations of each agreement with parties to which the Organization passed through Federal program funds to determine whether they were deemed to be either subrecipients or contractors. Cause Management had not updated its policies and procedures to incorporate the relevant Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring and management policies. Effect The lack of subrecipient monitoring and management policies of the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance by the Organization with the stipulated requirements for pass-through entities, as well as noncompliance of subrecipient requirements by the entities receiving the pass-through funds from the Organization. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provisions of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to their policies and procedures manual to ensure compliance with Federal standards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurs with the recommendation. As part of our current policies and procedures review and revision process, we plan to incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR§ 200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to emphasize accountability and compliance in managing federal funds and subrecipients. Specifically and prospectively, effective November 1, 2024, the Organization’s practices will include: 1. Using a checklist for the determination of subrecipient or contractor classification as guidance, perform a comprehensive risk assessment before entering into any subrecipient agreement. 2. Provide identification details such as CFDA number, amount of federal funds obligated, and the award period for determined subrecipient awards. 3. Require subrecipients to submit programmatic and financial reports as specified in the subrecipient agreement. 4. As part of the subrecipient process, ensure subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds during a fiscal year undergo a single audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Review their audit reports and address any findings related to their federal awards, taking appropriate corrective actions. Retroactively, for the audit periods July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 and July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024, the Organization will perform a risk assessment of the existing subrecipient portfolio during this period to identify high-priority risks. The objective of this risk assessment review is to identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could adversely impact the Organization’s ability to achieve its strategic, operational, and quality assurance goals, ensuring that all products, services, and processes align with established standards and fulfill processes. The above reflects the current planned practices of the Organization and the overall financial policies and procedures are in the process of being updated to align to the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. The Organization has prioritized the completion and distribution of the updated financial policies and procedures by December 31, 2024.
Criteria Pursuant to Title 2, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the Uniform Guidance), “a non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with the Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition We noted that the Organization did not make case-by-case determinations of each agreement with parties to which the Organization passed through Federal program funds to determine whether they were deemed to be either subrecipients or contractors. Cause Management had not updated its policies and procedures to incorporate the relevant Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring and management policies. Effect The lack of subrecipient monitoring and management policies of the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance by the Organization with the stipulated requirements for pass-through entities, as well as noncompliance of subrecipient requirements by the entities receiving the pass-through funds from the Organization. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provisions of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to their policies and procedures manual to ensure compliance with Federal standards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurs with the recommendation. As part of our current policies and procedures review and revision process, we plan to incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR§ 200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to emphasize accountability and compliance in managing federal funds and subrecipients. Specifically and prospectively, effective November 1, 2024, the Organization’s practices will include: 1. Using a checklist for the determination of subrecipient or contractor classification as guidance, perform a comprehensive risk assessment before entering into any subrecipient agreement. 2. Provide identification details such as CFDA number, amount of federal funds obligated, and the award period for determined subrecipient awards. 3. Require subrecipients to submit programmatic and financial reports as specified in the subrecipient agreement. 4. As part of the subrecipient process, ensure subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds during a fiscal year undergo a single audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Review their audit reports and address any findings related to their federal awards, taking appropriate corrective actions. Retroactively, for the audit periods July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 and July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024, the Organization will perform a risk assessment of the existing subrecipient portfolio during this period to identify high-priority risks. The objective of this risk assessment review is to identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could adversely impact the Organization’s ability to achieve its strategic, operational, and quality assurance goals, ensuring that all products, services, and processes align with established standards and fulfill processes. The above reflects the current planned practices of the Organization and the overall financial policies and procedures are in the process of being updated to align to the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. The Organization has prioritized the completion and distribution of the updated financial policies and procedures by December 31, 2024.
Criteria Pursuant to Title 2, Subtitle A Chapter II, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (the Uniform Guidance), “a non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with the Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a pass-through entity must make case-by-case determinations whether each agreement it makes for the disbursement of Federal program funds casts the party receiving the funds in the role of a subrecipient or a contractor.” Condition We noted that the Organization did not make case-by-case determinations of each agreement with parties to which the Organization passed through Federal program funds to determine whether they were deemed to be either subrecipients or contractors. Cause Management had not updated its policies and procedures to incorporate the relevant Uniform Guidance subrecipient monitoring and management policies. Effect The lack of subrecipient monitoring and management policies of the Uniform Guidance could result in noncompliance by the Organization with the stipulated requirements for pass-through entities, as well as noncompliance of subrecipient requirements by the entities receiving the pass-through funds from the Organization. Recommendation We recommend that the Organization incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provisions of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to their policies and procedures manual to ensure compliance with Federal standards. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action The Organization concurs with the recommendation. As part of our current policies and procedures review and revision process, we plan to incorporate the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR§ 200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance to emphasize accountability and compliance in managing federal funds and subrecipients. Specifically and prospectively, effective November 1, 2024, the Organization’s practices will include: 1. Using a checklist for the determination of subrecipient or contractor classification as guidance, perform a comprehensive risk assessment before entering into any subrecipient agreement. 2. Provide identification details such as CFDA number, amount of federal funds obligated, and the award period for determined subrecipient awards. 3. Require subrecipients to submit programmatic and financial reports as specified in the subrecipient agreement. 4. As part of the subrecipient process, ensure subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in federal funds during a fiscal year undergo a single audit in accordance with 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart F. Review their audit reports and address any findings related to their federal awards, taking appropriate corrective actions. Retroactively, for the audit periods July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 and July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024, the Organization will perform a risk assessment of the existing subrecipient portfolio during this period to identify high-priority risks. The objective of this risk assessment review is to identify, evaluate, and prioritize risks that could adversely impact the Organization’s ability to achieve its strategic, operational, and quality assurance goals, ensuring that all products, services, and processes align with established standards and fulfill processes. The above reflects the current planned practices of the Organization and the overall financial policies and procedures are in the process of being updated to align to the subrecipient monitoring and management provision of 2 CFR §200.331 and 2 CFR §200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. The Organization has prioritized the completion and distribution of the updated financial policies and procedures by December 31, 2024.
2022-006 Subaward Monitoring Research and Development Cluster (ALN 47.041-Engineering, Award 1940055, Award Period 9/1/19 – 8/31/22) Federal Agency: National Science Foundation Criteria: Written documentation pertaining to the identification, risk assessment of and monitoring of sub awardees was not available as required by 2 CFR 200.331-333. Condition: The Organization lacked documentation to indicate compliance with subaward monitoring responsibilities required Per 2 CFR 200.331-333, including the policies and procedures to identify and assess risks and monitor subaward recipients as required by grant recipients. Cause: The Organization lacked written policies and procedures to execute appropriate subaward monitoring responsibilities. Effect: The organization is not compliant with 2 CFR 200.331-333 which requires the Organization to monitor that the sub awardee is maintaining adequate financial reporting, recordkeeping and compliance with respect to funds received. The Organization could not document sub-awardee risk assessment or monitoring or reviewed debarment or suspension of the sub-awardee. Without policies to document, monitor and risk assess a sub awardee, the Organization could inadvertently engage in a relationship with a sub awardee of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure the sub awardee is expending the funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: The finding is a repeat of Finding 2021-007 in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization establish policy and procedures to document how sub awardees are selected, monitored and perform required risk assessment pertaining to the selection of the sub awardee. Response: The Organization will establish appropriate procedures for sub awardee monitoring. Questioned Costs: None
Finding 2021-008 Program: Office for Coastal Management Federal Financial Assistance Listing: 11.473 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Commerce Passed-through: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Award No. and Year: 0318.19.070225 (2020) Compliance Requirements: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Non-Compliance/Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200.331(a) - Requirements for Pass-Through Entities, states that all pass-through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes certain information as well as all the requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: The following information was not identified at the time of subaward for three of the three subawards selected for testing from the Office for Coastal Management: • Federal Award date by the Federal Agency • Whether or not the award was R&D • The indirect cost rate for the Federal Award (including if the de minimus rate is charged) Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. We selected all three subrecipients for testing. The condition noted above was identified during our procedures over CFSC’s subrecipient monitoring provisions. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No Effect: CFSC did not identify the required elements of the subaward to the subrecipients at the time of subaward, increasing the risk of noncompliance. Cause: CFSC’s procedures did not consistently ensure that the required award information and applicable requirements were communicated to subrecipients. Recommendation: We recommend that CFSC modify and strengthen its current policies and procedures to ensure that all required award information and applicable requirements are communicated to subrecipients at the time of subaward in accordance with 2 CFR section 200.331(a). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: See Separate Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2021-009 Program: Office for Coastal Management Federal Financial Assistance Listing: 11.473 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Commerce Passed-through: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Award No. and Year: 0318.19.070225 (2020) Compliance Requirements: Subrecipient Monitoring and Matching Type of Finding: Material Non-Compliance/Material Weakness 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 Part 200.331(b) - Requirements for Pass-Through Entities, states that all pass-through entities must assess the subrecipient’s risk of non-compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the subaward. 2 CFR 200.331(d) - establishes that the auditee must follow up and ensure subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided from the Pass Through Entity (PTE) detected through audits. 2 CFR 200.332(d) - establishes that the auditee must monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. As part of monitoring the subrecipients, since there is a matching requirement within the grant, the CFSC’s procedures should monitor and ensure the subrecipients are complying the required match arrangements outlined in the subaward agreements. Condition: CFSC did not perform risk assessment for all subrecipients selected for testing. CFSC was unable to provide supporting documentation to show that they inquired with the subrecipients about any audits they had undergone or evidence that CFSC received and reviewed audit reports to ensure timely follow ups were made if any findings pertaining to the Federal Award was noted. Monitoring of matching is not done each time expenditures are incurred by a subrecipient, which increases the risk that a subrecipient may not incur the required match costs before the end of the grant period. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. We selected all three subrecipients for testing. The condition noted above was identified during our procedures over CFSC’s subrecipient monitoring provisions. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: Yes –2020-001 Effect: CFSC did not perform the following, which increases the risk of noncompliance: • Required risk assessments for the subrecipients, • Review subrecipient audit reports to ensure compliance with Federal Awards or make any necessary follow-ups pertaining to any findings noted, if any. • Ensure match expenditures are incurred throughout the duration of the grant period, which increases risk that CFSC may not meet its matching requirements through its subrecipients. Cause: CFSC’s procedures did not consistently ensure that the required risk assessments, monitoring, matching through subrecipients, or subrecipient follow-up were performed. Recommendation: We recommend that CFSC modify and strengthen its current policies and procedures to ensure that all required risk assessments are performed in accordance with the criteria outlined above. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: See Separate Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2021-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster: 47.076 - STEM +C Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2020-006. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/31/2022 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
Finding 2021-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Research and Development Cluster (Education and Human Resources) Assistance Listing Number and Title: 47.076 STEM Education Name of Federal Agency, Pass Through Entity (when applicable), Award Number and Year: National Science Foundation: 1640791 (9/15/2016 – 8/31/2022) Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls Over Compliance, Other matters Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2020-006. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/31/2022 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
2021-005 – SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING – SUBAWARD AGREEMENTS Federal Program Information: Federal Agency Federal Program Name Assistance Listing Number Grant Award(s) Unique Identifier(s) Department of Defense Basic Scientific Research 12.431 W15QKN-14-1-0001 W15QKN-20-1-1000 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a 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 and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Subrecipient agreements must make the subrecipient aware of the award information required by 2 CFR section 200.331(a): (1) Determines who is eligible to receive what Federal assistance; (2) Has its performance measured in relation to whether objectives of a Federal program were met; (3) Has responsibility for programmatic decision-making; (4) Is responsible for adherence to applicable Federal program requirements specified in the Federal award; and (5) In accordance with its agreement, uses the Federal funds to carry out a program for a public purpose specified in authorizing statute, as opposed to providing goods or services for the benefit of the pass-through entity. Furthermore, DoDGAR’s Appendix B Part 22 requires agreements make the subrecipient aware of federal provisions related to Nondiscrimination; Debarment and Suspension; Hatch Act; Environmental Standards; Drug-Free Workplace and other federal regulations. Condition: Standard Subrecipient agreements did not make reference to certain provisions which are required to be contained in the agreement. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2021-005 – SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING – SUBAWARD AGREEMENTS (Continued) Federal Program Information: Federal Agency Federal Program Name Assistance Listing Number Grant Award(s) Unique Identifier(s) Department of Defense Basic Scientific Research 12.431 W15QKN-14-1-0001 W15QKN-20-1-1000 Context: There were twelve Subrecipient agreements executed during the year under the federal award with total expenditures of $2,086,200. Total federal expenditures listed on the Schedule of Federal Awards was $6,267,848. Cause: Internal controls and procedures related to Subrecipient monitoring requirements were not effectively designed or performed. Effect: The National Center for the Advancement of STEM Education, Inc. did not adequately include certain necessary language in the executed agreements to properly comply with Subrecipient monitoring. Recommendation: Management should establish proper policies and procedures which ensure Subrecipient agreements comply with applicable federal guidelines. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the finding and has developed a plan to correct the finding.
Finding 2021-008 Program: Office for Coastal Management Federal Financial Assistance Listing: 11.473 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Commerce Passed-through: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Award No. and Year: 0318.19.070225 (2020) Compliance Requirements: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Material Non-Compliance/Material Weakness Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200.331(a) - Requirements for Pass-Through Entities, states that all pass-through entities must ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes certain information as well as all the requirements imposed by the pass-through entity on the subrecipient so that the Federal award is used in accordance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Condition: The following information was not identified at the time of subaward for three of the three subawards selected for testing from the Office for Coastal Management: • Federal Award date by the Federal Agency • Whether or not the award was R&D • The indirect cost rate for the Federal Award (including if the de minimus rate is charged) Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. We selected all three subrecipients for testing. The condition noted above was identified during our procedures over CFSC’s subrecipient monitoring provisions. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: No Effect: CFSC did not identify the required elements of the subaward to the subrecipients at the time of subaward, increasing the risk of noncompliance. Cause: CFSC’s procedures did not consistently ensure that the required award information and applicable requirements were communicated to subrecipients. Recommendation: We recommend that CFSC modify and strengthen its current policies and procedures to ensure that all required award information and applicable requirements are communicated to subrecipients at the time of subaward in accordance with 2 CFR section 200.331(a). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: See Separate Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2021-009 Program: Office for Coastal Management Federal Financial Assistance Listing: 11.473 Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Commerce Passed-through: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Award No. and Year: 0318.19.070225 (2020) Compliance Requirements: Subrecipient Monitoring and Matching Type of Finding: Material Non-Compliance/Material Weakness 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 Part 200.331(b) - Requirements for Pass-Through Entities, states that all pass-through entities must assess the subrecipient’s risk of non-compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and terms and conditions of the subaward. 2 CFR 200.331(d) - establishes that the auditee must follow up and ensure subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided from the Pass Through Entity (PTE) detected through audits. 2 CFR 200.332(d) - establishes that the auditee must monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. As part of monitoring the subrecipients, since there is a matching requirement within the grant, the CFSC’s procedures should monitor and ensure the subrecipients are complying the required match arrangements outlined in the subaward agreements. Condition: CFSC did not perform risk assessment for all subrecipients selected for testing. CFSC was unable to provide supporting documentation to show that they inquired with the subrecipients about any audits they had undergone or evidence that CFSC received and reviewed audit reports to ensure timely follow ups were made if any findings pertaining to the Federal Award was noted. Monitoring of matching is not done each time expenditures are incurred by a subrecipient, which increases the risk that a subrecipient may not incur the required match costs before the end of the grant period. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. Context/Sampling: Sampling was not used. We selected all three subrecipients for testing. The condition noted above was identified during our procedures over CFSC’s subrecipient monitoring provisions. Repeat Finding from Prior Year: Yes –2020-001 Effect: CFSC did not perform the following, which increases the risk of noncompliance: • Required risk assessments for the subrecipients, • Review subrecipient audit reports to ensure compliance with Federal Awards or make any necessary follow-ups pertaining to any findings noted, if any. • Ensure match expenditures are incurred throughout the duration of the grant period, which increases risk that CFSC may not meet its matching requirements through its subrecipients. Cause: CFSC’s procedures did not consistently ensure that the required risk assessments, monitoring, matching through subrecipients, or subrecipient follow-up were performed. Recommendation: We recommend that CFSC modify and strengthen its current policies and procedures to ensure that all required risk assessments are performed in accordance with the criteria outlined above. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: See Separate Corrective Action Plan.
Finding 2021-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster: 47.076 - STEM +C Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2020-006. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/31/2022 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
Finding 2021-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Research and Development Cluster (Education and Human Resources) Assistance Listing Number and Title: 47.076 STEM Education Name of Federal Agency, Pass Through Entity (when applicable), Award Number and Year: National Science Foundation: 1640791 (9/15/2016 – 8/31/2022) Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls Over Compliance, Other matters Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2020-006. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/31/2022 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
2021-005 – SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING – SUBAWARD AGREEMENTS Federal Program Information: Federal Agency Federal Program Name Assistance Listing Number Grant Award(s) Unique Identifier(s) Department of Defense Basic Scientific Research 12.431 W15QKN-14-1-0001 W15QKN-20-1-1000 Criteria: 2 CFR 200.303 requires that a 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 and the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Subrecipient agreements must make the subrecipient aware of the award information required by 2 CFR section 200.331(a): (1) Determines who is eligible to receive what Federal assistance; (2) Has its performance measured in relation to whether objectives of a Federal program were met; (3) Has responsibility for programmatic decision-making; (4) Is responsible for adherence to applicable Federal program requirements specified in the Federal award; and (5) In accordance with its agreement, uses the Federal funds to carry out a program for a public purpose specified in authorizing statute, as opposed to providing goods or services for the benefit of the pass-through entity. Furthermore, DoDGAR’s Appendix B Part 22 requires agreements make the subrecipient aware of federal provisions related to Nondiscrimination; Debarment and Suspension; Hatch Act; Environmental Standards; Drug-Free Workplace and other federal regulations. Condition: Standard Subrecipient agreements did not make reference to certain provisions which are required to be contained in the agreement. Questioned Costs: Not applicable. SECTION III – FEDERAL AWARD FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2021-005 – SUBRECIPIENT MONITORING – SUBAWARD AGREEMENTS (Continued) Federal Program Information: Federal Agency Federal Program Name Assistance Listing Number Grant Award(s) Unique Identifier(s) Department of Defense Basic Scientific Research 12.431 W15QKN-14-1-0001 W15QKN-20-1-1000 Context: There were twelve Subrecipient agreements executed during the year under the federal award with total expenditures of $2,086,200. Total federal expenditures listed on the Schedule of Federal Awards was $6,267,848. Cause: Internal controls and procedures related to Subrecipient monitoring requirements were not effectively designed or performed. Effect: The National Center for the Advancement of STEM Education, Inc. did not adequately include certain necessary language in the executed agreements to properly comply with Subrecipient monitoring. Recommendation: Management should establish proper policies and procedures which ensure Subrecipient agreements comply with applicable federal guidelines. Views of Responsible Officials: Management concurs with the finding and has developed a plan to correct the finding.
Finding 2021-004 Noncompliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Period of Performance Finding 2021-005 Noncompliance with Eligibility Compliance Requirements: • Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards and Per 2 CFR 200.403, costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and authorized consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. The costs must also occur during the proper grant period of performance. • Eligibility – Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 2 CFR 200.331, the auditee must establish and maintain internal controls to ensure that only eligible individuals, organizations, or activities receive assistance under federal awards. Criteria: An effective system of internal control over compliance requires that expenditures charged to federal awards be supported by adequate documentation and approvals to demonstrate that: • Costs are necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable under program requirements, and recorded properly and in the correct period. • Expenditures are for activities permitted under the terms and conditions of the award. • Expenditures are reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries meet eligibility requirements. Condition: During our testing of expenditures and program activity for the federal program, we identified multiple instances in which transactions lacked adequate supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the above requirements. Specifically: • CSBG – ALN 93.569: Of the sixty expense transactions tested over CSBG, three did not have corresponding support or documentation to verify they were allowable activities, allowable costs, and they were recognized in the correct period. Specifically, invoices, purchase orders, or timesheets were missing, incomplete, or did not adequately substantiate the expenditures charged to the federal award. • During our testing, we identified an instance where 1 transaction was processed without proper documented approvals - 1 transaction totaling $842.40 • During testing of participant files over CSBG, we noted that 15 out of 60 client files could not be located, which did not allow us to properly determine if these participants were in fact eligible to be served under this program. Cause: The lack of documentation was primarily due to inadequate internal control procedures over record retention and verification. Additionally, there was significant turnover which contributed to inconsistent documentation practices. Effect or Potential Effect: Without sufficient supporting documentation and approvals, the Organization cannot demonstrate that: • Expenditures were for allowable activities. • Costs charged were necessary, reasonable, and allocable and recorded in the proper period. • Costs are reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries met eligibility requirements. Questioned costs: Due to insufficient documentation, the amount of questioned costs could not be determined. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its compliance-related internal controls by: • Requiring standardized documentation to support compliance with each requirement. • Implementing periodic reviews of documentation completeness before charging costs to federal awards. • Providing training to staff responsible for grant management on compliance and record retention requirements. • Retain all documentation related to federal awards in a central location. • Reinforcing the approval process by documenting and communicating approval requirements to all staff involved in initiating and processing transactions, providing mandatory training to employees on expense authorization policies, and establishing monitoring procedures to ensure approvals are consistently documented before transactions are processed. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and the recommendation. Corrective action plan: See Management’s Corrective Action Plan (Unaudited).
Finding 2021-004 Noncompliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Period of Performance Finding 2021-005 Noncompliance with Eligibility Compliance Requirements: • Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards and Per 2 CFR 200.403, costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and authorized consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. The costs must also occur during the proper grant period of performance. • Eligibility – Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 2 CFR 200.331, the auditee must establish and maintain internal controls to ensure that only eligible individuals, organizations, or activities receive assistance under federal awards. Criteria: An effective system of internal control over compliance requires that expenditures charged to federal awards be supported by adequate documentation and approvals to demonstrate that: • Costs are necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable under program requirements, and recorded properly and in the correct period. • Expenditures are for activities permitted under the terms and conditions of the award. • Expenditures are reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries meet eligibility requirements. Condition: During our testing of expenditures and program activity for the federal program, we identified multiple instances in which transactions lacked adequate supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the above requirements. Specifically: • CSBG – ALN 93.569: Of the sixty expense transactions tested over CSBG, three did not have corresponding support or documentation to verify they were allowable activities, allowable costs, and they were recognized in the correct period. Specifically, invoices, purchase orders, or timesheets were missing, incomplete, or did not adequately substantiate the expenditures charged to the federal award. • During our testing, we identified an instance where 1 transaction was processed without proper documented approvals - 1 transaction totaling $842.40 • During testing of participant files over CSBG, we noted that 15 out of 60 client files could not be located, which did not allow us to properly determine if these participants were in fact eligible to be served under this program. Cause: The lack of documentation was primarily due to inadequate internal control procedures over record retention and verification. Additionally, there was significant turnover which contributed to inconsistent documentation practices. Effect or Potential Effect: Without sufficient supporting documentation and approvals, the Organization cannot demonstrate that: • Expenditures were for allowable activities. • Costs charged were necessary, reasonable, and allocable and recorded in the proper period. • Costs are reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries met eligibility requirements. Questioned costs: Due to insufficient documentation, the amount of questioned costs could not be determined. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its compliance-related internal controls by: • Requiring standardized documentation to support compliance with each requirement. • Implementing periodic reviews of documentation completeness before charging costs to federal awards. • Providing training to staff responsible for grant management on compliance and record retention requirements. • Retain all documentation related to federal awards in a central location. • Reinforcing the approval process by documenting and communicating approval requirements to all staff involved in initiating and processing transactions, providing mandatory training to employees on expense authorization policies, and establishing monitoring procedures to ensure approvals are consistently documented before transactions are processed. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and the recommendation. Corrective action plan: See Management’s Corrective Action Plan (Unaudited).
Finding 2021-006 Noncompliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Period of Performance Finding 2021-007 Noncompliance with Eligibility Compliance Requirements: • Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards and Per 2 CFR 200.403, costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and authorized consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. The costs must also occur during the proper grant period of performance. • Eligibility – Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 2 CFR 200.331, the auditee must establish and maintain internal controls to ensure that only eligible individuals, organizations, or activities receive assistance under federal awards. Criteria: An effective system of internal control over compliance requires that expenditures charged to federal awards be supported by adequate documentation to demonstrate that: • Costs are necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable under program requirements and recorded in the proper period. • Expenditures are for activities permitted under the terms and conditions of the award and recorded properly. • Expenditures are reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries meet eligibility requirements. Condition: During our testing of expenditures and program activity for the federal program, we identified multiple instances in which transactions lacked adequate supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the above requirements. Specifically: • TANF – ALN 93.558: Of the sixty expense transactions tested over TANF, two did not have corresponding support or documentation to verify they were allowable activities and allowable costs. Specifically, invoices, purchase orders, or timesheets were missing, incomplete, or did not adequately substantiate the expenditures charged to the federal award in the proper period. • During our testing, we identified an instance where 8 transactions were processed without proper documented approvals - 8 transaction totaling $12,694.19 • During testing of participant files over TANF, we noted that five out of 60 client files could not be located, which did not allow us to properly determine if these participants were in fact eligible to be served under this program. Cause: The lack of documentation was primarily due to inadequate internal control procedures over record retention and verification. Additionally, there was significant turnover which contributed to inconsistent documentation practices. Effect or Potential Effect: Without sufficient supporting documentation, the Organization cannot demonstrate that: • Expenditures were for allowable activities. • Costs charged were necessary, reasonable, and allocable and recorded properly. • Expenditures were reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries met eligibility requirements. Questioned costs: Due to insufficient documentation, the amount of questioned costs could not be determined. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its compliance-related internal controls by: • Requiring standardized documentation to support compliance with each requirement. • Implementing periodic reviews of documentation completeness before charging costs to federal awards. • Providing training to staff responsible for grant management on compliance and record retention requirements. • Retain all documentation related to federal awards in a central location. • Reinforcing the approval process by documenting and communicating approval requirements to all staff involved in initiating and processing transactions, providing mandatory training to employees on expense authorization policies, and establishing monitoring procedures to ensure approvals are consistently documented before transactions are processed. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and the recommendation. Corrective action plan: See Management’s Corrective Action Plan (Unaudited).
Finding 2021-006 Noncompliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Period of Performance Finding 2021-007 Noncompliance with Eligibility Compliance Requirements: • Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards and Per 2 CFR 200.403, costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and authorized consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. The costs must also occur during the proper grant period of performance. • Eligibility – Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 2 CFR 200.331, the auditee must establish and maintain internal controls to ensure that only eligible individuals, organizations, or activities receive assistance under federal awards. Criteria: An effective system of internal control over compliance requires that expenditures charged to federal awards be supported by adequate documentation to demonstrate that: • Costs are necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable under program requirements and recorded in the proper period. • Expenditures are for activities permitted under the terms and conditions of the award and recorded properly. • Expenditures are reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries meet eligibility requirements. Condition: During our testing of expenditures and program activity for the federal program, we identified multiple instances in which transactions lacked adequate supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the above requirements. Specifically: • TANF – ALN 93.558: Of the sixty expense transactions tested over TANF, two did not have corresponding support or documentation to verify they were allowable activities and allowable costs. Specifically, invoices, purchase orders, or timesheets were missing, incomplete, or did not adequately substantiate the expenditures charged to the federal award in the proper period. • During our testing, we identified an instance where 8 transactions were processed without proper documented approvals - 8 transaction totaling $12,694.19 • During testing of participant files over TANF, we noted that five out of 60 client files could not be located, which did not allow us to properly determine if these participants were in fact eligible to be served under this program. Cause: The lack of documentation was primarily due to inadequate internal control procedures over record retention and verification. Additionally, there was significant turnover which contributed to inconsistent documentation practices. Effect or Potential Effect: Without sufficient supporting documentation, the Organization cannot demonstrate that: • Expenditures were for allowable activities. • Costs charged were necessary, reasonable, and allocable and recorded properly. • Expenditures were reviewed and monitored. • Participants or beneficiaries met eligibility requirements. Questioned costs: Due to insufficient documentation, the amount of questioned costs could not be determined. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its compliance-related internal controls by: • Requiring standardized documentation to support compliance with each requirement. • Implementing periodic reviews of documentation completeness before charging costs to federal awards. • Providing training to staff responsible for grant management on compliance and record retention requirements. • Retain all documentation related to federal awards in a central location. • Reinforcing the approval process by documenting and communicating approval requirements to all staff involved in initiating and processing transactions, providing mandatory training to employees on expense authorization policies, and establishing monitoring procedures to ensure approvals are consistently documented before transactions are processed. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and the recommendation. Corrective action plan: See Management’s Corrective Action Plan (Unaudited).
Finding 2021-008 Noncompliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Period of Performance Finding 2021-009 Noncompliance with Eligibility Compliance Requirements: • Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards and per 2 CFR 200.403, costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and authorized consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. The costs must also occur during the proper grant period of performance. • Eligibility – Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 2 CFR 200.331, the auditee must establish and maintain internal controls to ensure that only eligible individuals, organizations, or activities receive assistance under federal awards. Criteria: An effective system of internal control over compliance requires that expenditures charged to federal awards be supported by adequate documentation to demonstrate that: • Costs are necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable under program requirements. • Expenditures are for activities permitted under the terms and conditions of the award and recorded properly. • Participants or beneficiaries meet eligibility requirements. Condition: During our testing of expenditures and program activity for the federal program, we identified multiple instances in which transactions lacked adequate supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the above requirements. Specifically: • SSVF – ALN 64.033: Of the sixty expense transactions tested over SSVF, four did not have corresponding support or documentation to verify they were allowable activities, allowable costs, and recognized in the correct period. Specifically, invoices, purchase orders, or timesheets were missing, incomplete, or did not adequately substantiate the expenditures charged to the federal award. During testing of SSVF participant files, we noted that 13 out of 60 client files could not be located or were missing required documentation within their file, which did not allow us to properly determine if these participants were in fact eligible to be served under this program. Cause: The lack of documentation was primarily due to inadequate internal control procedures over record retention and verification. Additionally, there was significant turnover which contributed to inconsistent documentation practices. Effect or Potential Effect: Without sufficient supporting documentation, the Organization cannot demonstrate that: • Expenditures were for allowable activities. • Costs charged were necessary, reasonable, and allocable and recorded properly. • Participants or beneficiaries met eligibility requirements. Questioned costs: Due to insufficient documentation, the amount of questioned costs could not be determined. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its compliance-related internal controls by: • Requiring standardized documentation to support compliance with each requirement. • Implementing periodic reviews of documentation completeness before charging costs to federal awards. • Providing training to staff responsible for grant management on compliance and record retention requirements. • Retain all documentation related to federal awards in a central location. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and the recommendation. Corrective action plan: See Management’s Corrective Action Plan (Unaudited).
Finding 2021-008 Noncompliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles and Period of Performance Finding 2021-009 Noncompliance with Eligibility Compliance Requirements: • Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Per 2 CFR 200.303, the auditee must establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards and per 2 CFR 200.403, costs must be necessary, reasonable, allocable, and authorized consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities. The costs must also occur during the proper grant period of performance. • Eligibility – Per 2 CFR 200.303 and 2 CFR 200.331, the auditee must establish and maintain internal controls to ensure that only eligible individuals, organizations, or activities receive assistance under federal awards. Criteria: An effective system of internal control over compliance requires that expenditures charged to federal awards be supported by adequate documentation to demonstrate that: • Costs are necessary, reasonable, allocable, and allowable under program requirements. • Expenditures are for activities permitted under the terms and conditions of the award and recorded properly. • Participants or beneficiaries meet eligibility requirements. Condition: During our testing of expenditures and program activity for the federal program, we identified multiple instances in which transactions lacked adequate supporting documentation to demonstrate compliance with the above requirements. Specifically: • SSVF – ALN 64.033: Of the sixty expense transactions tested over SSVF, four did not have corresponding support or documentation to verify they were allowable activities, allowable costs, and recognized in the correct period. Specifically, invoices, purchase orders, or timesheets were missing, incomplete, or did not adequately substantiate the expenditures charged to the federal award. During testing of SSVF participant files, we noted that 13 out of 60 client files could not be located or were missing required documentation within their file, which did not allow us to properly determine if these participants were in fact eligible to be served under this program. Cause: The lack of documentation was primarily due to inadequate internal control procedures over record retention and verification. Additionally, there was significant turnover which contributed to inconsistent documentation practices. Effect or Potential Effect: Without sufficient supporting documentation, the Organization cannot demonstrate that: • Expenditures were for allowable activities. • Costs charged were necessary, reasonable, and allocable and recorded properly. • Participants or beneficiaries met eligibility requirements. Questioned costs: Due to insufficient documentation, the amount of questioned costs could not be determined. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization strengthen its compliance-related internal controls by: • Requiring standardized documentation to support compliance with each requirement. • Implementing periodic reviews of documentation completeness before charging costs to federal awards. • Providing training to staff responsible for grant management on compliance and record retention requirements. • Retain all documentation related to federal awards in a central location. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding and the recommendation. Corrective action plan: See Management’s Corrective Action Plan (Unaudited).
Finding 2020-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster: 47.076 - STEM +C Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2019-005. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/17/2021 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
Finding 2020-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Research and Development Cluster (Education and Human Resources) Assistance Listing Number and Title: 47.076 STEM Education Name of Federal Agency, Pass Through Entity (when applicable), Award Number and Year: National Science Foundation: 1640791 (9/15/2016 – 8/31/2022) Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls Over Compliance, Other matters Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2019-005. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/31/2022 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
Finding 2020-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Programs: Research and Development Cluster: 47.076 - STEM +C Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2019-005. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/17/2021 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
Finding 2020-006: Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Program: Research and Development Cluster (Education and Human Resources) Assistance Listing Number and Title: 47.076 STEM Education Name of Federal Agency, Pass Through Entity (when applicable), Award Number and Year: National Science Foundation: 1640791 (9/15/2016 – 8/31/2022) Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls Over Compliance, Other matters Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory, or Other Citation): As stated in 2 CFR 200.331 part (b), all pass-through entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual subrecipient. Condition: During our audit work over subrecipient monitoring, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. It is our understanding that AAPT has ongoing relationships with these subrecipients and evaluation of these subrecipients' risk is a continual process; however, these procedures were not documented. Cause: AAPT’s internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipient was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: AAPT could inadvertently engage in relationships with subrecipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight to ensure subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: Our audit procedures consisted of examining documentation of the subrecipient monitoring process, and evaluating internal controls over the process. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: 2019-005. Recommendation: We recommend AAPT follow their internal policies and procedures surrounding subrecipients and document the risk assessment criteria for the purpose of determining the expected level of oversight during the period of performance. This evaluation should include a scaling system, such as high, medium or low risk (for example), and the monitoring tools and procedures to be performed at each of these levels (additional training, on-site reviews, types of and frequency of reporting, etc.). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: Management will continue to perform risk assessment procedures and will thoroughly document the processes and evaluations. Anticipated Completion Date: 12/31/2022 Responsible Official: Michael Brosnan, CFO
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program: 14.218 Entitlement Grants Cluster: Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants Identification Number: B-15-MC-42-0018; B-16-MC-42-0018; B-17-MC-42-0018; B-18-MC-42-0018; B-19- MC-42-0018 Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles; Period of Performance; Reporting; Special Tests and Provisions Type of Finding: Material weakness in internal control over major program; Noncompliance Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 of the Uniform Guidance states that pass-thru entities must evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring. This evaluation may include, but is not limited to, (1) The subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards; (2) The results of previous audits including whether or not the subrecipient receives a single audit and the extent to which the same or similar subaward has been audited as a major program; and (3) Whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially changed systems. Based on the results of the evaluation, the City would then have to consider the extent to which monitoring procedures are required. At a minimum, the City must, (1) Review financial and performance reports required by the City, (2) Follow-up and ensure that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means, and (3) Issue a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the City as required by Section 200.521 of the Uniform Guidance. Additionally, the City must perform monitoring visits as stipulated in the contracts between the City and the subrecipients. Condition: The City does not have policies and procedures in place to perform the required risk assessment of subrecipients to determine the extent of monitoring procedures, and then perform and document the monitoring procedures performed. Cause: There is no documentation of any subrecipient risk assessment being performed for grants provided to subrecipients for 2019, and only partial documentation of any subrecipient monitoring procedures being performed. Effect: Subrecipient monitoring procedures were not properly performed and documented by the City. Questioned costs: There are no questioned costs associated with this finding. Context: The City needs to create and implement a policy to perform risk assessment of subrecipients, in order to determine the extent of monitoring procedures and performance of the monitoring procedures themselves. Recommendation: We recommend the City implement procedures to ensure risk assessment of subrecipients prior to each subaward is performed in accordance with the Uniform Guidance requirements and thoroughly documented. We further recommend that the required subrecipient monitoring be performed and documented for each subaward.