Finding 2024-028 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services AL No. 93.940 HIV Prevention Activities Health Department Based Material Weakness in Internal Controls and Noncompliance over Subrecipient Monitoring Repeat Finding: Yes; 2023-024 Condition: For 1 out of 3 selections, management was unable to provide evidence that the Single Audit Report was reviewed. For 3 out of 3 selections, we were unable to verify the subrecipient's active registration on SAM.gov. For 3 out of 3 selections, various information related to the funding source and the pass-through entity is missing on the notice of award (E.g. FAIN number, UEI, CFDA and name of pass-through and indirect cost). Criteria: In accordance with 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. In accordance with 2 CFR §25.300: (a) A recipient may not make a subaward to a subrecipient unless that subrecipient has obtained and provided to the recipient a unique entity identifier. Subrecipients are not required to complete full SAM registration to obtain a unique entity identifier. (b) A recipient must notify any potential subrecipients that the recipient cannot make a subaward unless the subrecipient has obtained a unique entity identifier as described in paragraph (a) of this section. According to 2 CFR §200.332, all pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the Federal award identification including the subrecipient's unique entity identifier, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for the Federal award. (b) 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. d) 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. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by 2 CFR § 200.331 when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. Cause: BCHD did not have proper controls in place to ensure the subrecipient monitoring requirements of the grant were met. Effect: BCHD may not be in compliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Recommendation: We recommend the City establish and implement controls to maintain compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Auditee Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management agrees with the finding. Refer to the corrective action plan on current findings in Part V of this report. Auditor’s Conclusion: Finding remains as stated.
Finding 2024-028 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services AL No. 93.940 HIV Prevention Activities Health Department Based Material Weakness in Internal Controls and Noncompliance over Subrecipient Monitoring Repeat Finding: Yes; 2023-024 Condition: For 1 out of 3 selections, management was unable to provide evidence that the Single Audit Report was reviewed. For 3 out of 3 selections, we were unable to verify the subrecipient's active registration on SAM.gov. For 3 out of 3 selections, various information related to the funding source and the pass-through entity is missing on the notice of award (E.g. FAIN number, UEI, CFDA and name of pass-through and indirect cost). Criteria: In accordance with 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. In accordance with 2 CFR §25.300: (a) A recipient may not make a subaward to a subrecipient unless that subrecipient has obtained and provided to the recipient a unique entity identifier. Subrecipients are not required to complete full SAM registration to obtain a unique entity identifier. (b) A recipient must notify any potential subrecipients that the recipient cannot make a subaward unless the subrecipient has obtained a unique entity identifier as described in paragraph (a) of this section. According to 2 CFR §200.332, all pass-through entities must: (a) Ensure that every subaward is clearly identified to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the Federal award identification including the subrecipient's unique entity identifier, Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN), identification of whether the award is R&D and indirect cost rate for the Federal award. (b) 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. d) 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. (f) Verify that every subrecipient is audited as required by 2 CFR § 200.331 when it is expected that the subrecipient's Federal awards expended during the respective fiscal year equaled or exceeded the threshold set forth in § 200.501. Cause: BCHD did not have proper controls in place to ensure the subrecipient monitoring requirements of the grant were met. Effect: BCHD may not be in compliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements of the grant. Questioned Costs: Unknown. Recommendation: We recommend the City establish and implement controls to maintain compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Auditee Response and Corrective Action Plan: Management agrees with the finding. Refer to the corrective action plan on current findings in Part V of this report. Auditor’s Conclusion: Finding remains as stated.
Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury (Treasury) Federal Program: 21.027 COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds SLFRP4542 State Agency: Office of Administration (OA) Type of Finding: A - Internal Control (Material Weakness) and Material Noncompliance B - Internal Control (Material Weakness) and Material Noncompliance Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring As noted in our previous audit, the OA has not established policies and procedures regarding monitoring subrecipients of the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) program. As a result, the OA did not comply with the Uniform Guidance (UG) requirements regarding identifying and monitoring subrecipients of the SLFRF program. The OA is the lead agency responsible for administering the SLFRF program. The purpose of the SLFRF program is to provide funding to respond to the COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) or its negative impacts; respond to workers performing essential work during the PHE; provide government services, to the extent of the reduction in revenue due to the PHE (revenue replacement); make necessary investments in water, sewer, or broadband infrastructure; provide emergency relief from natural disasters or the negative economic impacts of natural disasters; and finance certain surface transportation and housing projects. The OA and various state agencies designed projects within the various allowable SLFRF program categories, and are responsible for administering the projects. The OA developed the American Rescue Plan Act Grant Management Portal (portal) to serve as the official repository of information and documentation supporting each SLFRF program project. The state agencies upload supporting documentation to the portal, including contracts, payment requests, and other supporting documentation. Most payments are made on a reimbursement basis. The OA reviews each payment request and processes the payments. Some SLFRF program projects are administered through subawards. The OA establishes contracts with each subrecipient that outline various SLFRF program requirements, terms, and conditions. In the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA), the OA reported approximately $186 million was passed through to subrecipients of the SLFRF program during the year ended June 30, 2024. This amount represents approximately 30 percent of the SLFRF program expenditures. These awards were administered through the OA and 7 other state agencies. However, as noted in finding point A., the amounts are not accurate due to subrecipient determination errors. In response to our prior audit finding, the OA held a training for state agency personnel in August 2024 and sent a letter to state agencies in January 2025 (after the current audit period), covering agency responsibilities related to certain SLFRF program subrecipient monitoring requirements, such as subrecipient determinations and single audits. Of the 7 state agencies that administered subawards reported in the SEFA during the year ended June 30, 2024, 4 administered the majority of the subawards, with payments totaling approximately $181 million, or 97 percent of the total subrecipient payments reported in the SEFA. These 4 state agencies were the Department of Mental Health (DMH), Department of Higher Education and Workforce Development (DHEWD), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and the Department of Economic Development (DED). Our review and testing of subrecipient monitoring procedures focused on the OA and the 4 state agencies. For the 4 state agencies, a total of 212 recipients were identified as subrecipients in the SEFA. However, as noted in finding point A., this count is not accurate due to subrecipient determination errors. To understand the OA and state agency procedures, and to test compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements, we randomly selected a sample of payments to 21 subrecipients for the 4 state agencies. In addition, we judgmentally selected an additional subrecipient at one of the agencies because we had received citizen concerns regarding the administration of the subrecipient project. The 22 subrecipients were awarded a total of approximately $230 million in SLFRF program funding and were paid a total of approximately $77.9 million during the year ended June 30, 2024. We reviewed records in the portal supporting the subawards and 1 payment for each of the 22 subrecipients. We reviewed payments totaling approximately $5.9 million. For the judgmentally-selected subrecipient, we reviewed documentation of the state agency's monitoring of the subrecipient, including documentation of decisions to terminate (June 2024), not reinstate (December 2024), and reinstate (June 2025) the project. No significant issues were identified in this review. A. Subrecipient Determination The OA has not established policies and procedures to determine whether recipients of the SLFRF program funds are subrecipients or contractors. As a result, some recipients were incorrectly classified, and the OA lacks a complete and accurate listing of subrecipients. Subrecipient monitoring requirements are outlined in the UG. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.331 states 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. The classification of a subrecipient is dependent on whether the entity is responsible for making eligibility determinations for assistance, has its performance measured in relation to whether the objectives of the federal program were met, has responsibility for programmatic decision-making, is responsible for adherence to federal program requirements, and uses the federal funds to carry out a program for its public purpose. The OA did not evaluate each SLFRF program recipient for the UG criteria, and did not make a determination of whether the entity was a subrecipient or contractor. OA officials assigned responsibility for making these determinations and identifying subrecipients to the applicable state agencies, but did not provide clear guidance to the state agencies or ensure the state agencies properly performed and documented the determinations. One of the 4 state agencies had not documented their determinations for any of their sampled subrecipients and another state agency had not documented its determinations for 2 of 4 sampled subrecipients. Our analysis and review of the population of 212 subrecipients identified in the SEFA for the 4 state agencies revealed 1 state agency incorrectly recorded 2 contractors (office supply and electrical supply companies), with payments totaling $6,509, as subrecipients. The OA is the lead agency responsible for administering the SLFRF program. Without adequate procedures over subrecipient or contractor determinations, the OA lacks assurance that its subrecipients have been identified for subrecipient monitoring purposes. The OA Corrective Action Plan and Summary Schedule of Prior Audit Findings for prior audit finding number 2023-010 state the OA disagrees that it needs to develop policies and procedures regarding subrecipient determinations since the requirements are already stated in the Uniform Guidance and SLFRF program regulations. However, documented policies and procedures are necessary to clearly communicate responsibilities to the state agencies, prevent misunderstandings, and demonstrate adequate internal controls over compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.303(a) requires the non-federal entity to "[e]stablish 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." Paragraph 3.10 of the Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, also known as the Green Book, states, "[e]ffective documentation assists in management's design of internal control by establishing and communicating the who, what, when, where, and why of internal control execution to personnel. Documentation also provides a means to retain organizational knowledge and mitigate the risk of having that knowledge limited to a few personnel, as well as a means to communicate that knowledge as needed to external parties, such as external auditors." Paragraph 12.01 states, "[m]anagement should implement control activities through policies." B. Subrecipient Monitoring The OA did not implement an effective subrecipient monitoring program to monitor the SLFRF subrecipients. As a result, some subrecipient monitoring procedures were not performed as required by the UG. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.332(b) states that 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. Risk assessments may consider factors such as the subrecipient's prior experience with the same or similar subawards, the results of previous audits, whether the subrecipient has new personnel or new or substantially-changed systems, and the extent and results of federal awarding agency monitoring. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.332(d) requires pass-through entities to monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure the subrecipient is in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward; and that subaward performance goals are achieved. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity; (2) following up and ensuring the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address single audit findings related to the particular subaward; and (3) issuing a management decision for applicable findings pertaining only to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.332(f) requires pass-through entities to verify that every subrecipient had a single audit when it is expected that the subrecipient spent $750,000 or more during the subrecipient's fiscal year. To monitor subrecipients of the SLFRF program, the OA relies on its pre-payment monitoring process. The OA does not perform any post-payment monitoring procedures, and relies on the state agencies to perform these procedures. The OA did not establish policies and procedures over the pre-payment review process and these reviews were not always clearly documented. In addition, the OA did not sufficiently communicate with the state agencies regarding subrecipient monitoring responsibilities or ensure the state agencies performed monitoring reviews. The information communicated to the state agencies in memos, emails, and periodic meetings and trainings with state agency personnel were not formalized in a policy and did not cover all relevant compliance requirements. In addition, the OA did not ensure risk assessments were performed or that subrecipients received single audits as required by the UG. Risk assessments The OA did not ensure required risk assessments for subrecipients of the SLFRF program were performed to determine the nature, timing, and extent of monitoring procedures necessary. Two of the 4 state agencies did not perform any risk assessments for the sampled subrecipients. OA officials indicated risk assessment procedures are the responsibility of the state agencies; however, the OA did not provide clear guidance to the state agencies or ensure the state agencies performed and used risk assessments as required. In addition to complying with federal requirements, risk assessments are necessary to ensure monitoring reviews are conducted with adequate frequency to help ensure subrecipient compliance with program requirements. OA pre-payment monitoring procedures The OA has not developed policies and procedures outlining its pre-payment monitoring procedures and did not always clearly document monitoring performed prior to making payments. In their review and approval of each SLFRF subrecipient payment request, OA officials stated they thoroughly review supporting documentation uploaded to the portal by the state agencies, including contracts, bid documentation, invoices, and other supporting documentation. OA officials further stated they review for compliance with certain types of SLFRF program compliance requirements, including allowable activities and allowable costs, procurement, and period of performance. However, the OA does not clearly document review procedures performed. For each of the 22 subrecipients sampled, the portal included documentation pertaining to some, but not all of the applicable compliance requirements. For example, for 5 subrecipient payments reviewed (for 2 state agencies), the portal included summary invoices, but did not include sufficiently detailed documentation showing compliance with the allowable activities and allowable costs and period of performance compliance requirements. Without documented policies and procedures and documentation of prepayment monitoring procedures performed, the OA cannot demonstrate subrecipient monitoring procedures were performed. Additional monitoring procedures The OA does not monitor subrecipients beyond the pre-payment monitoring process previously described. OA officials stated post-payment monitoring procedures are the responsibility of the state agencies; however, the OA did not sufficiently communicate with the agencies regarding subrecipient monitoring responsibilities or ensure the agencies performed monitoring reviews. Our review of subrecipient monitoring procedures at the 4 state agencies noted 3 agencies had developed written policies or procedures regarding subrecipient monitoring. We also noted state agency review procedures varied significantly, did not cover all significant compliance requirements, and were not always documented. While officials of some state agencies indicated they perform detailed pre-payment reviews for compliance with allowable activities and allowable costs, period of performance, and/or local match requirements, officials of some agencies explained they and the OA sometimes review only summary invoices of expenditures from the subrecipients prior to payment. Additionally, officials of all state agencies described various post-payment review procedures such as reviews for compliance with certain requirements, reviews of documentation supporting expenditures of funds advanced to the subrecipient, billing reviews of documentation supporting summary invoices, and/or reviews of the final work product; however, none of the agencies performed all of these procedures. In addition, the agencies could not always provide documentation such reviews had been performed for the sampled items. In addition to noncompliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements, the failure to ensure sufficient monitoring procedures were performed and documented increases the risk that subrecipient noncompliance will not be prevented or detected timely. Subrecipient audits The OA did not ensure the required reviews of single audit reports for applicable SLFRF program subrecipients were conducted. OA officials indicated the state agencies are responsible for ensuring subrecipients had a single audit, and reviewing and following up on the audit reports; however, the OA did not ensure the state agencies performed these procedures. All 4 agencies described procedures to monitor and follow up on single audit reports. Each subrecipient that spent in excess of $750,000 in federal awards during its fiscal year must obtain a single audit in accordance with the UG within 9 months after the end of the fiscal year. In addition to noncompliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements, the failure to ensure subrecipients received required audits and to review and follow up on the related audit reports, increases the risk that subrecipient noncompliance will not be identified and addressed. Conclusions The following table summarizes the results of our sampling at the 4 state agencies, presented in finding points A. and B. Instances in which a criterion was partially met are shown as the applicable number of items sampled. The OA is the lead agency responsible for administering the SLFRF program. OA officials indicated the state agencies were responsible for some of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. However, without clear communication and monitoring of these responsibilities, the OA lacks assurance of compliance with all subrecipient monitoring requirements. Without an established subrecipient monitoring program, the OA cannot provide assurance subrecipients are complying with SLFRF program requirements and there is increased risk that noncompliance with program requirements or subaward terms and conditions will go undetected, or that subaward performance goals will not be achieved. In addition, a subrecipient monitoring program is necessary to demonstrate adequate internal controls over compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.303(a) requires the non-federal entity to "[e]stablish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing that 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." Paragraph 3.10 of the Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, also known as the Green Book, states, "[e]ffective documentation assists in management's design of internal control by establishing and communicating the who, what, when, where, and why of internal control execution to personnel. Documentation also provides a means to retain organizational knowledge and mitigate the risk of having that knowledge limited to a few personnel, as well as a means to communicate that knowledge as needed to external parties, such as external auditors." Paragraph 12.01 states, "[m]anagement should implement control activities through policies." Recommendations The OA: A. Develop policies and procedures to determine whether recipients of SLFRF program funds are subrecipients or contractors. Continue to work with the state agencies to ensure accurate and documented determinations are prepared for all recipients, and modify subrecipient records as needed. B. Develop a subrecipient monitoring program in accordance with the Uniform Guidance that includes performing risk assessments for each subrecipient for the purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring procedures; monitoring for compliance with federal requirements and subaward terms and conditions, and ensuring subaward performance goals are achieved; and reviewing subrecipient single audit reports. Ensure tasks delegated to state agencies are adequately communicated and establish procedures to ensure those tasks are appropriately completed. Auditee's Response A. We partially agree with the auditor's finding. Our Corrective Action Plan includes an explanation and specific reasons for our disagreement and any planned actions to address the finding. B. We agree with the auditor's finding. Our Corrective Action Plan includes our planned actions to address the finding. Auditor's Comment The OA Corrective Action Plan states the OA partially agrees with Finding point A. because the OA completed training for all agencies regarding agency subrecipient monitoring responsibilities and distributed a memo instructing the agencies to develop subrecipient monitoring policies and procedures. However, as noted in the audit finding, the training was held and letter was sent to state agencies after the current audit period. Because the OA took no corrective action prior to or during the audit period, the internal control weaknesses and noncompliance occurred again in the current audit period.
2024-004: Subrecipient Determination and Monitoring Assistance Listing Number (ALN) and Title: 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction Federal Grantor: U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Passed-through: Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Award Identification Numbers and Years: Finding is applicable to all 20.205 awards on the SEFA for 2024 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Type of Finding: Noncompliance and Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance. Prior Year Audit Finding: No Criteria: 2 CFR 200.331 requires pass-through entities (PTEs) like LCOG to make case-by-case determinations whether an agreement casts the party receiving funds as a subrecipient or a contractor (vendor). This determination affects reporting on the SEFA (§200.510(b)(4)). Furthermore, 2 CFR 200.332 requires PTEs to evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance, monitor their activities to ensure compliance with federal requirements (including reviewing financial and performance reports), and verify that subrecipients subject to the Single Audit requirements have obtained the required audit and take appropriate action on any findings effecting the pass-through program (§200.332(b), (d), and (f)). Effective internal controls should ensure proper classification and that required monitoring activities are performed and documented. Condition: LCOG exhibited weaknesses in its process for determining and monitoring subrecipients under ALN 20.205. Specifically: LCOG did not correctly classify entities receiving funds. Multiple vendors were incorrectly identified as subrecipients on the draft SEFA provided for audit. Two entities meeting the definition of subrecipients were identified during audit procedures; however, LCOG had classified them as vendors and omitted them from the draft SEFA. As a result of misclassifying the actual subrecipients as vendors, LCOG did not perform required subrecipient monitoring activities for these entities, such as conducting and documenting a risk assessment or obtaining and reviewing their Single Audit reporting packages. Questioned Costs: None. Context: The misclassifications were identified during audit testing and review of the draft SEFA. While the entities omitted from the SEFA were later confirmed to be subrecipients, LCOG had not performed the required monitoring steps during the fiscal year. Subsequent review of the Single Audit reports for these two subrecipients during the audit process confirmed they had correctly reported the funds received from LCOG and disclosed no audit findings related to this program. No errors were noted in the initial contracting process with these entities. However, the lack of contemporaneous monitoring represents noncompliance and a control weakness. Cause: LCOG lacks adequate procedures for performing and documenting the subrecipient vs. contractor determination based on the criteria in 2 CFR 200.331. This initial failure led to inaccurate SEFA reporting and the subsequent failure to implement required monitoring protocols for entities that were, in fact, subrecipients. Effect: The failure to correctly identify and monitor subrecipients constitutes noncompliance with 2 CFR 200.332 and resulted in inaccurate SEFA reporting. Although no subrecipient noncompliance impacting the program was ultimately identified in this instance, the absence of required monitoring activities (including risk assessment and review of audit reports) creates a risk that subrecipient noncompliance could occur and not be detected by LCOG in a timely manner. This condition represents a material weakness in internal control over compliance. Recommendation: We recommend LCOG implement procedures to: 99 Formally document the determination of whether entities receiving federal funds are subrecipients or contractors prior to entering into agreements and preparing the SEFA, using the criteria in 2 CFR 200.331. Develop and implement a risk-based monitoring plan for all identified subrecipients, ensuring that required monitoring activities (including review of reports and Single Audits, where applicable) are performed and documented throughout the period of performance. Ensure the SEFA accurately reflects subrecipient relationships and amounts passed through. Auditee Views: While we agree that we did not have a formal monitoring plan in place, now that we are aware of the need for such a plan, we will put a plan in place immediately. Once we became aware, we immediately reviewed the single audit reports all subrecipients. As to whether all subrecipients were properly reported on the SEFA, LCOG and ODOT had been in discussions for several months over whether certain entities contracted by LCOG under the Secure Routes to Schools program were, in fact, subrecipients and was unclear due to conflicting guidance received from various individuals. We will begin consulting with ODOT prior to the audit to make sure they agree with the classification of fund recipients as either contractor or subrecipient.
2024-011 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, For the period July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024, ALN # 14.239– HOME Investment Partnerships Program Criteria: Per 2 CFR §200.331(b), 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. Furthermore, 2 CFR §200.332(d) requires pass-through entities to follow up on any audit findings identified in subrecipients’ Single Audit reports that pertain to the federal award. Condition: The City did not perform a documented risk assessment of subrecipients under the HOME program to determine the appropriate level and type of monitoring. Additionally, the City did not obtain or review subrecipients’ Single Audit reports to identify and follow up on any findings related to the HOME program. Two of the four contracts with expenditures in fiscal year 2024 were tested. Cause: The City has not established formal procedures to assess subrecipient risk or to review and follow up on audit findings related to the HOME program. Effect: Without a documented risk assessment and review of subrecipient audit reports: • The City may not tailor its monitoring procedures appropriately, increasing the risk of undetected noncompliance. • Potential issues identified in subrecipient audits may go unaddressed, jeopardizing the integrity of the program and federal funding. Recommendation: The City should implement formal procedures to conduct and document risk assessments for all subrecipients of the HOME program, obtain and review subrecipient Single Audit reports annually, follow up on any findings related to the HOME program to ensure corrective actions are taken. Questioned Costs: none
Finding 2024-002: Subrecipient Risk Assessment and Monitoring Federal Program: 19.345 Criteria: 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 sub-award for purposes of determining the appropriate sub-recipient monitoring procedures to prescribe to each individual sub-recipient (i.e. pre-award risk assessment procedures). Condition: We noted certain subrecipients did not have current risk assessments on file. The subrecipients were long standing partners of Invisible Children. In addition, Invisible Children did not have a procedure in place to document whether the subrecipients were subject to audit under Uniform Guidance each year (based on the threshold of U.S. Federal funding incurred). Cause: Invisible Children has conducted risk assessments when originally engaging with the subrecipients, but were not reviewing and updating the assessments on a routine basis, or when new agreements were signed. This was not required by their policy. Effect: The Organization could inadvertently engage in relationships with sub-recipients of higher risk without the appropriate level of oversight (monitoring) to ensure that subrecipients are expending funds in accordance with the provisions and terms of the subaward. Questioned Costs: None noted Context: Under the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200), Federal awarding agencies and passthrough entities are required to evaluate the risk of subrecipients and ensure compliance with audit requirements. Specifically, subrecipients that expend $750,000 or more in Federal awards during a fiscal year are subject to a Single Audit or program-specific audit. Pass-through entities must have documented procedures to annually assess which subrecipients meet this threshold and ensure that appropriate risk assessments and audit follow-ups are completed. In this case, Invisible Children has longstanding relationships with its subrecipients but lacks a formal procedure to document annual risk assessments and to verify whether subrecipients meet the audit threshold, which creates a risk of noncompliance with Federal requirements. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not applicable Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update their policies to ensure that they comply with Uniform Guidance requirements regarding pre-award risk assessments as well as document annually whether the subrecipient was required to obtain an audit in accordance with the standards. If applicable, the Organization is to verify that the subrecipient is audited and review the results of the audit with respect to its funding.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities of two CFR Part 200, 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. In addition, the pass-through entity 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. Condition and Context: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring. Questioned costs: N/A Cause: The Organization was unaware of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. Also, the Organization lacks established internal controls and procedures for monitoring pass-through funds to subrecipients to ensure compliance with applicable compliance requirements. Effect: The lack of internal controls over this compliance requirement provides an opportunity for noncompliance. The auditor noted instances of material noncompliance. Noncompliance results in possible Federal funds provided to ineligible subrecipients or that the grant funds are not used for authorized purposes or in line with the grant terms and conditions. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization create an internal policy over sub-grant recipient procedures and create effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring and tracking that allow for compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and compliance requirements of various Federal grants Management Response: Management has accepted the recommendation and will add language to the existing Grant Funds Tracking Policy and Procedure outlining the Organization’s responsibilities for establishing effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring. The updated policy will also include reference to the Information to Provide to Every Subrecipient for Each Subaward form. This form outlines details of the pass-through grant, and subrecipient responsibilities, and will be signed by each subrecipient prior to any pass-through fund disbursement. Also, the Organization will educate supervisors on this policy update at an upcoming training meeting no later than October 31, 2024.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities of two CFR Part 200, 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. In addition, the pass-through entity 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. Condition and Context: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring. Questioned costs: N/A Cause: The Organization was unaware of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. Also, the Organization lacks established internal controls and procedures for monitoring pass-through funds to subrecipients to ensure compliance with applicable compliance requirements. Effect: The lack of internal controls over this compliance requirement provides an opportunity for noncompliance. The auditor noted instances of material noncompliance. Noncompliance results in possible Federal funds provided to ineligible subrecipients or that the grant funds are not used for authorized purposes or in line with the grant terms and conditions. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization create an internal policy over sub-grant recipient procedures and create effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring and tracking that allow for compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and compliance requirements of various Federal grants Management Response: Management has accepted the recommendation and will add language to the existing Grant Funds Tracking Policy and Procedure outlining the Organization’s responsibilities for establishing effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring. The updated policy will also include reference to the Information to Provide to Every Subrecipient for Each Subaward form. This form outlines details of the pass-through grant, and subrecipient responsibilities, and will be signed by each subrecipient prior to any pass-through fund disbursement. Also, the Organization will educate supervisors on this policy update at an upcoming training meeting no later than October 31, 2024.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities of two CFR Part 200, 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. In addition, the pass-through entity 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. Condition and Context: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring. Questioned costs: N/A Cause: The Organization was unaware of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. Also, the Organization lacks established internal controls and procedures for monitoring pass-through funds to subrecipients to ensure compliance with applicable compliance requirements. Effect: The lack of internal controls over this compliance requirement provides an opportunity for noncompliance. The auditor noted instances of material noncompliance. Noncompliance results in possible Federal funds provided to ineligible subrecipients or that the grant funds are not used for authorized purposes or in line with the grant terms and conditions. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization create an internal policy over sub-grant recipient procedures and create effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring and tracking that allow for compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and compliance requirements of various Federal grants Management Response: Management has accepted the recommendation and will add language to the existing Grant Funds Tracking Policy and Procedure outlining the Organization’s responsibilities for establishing effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring. The updated policy will also include reference to the Information to Provide to Every Subrecipient for Each Subaward form. This form outlines details of the pass-through grant, and subrecipient responsibilities, and will be signed by each subrecipient prior to any pass-through fund disbursement. Also, the Organization will educate supervisors on this policy update at an upcoming training meeting no later than October 31, 2024.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities of two CFR Part 200, 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. In addition, the pass-through entity 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. Condition and Context: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring. Questioned costs: N/A Cause: The Organization was unaware of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. Also, the Organization lacks established internal controls and procedures for monitoring pass-through funds to subrecipients to ensure compliance with applicable compliance requirements. Effect: The lack of internal controls over this compliance requirement provides an opportunity for noncompliance. The auditor noted instances of material noncompliance. Noncompliance results in possible Federal funds provided to ineligible subrecipients or that the grant funds are not used for authorized purposes or in line with the grant terms and conditions. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization create an internal policy over sub-grant recipient procedures and create effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring and tracking that allow for compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and compliance requirements of various Federal grants Management Response: Management has accepted the recommendation and will add language to the existing Grant Funds Tracking Policy and Procedure outlining the Organization’s responsibilities for establishing effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring. The updated policy will also include reference to the Information to Provide to Every Subrecipient for Each Subaward form. This form outlines details of the pass-through grant, and subrecipient responsibilities, and will be signed by each subrecipient prior to any pass-through fund disbursement. Also, the Organization will educate supervisors on this policy update at an upcoming training meeting no later than October 31, 2024.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities of two CFR Part 200, 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. In addition, the pass-through entity 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. Condition and Context: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring. Questioned costs: N/A Cause: The Organization was unaware of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. Also, the Organization lacks established internal controls and procedures for monitoring pass-through funds to subrecipients to ensure compliance with applicable compliance requirements. Effect: The lack of internal controls over this compliance requirement provides an opportunity for noncompliance. The auditor noted instances of material noncompliance. Noncompliance results in possible Federal funds provided to ineligible subrecipients or that the grant funds are not used for authorized purposes or in line with the grant terms and conditions. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization create an internal policy over sub-grant recipient procedures and create effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring and tracking that allow for compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and compliance requirements of various Federal grants Management Response: Management has accepted the recommendation and will add language to the existing Grant Funds Tracking Policy and Procedure outlining the Organization’s responsibilities for establishing effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring. The updated policy will also include reference to the Information to Provide to Every Subrecipient for Each Subaward form. This form outlines details of the pass-through grant, and subrecipient responsibilities, and will be signed by each subrecipient prior to any pass-through fund disbursement. Also, the Organization will educate supervisors on this policy update at an upcoming training meeting no later than October 31, 2024.
Criteria or specific requirement: According to §200.331 Requirements for pass-through entities of two CFR Part 200, 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. In addition, the pass-through entity 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. Condition and Context: During our testing, we noted the Organization did not have adequate internal controls in place to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring. Questioned costs: N/A Cause: The Organization was unaware of the subrecipient monitoring requirements. Also, the Organization lacks established internal controls and procedures for monitoring pass-through funds to subrecipients to ensure compliance with applicable compliance requirements. Effect: The lack of internal controls over this compliance requirement provides an opportunity for noncompliance. The auditor noted instances of material noncompliance. Noncompliance results in possible Federal funds provided to ineligible subrecipients or that the grant funds are not used for authorized purposes or in line with the grant terms and conditions. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization create an internal policy over sub-grant recipient procedures and create effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring and tracking that allow for compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and compliance requirements of various Federal grants Management Response: Management has accepted the recommendation and will add language to the existing Grant Funds Tracking Policy and Procedure outlining the Organization’s responsibilities for establishing effective internal controls and procedures over subrecipient monitoring. The updated policy will also include reference to the Information to Provide to Every Subrecipient for Each Subaward form. This form outlines details of the pass-through grant, and subrecipient responsibilities, and will be signed by each subrecipient prior to any pass-through fund disbursement. Also, the Organization will educate supervisors on this policy update at an upcoming training meeting no later than October 31, 2024.
Program: Emergency Rental Assistance Program Federal Agency: Department of Treasury (DOT) AL #: 21.023 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-through Entity: N/A Type of Compliance Finding: M – Subrecipient Monitoring Criteria Per OMB Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f), a pass-through entity (the City) must “monitor the activities of subrecipients as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals.” Also, per the City’s Grant Award Manual (City policy) regarding the Site Monitoring Plan of all subrecipients – “staff shall conduct and document at least one site visit annually.” Condition Management did not annually monitor “all” subrecipients as required by the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Cause Management does not have controls and processes in place to ensure that all subrecipients are monitored in accordance with the City’s policy. Effect Subrecipients may not be complying with the terms and conditions of the subaward or achieving program performance goals. Questioned Costs $4,644,629 Is the finding a repeat finding No Recommendations We recommend management establish a process to ensure all subrecipients are monitored as stated in the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Views of Responsible Officials/ Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan on Organization’s letterhead.
Program: Emergency Rental Assistance Program Federal Agency: Department of Treasury (DOT) AL #: 21.023 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-through Entity: N/A Type of Compliance Finding: M – Subrecipient Monitoring Criteria Per OMB Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f), a pass-through entity (the City) must “monitor the activities of subrecipients as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals.” Also, per the City’s Grant Award Manual (City policy) regarding the Site Monitoring Plan of all subrecipients – “staff shall conduct and document at least one site visit annually.” Condition Management did not annually monitor “all” subrecipients as required by the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Cause Management does not have controls and processes in place to ensure that all subrecipients are monitored in accordance with the City’s policy. Effect Subrecipients may not be complying with the terms and conditions of the subaward or achieving program performance goals. Questioned Costs $4,644,629 Is the finding a repeat finding No Recommendations We recommend management establish a process to ensure all subrecipients are monitored as stated in the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Views of Responsible Officials/ Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan on Organization’s letterhead.
Program: Emergency Rental Assistance Program Federal Agency: Department of Treasury (DOT) AL #: 21.023 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-through Entity: N/A Type of Compliance Finding: M – Subrecipient Monitoring Criteria Per OMB Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f), a pass-through entity (the City) must “monitor the activities of subrecipients as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals.” Also, per the City’s Grant Award Manual (City policy) regarding the Site Monitoring Plan of all subrecipients – “staff shall conduct and document at least one site visit annually.” Condition Management did not annually monitor “all” subrecipients as required by the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Cause Management does not have controls and processes in place to ensure that all subrecipients are monitored in accordance with the City’s policy. Effect Subrecipients may not be complying with the terms and conditions of the subaward or achieving program performance goals. Questioned Costs $4,644,629 Is the finding a repeat finding No Recommendations We recommend management establish a process to ensure all subrecipients are monitored as stated in the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Views of Responsible Officials/ Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan on Organization’s letterhead.
Program: Emergency Rental Assistance Program Federal Agency: Department of Treasury (DOT) AL #: 21.023 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-through Entity: N/A Type of Compliance Finding: M – Subrecipient Monitoring Criteria Per OMB Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f), a pass-through entity (the City) must “monitor the activities of subrecipients as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals.” Also, per the City’s Grant Award Manual (City policy) regarding the Site Monitoring Plan of all subrecipients – “staff shall conduct and document at least one site visit annually.” Condition Management did not annually monitor “all” subrecipients as required by the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Cause Management does not have controls and processes in place to ensure that all subrecipients are monitored in accordance with the City’s policy. Effect Subrecipients may not be complying with the terms and conditions of the subaward or achieving program performance goals. Questioned Costs $4,644,629 Is the finding a repeat finding No Recommendations We recommend management establish a process to ensure all subrecipients are monitored as stated in the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Views of Responsible Officials/ Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan on Organization’s letterhead.
Program: Emergency Rental Assistance Program Federal Agency: Department of Treasury (DOT) AL #: 21.023 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-through Entity: N/A Type of Compliance Finding: M – Subrecipient Monitoring Criteria Per OMB Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f), a pass-through entity (the City) must “monitor the activities of subrecipients as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals.” Also, per the City’s Grant Award Manual (City policy) regarding the Site Monitoring Plan of all subrecipients – “staff shall conduct and document at least one site visit annually.” Condition Management did not annually monitor “all” subrecipients as required by the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Cause Management does not have controls and processes in place to ensure that all subrecipients are monitored in accordance with the City’s policy. Effect Subrecipients may not be complying with the terms and conditions of the subaward or achieving program performance goals. Questioned Costs $4,644,629 Is the finding a repeat finding No Recommendations We recommend management establish a process to ensure all subrecipients are monitored as stated in the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Views of Responsible Officials/ Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan on Organization’s letterhead.
Program: Emergency Rental Assistance Program Federal Agency: Department of Treasury (DOT) AL #: 21.023 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-through Entity: N/A Type of Compliance Finding: M – Subrecipient Monitoring Criteria Per OMB Uniform Guidance, 2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f), a pass-through entity (the City) must “monitor the activities of subrecipients as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals.” Also, per the City’s Grant Award Manual (City policy) regarding the Site Monitoring Plan of all subrecipients – “staff shall conduct and document at least one site visit annually.” Condition Management did not annually monitor “all” subrecipients as required by the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Cause Management does not have controls and processes in place to ensure that all subrecipients are monitored in accordance with the City’s policy. Effect Subrecipients may not be complying with the terms and conditions of the subaward or achieving program performance goals. Questioned Costs $4,644,629 Is the finding a repeat finding No Recommendations We recommend management establish a process to ensure all subrecipients are monitored as stated in the Federal regulations and City’s policy. Views of Responsible Officials/ Planned Corrective Actions Management agrees with the finding. See Corrective Action Plan on Organization’s letterhead.
Finding 2023-001 – Reporting Identification of federal program: Assistance Listing No. 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Criteria or specific requirement: Section 200.332 of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) provides the requirements for pass-through entities. A pass-through entity (PTE) must clearly identify to the subrecipient the award as a subaward at the time of subaward (or subsequent subaward modification) by providing the information described in 2 CFR section 200.332(a)(2); all requirements imposed by the PTE on the subrecipient so that the federal award is used in accordance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award (2 CFR section 200.331(a)(2)); and (3) any additional requirements that the PTE imposes on the subrecipient in order for the PTE to meet its own responsibility for the federal award (e.g., financial, performance, and special reports) (2 CFR section 200.332(a)(3)). Condition: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements with its subrecipients covering the period under audit that meet the requirements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Management indicated that the existing subaward agreements, which do not cover the year ended December 31, 2023, were not updated due to an oversight attributed to personnel vacancies. Effect or potential effect: Noncompliance with Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance could result in misunderstanding in program compliance requirements. Questioned cost: not applicable. Context: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements that cover the audit period for the two subawards made under this program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update and execute agreements with its subrecipients that contains all the required elements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: The Organization concurs with this finding. See page 40 for corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-001 – Reporting Identification of federal program: Assistance Listing No. 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Criteria or specific requirement: Section 200.332 of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) provides the requirements for pass-through entities. A pass-through entity (PTE) must clearly identify to the subrecipient the award as a subaward at the time of subaward (or subsequent subaward modification) by providing the information described in 2 CFR section 200.332(a)(2); all requirements imposed by the PTE on the subrecipient so that the federal award is used in accordance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award (2 CFR section 200.331(a)(2)); and (3) any additional requirements that the PTE imposes on the subrecipient in order for the PTE to meet its own responsibility for the federal award (e.g., financial, performance, and special reports) (2 CFR section 200.332(a)(3)). Condition: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements with its subrecipients covering the period under audit that meet the requirements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Management indicated that the existing subaward agreements, which do not cover the year ended December 31, 2023, were not updated due to an oversight attributed to personnel vacancies. Effect or potential effect: Noncompliance with Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance could result in misunderstanding in program compliance requirements. Questioned cost: not applicable. Context: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements that cover the audit period for the two subawards made under this program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update and execute agreements with its subrecipients that contains all the required elements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: The Organization concurs with this finding. See page 40 for corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-001 – Reporting Identification of federal program: Assistance Listing No. 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Criteria or specific requirement: Section 200.332 of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) provides the requirements for pass-through entities. A pass-through entity (PTE) must clearly identify to the subrecipient the award as a subaward at the time of subaward (or subsequent subaward modification) by providing the information described in 2 CFR section 200.332(a)(2); all requirements imposed by the PTE on the subrecipient so that the federal award is used in accordance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award (2 CFR section 200.331(a)(2)); and (3) any additional requirements that the PTE imposes on the subrecipient in order for the PTE to meet its own responsibility for the federal award (e.g., financial, performance, and special reports) (2 CFR section 200.332(a)(3)). Condition: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements with its subrecipients covering the period under audit that meet the requirements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Management indicated that the existing subaward agreements, which do not cover the year ended December 31, 2023, were not updated due to an oversight attributed to personnel vacancies. Effect or potential effect: Noncompliance with Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance could result in misunderstanding in program compliance requirements. Questioned cost: not applicable. Context: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements that cover the audit period for the two subawards made under this program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update and execute agreements with its subrecipients that contains all the required elements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: The Organization concurs with this finding. See page 40 for corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-001 – Reporting Identification of federal program: Assistance Listing No. 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. Criteria or specific requirement: Section 200.332 of Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) provides the requirements for pass-through entities. A pass-through entity (PTE) must clearly identify to the subrecipient the award as a subaward at the time of subaward (or subsequent subaward modification) by providing the information described in 2 CFR section 200.332(a)(2); all requirements imposed by the PTE on the subrecipient so that the federal award is used in accordance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award (2 CFR section 200.331(a)(2)); and (3) any additional requirements that the PTE imposes on the subrecipient in order for the PTE to meet its own responsibility for the federal award (e.g., financial, performance, and special reports) (2 CFR section 200.332(a)(3)). Condition: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements with its subrecipients covering the period under audit that meet the requirements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Management indicated that the existing subaward agreements, which do not cover the year ended December 31, 2023, were not updated due to an oversight attributed to personnel vacancies. Effect or potential effect: Noncompliance with Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance could result in misunderstanding in program compliance requirements. Questioned cost: not applicable. Context: The Organization was not able to provide executed agreements that cover the audit period for the two subawards made under this program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization update and execute agreements with its subrecipients that contains all the required elements of Section 200.332 of the Uniform Guidance. Views of responsible officials: The Organization concurs with this finding. See page 40 for corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-002: Pre-Award Risk Assessment for Sub-Recipient Information on the Federal Program: 93.048 Criteria: 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 testing performed over subrecipient expenditures, we were unable to obtain evidence that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed over subrecipients, consistent with 2 CFR §200.332(b). Cause: The Organization's internal policies and procedures governing risk assessment on subrecipients was not performed. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organization could inadvertently be engaged 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 substantive testwork over a sample of subrecipients. We consider our sample to be representative of the population. The samples were made using statistical sampling and we believe the condition appeared to be systematic in nature. Identification as a Repeat Finding, if Applicable: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization follow their internal policies regarding performing a pre-award risk assessment on all new sub-recipients engaged throughout the life of the award. For repeat sub-recipients, the risk assessment should be re-visited throughout the award term to ensure that conditions have not changed and the original risk assessment remains reasonable.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Name: COVID-19 Community Development Block Grants Assistance Listing Number: 14.228 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: B-20-DW-27-0001, 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, Business and Community Development Division Pass-Through Number: B-20-DW-27-0001 Compliance Requirement Affected: Reporting Award Period: Year Ended December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Material Noncompliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: Recipients of $150,000 or more of grant funds must submit, no later than 7 days after the end of each calendar quarter, a quarterly report to the State. Quarterly reports mush be in accordance with reporting requirements set forth in section 15011 of the CARES Act. The Grantee will monitor the activities of the sub-recipient according to 2 CFR §200.303 and 2 CFR §200.331 as necessary to ensure that the sub-award is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the sub-award; and that sub-award performance goals are achieved. This includes reviewing financial and programmatic reports required by the pass-through entity. Condition: Proper records were not retained for reports and there was no oversight by County management of the reports being submitted by the subrecipient to the State. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: For one of two quarterly reports tested, there was no record on file for the report that was submitted. For one of two quarterly reports tested, the report was not submitted by the deadline listed in the grant agreement. For all reports, it was noted that there was no review by County management of the reports submitted by the subrecipient and the County received a copy of the report at the same time as the submission was completed. Cause: Insufficient management oversight. Effect: Ineligible costs could be reported. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County reviews their policies to ensure reporting requirements are met including a review of the subrecipient reports prior to submission. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Name: COVID-19 Community Development Block Grants Assistance Listing Number: 14.228 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: B-20-DW-27-0001, 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, Business and Community Development Division Pass-Through Number: B-20-DW-27-0001 Compliance Requirement Affected: Subrecipient Monitoring Award Period: Year Ended December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance and Material Noncompliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The grantee will monitor the activities of the sub-recipient according to 2 CFR §200.303 and 2 CFR §200.331 as necessary to ensure that the sub-award is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the sub-award; and that sub-award performance goals are achieved. Condition: Proper records were not retained as required by subrecipient monitoring purposes. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: There are no monitoring policies or procedures in place at the County. There was no documentation on file to support that the County monitored the subrecipient to ensure they used the subaward for authorized purposes in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward or that the subrecipient audits were completed in accordance with requirements. Cause: Insufficient management oversight. Effect: Ineligible costs could be reported. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County reviews their policies to ensure they are monitoring subrecipients and retaining documentation as required by federal guidelines. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
U.S. Department of Treasury Passed-through the Colorado Department of Local Affairs FFAL #21.027 COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Subrecipient Monitoring Material Noncompliance Material Weakness in Internal Controls Criteria: Section 2 CFR 200.331 establishes the determination of whether there is a subrecipient or contractor of the federal award. The non-Federal entity may concurrently receive Federal awards as a recipient, a subrecipient, and a contractor, depending on the substance of its agreements with Federal awarding agencies and pass-through entities. Therefore, a passthrough 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. The Federal awarding agency may supply and require recipients to comply with additional guidance to support these determinations provided such guidance does not conflict with this section. Once it is determined the recipient is a sub-recipient there are certain requirements for pass-through entities established in 2 CFR 200.332. Per 2 CFR 200.332, pass-through entities are responsible for informing subrecipients of the Federal award identifiers including but not limited to award date, period of performance and Federal awarding agency and Assistance Listing Number and title. Pass-through entities are required to assess the subrecipient’s risk of noncompliance with Federal statutes, regulations and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Further, the pass-through entity is required to perform certain monitoring activities to ensure 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. Finally, the pass-through entity should also verify the subrecipient is audited as required by Subpart F - Audit Requirement under the Uniform Guidance. The monitoring policy should include an initial valuation of risk of noncompliance to determine the appropriate level of monitoring required related to the subaward as well as appropriate awarding documentation. Condition: The County did not appropriately identify two subrecipients of the grant and initially determined them to be contractors. The County failed to perform any subrecipient monitoring as required by the Uniform Guidance. Cause: Due to the County’s failure to understand the sub-recipient monitoring requirements, two of subawards were incorrectly identified as contractors and none of the required award and monitoring procedures were performed for the four subrecipients of the grant. Effect: Insufficient procedures and internal controls related to subrecipients resulted in noncompliance. Questioned Costs: No questioned costs were identified as a result of our procedures. 16 Summit County, Colorado Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs Year Ended December 31, 2023 Context/Sampling: All four subrecipients were selected for subrecipient monitoring testing. Repeat Finding from Prior Years: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County establish and adhere to policies and procedures, including internal controls, to ensure compliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements as established by 2 CFR 200.331 and 2 CFR 200.332. Views of Responsible Officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Finding 2023-001: Subrecipient Pre-award Risk Assessment Information on the Federal Programs: All Programs Criteria or Specific Requirement: CFR § 200.332, "Requirements for pass-through entities", requires pass-through entities to 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. Condition: During our testing of subawards, we were unable to verify that pre-award risk assessment procedures were performed. We additionally noted that these requirements were not incorporated into the Organizations' current policies and procedures. Cause: The Organizations do not have a formal internal policy with respect to performing subaward risk assessments as required by Federal regulation at the execution of the subaward agreements or on a regular basis. Effect or Potential Effect: The Organizations may have inadvertently failed to perform monitoring procedures appropriate for a subrecipient’s assessed level of risk. Questioned Costs: N/A Context: The Organizations execute subaward agreements under US Federal grants. Therefore, the Organizations are subject to CFR § 200.332 "Requirements for pass-through entities". Our audit procedures consisted of testwork completed on subawards and individual expenditures charged to the Federal awards. The report in which samples were selected was generated directly from the Organizations' general ledger (accounting system). We consider our sample to be representative of the population. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: We recommend the Organizations develop a subaward policy to ensure the risk assessment procedures over its subrecipients are performed and documented prior to engagement. Based on these risk assessments, the Organizations should assign a risk level to each, and then determine the monitoring tools to apply based on these risk levels. We also recommend the Organizations require its subrecipients to submit financial reports demonstrating use of each advance before advancing more funds, to ensure subrecipients are expending funds appropriately. Recommended factors to consider when developing a policy are as follows: Refer to 2 CFR 200.331 part (a) for complete listing of data elements that are required to be included in every subaward, and incorporate this listing into the updated policies and procedures. Establish criteria to be used in the evaluation of the risk of noncompliance associated with the intended subrecipient 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.).
Federal Programs – AL 93.569 – Community Services Block Grant Criteria – Uniform Guidance requires, for any funds passed through to a subrecipient, that the pass-through entity (CAPND) must perform certain activities to ensure that the subrecipient uses the funds within provisions of the grant award and Uniform Guidance (2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f)). This includes the review of independent audits of subrecipients and response to deficiencies detected through audits (2CFR section 200.331 (f)). It also includes requiring all subawards granted to subrecipients have specific identifications with the award to ensure the subaward is clearly identifiable (2 CFR Section 200.331(a)). Condition – For the year ended December 31, 2023, we reviewed CAPND's subrecipient monitoring policy, requested supporting documentation for monitoring activities included, and interviewed key members of management when documentation was not available. Performance of several of the policies noted as required under Uniform Guidance for subrecipient monitoring and per CAPND's internal policies could not be substantiated or were determined to not have occurred during the year under audit. Cause – Due to internal control deficiency noted in 2023-002, the subrecipient monitoring requirement was not in compliance during the current year. Context– Of the total federal expenditures under the program noted above, $276,165 are passed through to subrecipients. The following are specific items noted that were not in compliance with the criteria listed above: - We requested copies of the correspondence with subrecipients requesting copies of the financial statement audits performed in compliance with 2 CFR 200. Follow up discussion with CAPND staff confirmed that this requirement was not completed during the year under audit. Subsequently, of the five subrecipient audit reports required to be requested, zero were requested. - We requested copies of all subawards awarded to subrecipients. Of the five subawards awarded to pass-through entities, all five were missing the following required information under (2 CFR Section 200.331(a)): o Subrecipient's unique entity identifier. o Amount of federal funds obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient. Effect – Increased risk of potential noncompliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements under Uniform Guidance. Question costs – None. Repeat Finding – This is not a repeat finding.
Federal Programs – AL 93.569 – Community Services Block Grant Criteria – Uniform Guidance requires, for any funds passed through to a subrecipient, that the pass-through entity (CAPND) must perform certain activities to ensure that the subrecipient uses the funds within provisions of the grant award and Uniform Guidance (2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f)). This includes the review of independent audits of subrecipients and response to deficiencies detected through audits (2CFR section 200.331 (f)). It also includes requiring all subawards granted to subrecipients have specific identifications with the award to ensure the subaward is clearly identifiable (2 CFR Section 200.331(a)). Condition – For the year ended December 31, 2023, we reviewed CAPND's subrecipient monitoring policy, requested supporting documentation for monitoring activities included, and interviewed key members of management when documentation was not available. Performance of several of the policies noted as required under Uniform Guidance for subrecipient monitoring and per CAPND's internal policies could not be substantiated or were determined to not have occurred during the year under audit. Cause – Due to internal control deficiency noted in 2023-002, the subrecipient monitoring requirement was not in compliance during the current year. Context– Of the total federal expenditures under the program noted above, $276,165 are passed through to subrecipients. The following are specific items noted that were not in compliance with the criteria listed above: - We requested copies of the correspondence with subrecipients requesting copies of the financial statement audits performed in compliance with 2 CFR 200. Follow up discussion with CAPND staff confirmed that this requirement was not completed during the year under audit. Subsequently, of the five subrecipient audit reports required to be requested, zero were requested. - We requested copies of all subawards awarded to subrecipients. Of the five subawards awarded to pass-through entities, all five were missing the following required information under (2 CFR Section 200.331(a)): o Subrecipient's unique entity identifier. o Amount of federal funds obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient. Effect – Increased risk of potential noncompliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements under Uniform Guidance. Question costs – None. Repeat Finding – This is not a repeat finding.
Federal Programs – AL 93.569 – Community Services Block Grant Criteria – Uniform Guidance requires, for any funds passed through to a subrecipient, that the pass-through entity (CAPND) must perform certain activities to ensure that the subrecipient uses the funds within provisions of the grant award and Uniform Guidance (2 CFR sections 200.331 (d) through (f)). This includes the review of independent audits of subrecipients and response to deficiencies detected through audits (2CFR section 200.331 (f)). It also includes requiring all subawards granted to subrecipients have specific identifications with the award to ensure the subaward is clearly identifiable (2 CFR Section 200.331(a)). Condition – For the year ended December 31, 2023, we reviewed CAPND's subrecipient monitoring policy, requested supporting documentation for monitoring activities included, and interviewed key members of management when documentation was not available. Performance of several of the policies noted as required under Uniform Guidance for subrecipient monitoring and per CAPND's internal policies could not be substantiated or were determined to not have occurred during the year under audit. Cause – Due to internal control deficiency noted in 2023-002, the subrecipient monitoring requirement was not in compliance during the current year. Context– Of the total federal expenditures under the program noted above, $276,165 are passed through to subrecipients. The following are specific items noted that were not in compliance with the criteria listed above: - We requested copies of the correspondence with subrecipients requesting copies of the financial statement audits performed in compliance with 2 CFR 200. Follow up discussion with CAPND staff confirmed that this requirement was not completed during the year under audit. Subsequently, of the five subrecipient audit reports required to be requested, zero were requested. - We requested copies of all subawards awarded to subrecipients. Of the five subawards awarded to pass-through entities, all five were missing the following required information under (2 CFR Section 200.331(a)): o Subrecipient's unique entity identifier. o Amount of federal funds obligated by this action by the pass-through entity to the subrecipient. Effect – Increased risk of potential noncompliance with subrecipient monitoring requirements under Uniform Guidance. Question costs – None. Repeat Finding – This is not a repeat finding.
Finding Number: 2023-001 Internal Control over Compliance and Compliance with the Subrecipient Monitoring Compliance Requirement, Repeat Finding, Finding No. 2022-001 Identification of the Major Federal Program: Programs: Government Agency: Inclusion Across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science Assistance Listing Number: 47.076 Award Number: HRD-1834540 Award Years: 09/01/2018 – 02/28/2025 PhysTEC: Building a Solution to the National Physics Teacher Shortage Assistance Listing Number: 47.049 Award Number: PHY-1707990 Award Years: 07/01/2017 – 06/30/2023 National Science Foundation (NSF) Criteria - The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.331, a pass-through entity (PTE) must monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals (2 CFR sections 200.332(d) through (f)). In addition to procedures identified as necessary based upon the evaluation of subrecipient risk or specifically required by the terms and conditions of the award, subaward monitoring must include the following: 1. reviewing financial and programmatic (performance and special reports) required by the PTE; 2. following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the PTE detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means; 3. issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the PTE as required by 2 CFR section 200.521. Furthermore, under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) (Pub. L. No. 109-282), as amended by Section 6202 of Public Law 110-252, hereafter referred as the “Transparency Act” that are codified in 2 CFR Part 170, recipients (i.e., direct recipients) of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). If a subaward/subcontract was subject to reporting under the Transparency Act, the action was required to be reported in FSRS no later than the last day of the month following the month in which the subaward/subcontract amendment obligation was made or in the subcontract award/subcontract modification was made. Conditions – Our examination of the program’s subrecipient monitoring requirements includes the review and approval of financial and performance quarterly reports by the program managers. The quarterly reports are prepared by APS’ grants administrator with inputs provided by the subrecipient submitted to the program managers. Of the program’s twenty (20) subrecipients, we examined eight (8) subrecipients and observed that although the respective program managers had monitoring oversight of the various grant’s financial and programmatic activities, there was no formal evidentiary documentation to support the monitoring oversight process performed by the program managers. Furthermore, our examination of the program’s subrecipient monitoring requirements includes follow-ups by APS to ensure the subrecipients take timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to federal awards provided to the subrecipients which have been detected through reviews of audits, on-site reviews, and other means. We selected six (6) subrecipients for testing and noted that for two (2) samples selected APS was unable to provide evidence that it monitored the subrecipients through review of its single audit reports, on-site reviews, and other means. We also tested a sample of three (3) subrecipients and our examination of the monitoring and reporting requirements revealed that APS did not report the information on a subaward of $30,000 or more in federal funds timely and on one (1) of the sub awards reported, the contract award amount reported is less than the actual expenditures incurred by the subrecipient. APS began implementation of its corrective action plan on June 5, 2023, and the exceptions identified above is as a result of the fact that APS was still in the implementation process of its corrective action plan. Cause - Management does not have adequate internal controls and policies and procedures in place to ensure that a review is performed on the financial and programmatic reports in a timely manner and to ensure that its subrecipients do not have any audit deficiencies relating to federal award programs and if any deficiencies are detected, that the subrecipients takes timely and appropriate action to resolve the deficiencies identified. There is also a lack of established monitoring and internal control procedures in place to ensure that reports required under the Transparency Act are prepared and submitted timely in FSRS Reporting System resulted in APS’ noncompliance with the reporting requirements. Effect or potential effect – APS is not in compliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements as it did not maintain consistent documented evidence of its monitoring of subrecipients. In addition, failure to comply with the reporting requirements of the Uniform Guidance could result in the awarding agency taking action such as reducing future funding. Questioned Costs – None. Context – These are conditions identified per review of APS compliance with specified compliance requirements using a statistically valid sample. Recommendations – BDO recommends that APS continue to apply the implemented policies, procedures and controls that will ensure that all requisite reports are reviewed, and evidence of review are documented and maintained. Furthermore, APS should continue to implement policies to obtain and review single audit reports of its subrecipients in order to ensure compliance with all the required laws, guidelines and requirement under the award. BDO recommends that APS continues to implement established policies and procedure over the preparation and timely submission of reports required under the Transparency Act to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials - APS concurs with this finding. APS’ corrective action is described in the Management’s Corrective Action Plan included below.
Finding Number: 2023-001 Internal Control over Compliance and Compliance with the Subrecipient Monitoring Compliance Requirement, Repeat Finding, Finding No. 2022-001 Identification of the Major Federal Program: Programs: Government Agency: Inclusion Across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science Assistance Listing Number: 47.076 Award Number: HRD-1834540 Award Years: 09/01/2018 – 02/28/2025 PhysTEC: Building a Solution to the National Physics Teacher Shortage Assistance Listing Number: 47.049 Award Number: PHY-1707990 Award Years: 07/01/2017 – 06/30/2023 National Science Foundation (NSF) Criteria - The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal control designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In accordance with the Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.331, a pass-through entity (PTE) must monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals (2 CFR sections 200.332(d) through (f)). In addition to procedures identified as necessary based upon the evaluation of subrecipient risk or specifically required by the terms and conditions of the award, subaward monitoring must include the following: 1. reviewing financial and programmatic (performance and special reports) required by the PTE; 2. following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the PTE detected through audits, on-site reviews, and other means; 3. issuing a management decision for audit findings pertaining to the federal award provided to the subrecipient from the PTE as required by 2 CFR section 200.521. Furthermore, under the requirements of the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (FFATA) (Pub. L. No. 109-282), as amended by Section 6202 of Public Law 110-252, hereafter referred as the “Transparency Act” that are codified in 2 CFR Part 170, recipients (i.e., direct recipients) of grants or cooperative agreements are required to report first-tier subawards of $30,000 or more to the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act Subaward Reporting System (FSRS). If a subaward/subcontract was subject to reporting under the Transparency Act, the action was required to be reported in FSRS no later than the last day of the month following the month in which the subaward/subcontract amendment obligation was made or in the subcontract award/subcontract modification was made. Conditions – Our examination of the program’s subrecipient monitoring requirements includes the review and approval of financial and performance quarterly reports by the program managers. The quarterly reports are prepared by APS’ grants administrator with inputs provided by the subrecipient submitted to the program managers. Of the program’s twenty (20) subrecipients, we examined eight (8) subrecipients and observed that although the respective program managers had monitoring oversight of the various grant’s financial and programmatic activities, there was no formal evidentiary documentation to support the monitoring oversight process performed by the program managers. Furthermore, our examination of the program’s subrecipient monitoring requirements includes follow-ups by APS to ensure the subrecipients take timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to federal awards provided to the subrecipients which have been detected through reviews of audits, on-site reviews, and other means. We selected six (6) subrecipients for testing and noted that for two (2) samples selected APS was unable to provide evidence that it monitored the subrecipients through review of its single audit reports, on-site reviews, and other means. We also tested a sample of three (3) subrecipients and our examination of the monitoring and reporting requirements revealed that APS did not report the information on a subaward of $30,000 or more in federal funds timely and on one (1) of the sub awards reported, the contract award amount reported is less than the actual expenditures incurred by the subrecipient. APS began implementation of its corrective action plan on June 5, 2023, and the exceptions identified above is as a result of the fact that APS was still in the implementation process of its corrective action plan. Cause - Management does not have adequate internal controls and policies and procedures in place to ensure that a review is performed on the financial and programmatic reports in a timely manner and to ensure that its subrecipients do not have any audit deficiencies relating to federal award programs and if any deficiencies are detected, that the subrecipients takes timely and appropriate action to resolve the deficiencies identified. There is also a lack of established monitoring and internal control procedures in place to ensure that reports required under the Transparency Act are prepared and submitted timely in FSRS Reporting System resulted in APS’ noncompliance with the reporting requirements. Effect or potential effect – APS is not in compliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirements as it did not maintain consistent documented evidence of its monitoring of subrecipients. In addition, failure to comply with the reporting requirements of the Uniform Guidance could result in the awarding agency taking action such as reducing future funding. Questioned Costs – None. Context – These are conditions identified per review of APS compliance with specified compliance requirements using a statistically valid sample. Recommendations – BDO recommends that APS continue to apply the implemented policies, procedures and controls that will ensure that all requisite reports are reviewed, and evidence of review are documented and maintained. Furthermore, APS should continue to implement policies to obtain and review single audit reports of its subrecipients in order to ensure compliance with all the required laws, guidelines and requirement under the award. BDO recommends that APS continues to implement established policies and procedure over the preparation and timely submission of reports required under the Transparency Act to ensure compliance with reporting requirements. Views of Responsible Officials - APS concurs with this finding. APS’ corrective action is described in the Management’s Corrective Action Plan included below.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Title: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Program Year: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Indiana Finance Authority Pass-Through Number: Unknown Type of Finding: • Significant deficiency and noncompliance Criteria or Specific Requirement – Subrecipient Monitoring: Pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.331, non-Federal entities can award subawards for the purpose of carrying out a portion of a federal award and creates a federal assistance relationship with the subrecipient. In addition, pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.332, the non-Federal entity must identify to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the Federal award identification. The non-Federal entity must monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, incompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Condition: The County could not provide support that it had sufficient review of the subrecipient during the year on a consistent basis. The County had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls that would likely be effective in preventing, detecting, and correcting, noncompliance. Questioned Costs: None Context: It was noted that the file selected for testing did not have documented evidence supporting that the County had sufficient monitoring and communication of the subrecipient. From a population of three files, one was selected for testing. Our sample was not intended to be statistically valid. Effect: The County was unable to support that the subrecipients were being monitored. Cause: Failure to maintain sufficient monitoring of the subrecipient Identification as a Repeat Finding: Yes, 2022-003 Recommendation: We recommend the County maintain adequate communication and documentation with the subrecipients to ensure compliance with the subrecipients requirement. This documentation could include a quarterly communication, receipt of the audited financial statements and single audit report, if applicable. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The County is aware of the compliance requirement and has implemented additional procedures, including certain of those identified in the recommendation above, to be able to support suspension and debarment processes are in place. Persons responsible for implementing: Abby Doyle, Chief Deputy Auditor Anticipated completion date: Completed.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Treasury Federal Program Title: COVID-19 Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Program Year: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Indiana Finance Authority Pass-Through Number: Unknown Type of Finding: • Significant deficiency and noncompliance Criteria or Specific Requirement – Subrecipient Monitoring: Pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.331, non-Federal entities can award subawards for the purpose of carrying out a portion of a federal award and creates a federal assistance relationship with the subrecipient. In addition, pursuant to 2 CFR § 200.332, the non-Federal entity must identify to the subrecipient as a subaward and includes the Federal award identification. The non-Federal entity must monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for authorized purposes, incompliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. Condition: The County could not provide support that it had sufficient review of the subrecipient during the year on a consistent basis. The County had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls that would likely be effective in preventing, detecting, and correcting, noncompliance. Questioned Costs: None Context: It was noted that the file selected for testing did not have documented evidence supporting that the County had sufficient monitoring and communication of the subrecipient. From a population of three files, one was selected for testing. Our sample was not intended to be statistically valid. Effect: The County was unable to support that the subrecipients were being monitored. Cause: Failure to maintain sufficient monitoring of the subrecipient Identification as a Repeat Finding: Yes, 2022-003 Recommendation: We recommend the County maintain adequate communication and documentation with the subrecipients to ensure compliance with the subrecipients requirement. This documentation could include a quarterly communication, receipt of the audited financial statements and single audit report, if applicable. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: The County is aware of the compliance requirement and has implemented additional procedures, including certain of those identified in the recommendation above, to be able to support suspension and debarment processes are in place. Persons responsible for implementing: Abby Doyle, Chief Deputy Auditor Anticipated completion date: Completed.
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Program Information Assistance Listing # 47.076 STEM Education 2023-001 Documentation of Subawards Material Weakness Criteria: The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 200.331 requires a pass-through entity (PTE) to clearly identify to the subrecipient: (1) the award as a subaward at the time of subaward (or subsequent subaward modification) by providing the information described in 2 CFR section 200.331(a)(1); (2) all requirements imposed by the PTE on the subrecipient so that the federal award is used in accordance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award (2 CFR section 200.331(a)(2)); and (3) any additional requirements that the PTE imposes on the subrecipient in order for the PTE to meet its own responsibility for the federal award (e.g., financial, performance, and special reports) (2 CFR section 200.331(a)(3)). Condition: A sample of three subawards were selected. Two of the three subawards did not have a subaward agreement. Cause: This is the first year that the Foundation was required to have a Single audit and as such is still in the process of developing and adopting specific policies for sub-awards and subrecipients. Effect: During 2023 contemporaneous documentation was not obtained from sub-awardees and sub-recipients. Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend that management require all sub-awardees to have a subaward agreement or memorandum of understanding (MOU). Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: The Foundation’s management team agrees with this finding and remains fully committed to both developing and adopting specific policies for sub-awards and sub-recipients which will better ensure its internal practices are in alignment with the Uniform Guidance.
Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Program Name: COVID-19 Community Development Block Grants/State’s Program and Non- Entitlement Grants in Hawaii Assistance Listing Number: 14.228 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: B-20-DW-27-0001, 2023 Pass-Through Agency: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, Business and Community Development Division Pass-Through Number: B-20-DW-27-0001 Compliance Requirement Affected: Reporting Award Period: Year Ended December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: Recipients of $150,000 or more of grant funds must submit a quarterly and annual report, no later than 7 days after the end of each calendar quarter and 15 days after the fiscal year end, respectively. Quarterly and annual reports must be in accordance with reporting requirements set forth in section 15011 of the CARES Act. The Grantee will monitor the activities of the sub-recipient according to 2 CFR §200.303 and 2 CFR §200.331 as necessary to ensure that the sub-award is used for authorized purposes, in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the sub-award; and that sub-award performance goals are achieved. This includes reviewing financial and programmatic reports required by the pass-through entity. Condition: There was no oversight by County management of the reports being submitted by the subrecipient to the State. Questioned Costs: None noted. Context: For two of two quarterly reports and one of one annual reports tested, it was noted that there was no review by County management of the reports submitted by the subrecipient and the County received a copy of the report at the same time as the submission was completed. Cause: Insufficient management oversight. Effect: Ineligible costs could be reported. Repeat Finding: No. Recommendation: We recommend that the County reviews their policies to ensure reporting requirements are met including a review of the subrecipient reports prior to submission. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
FINDING 2023-003 Subject: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Subrecipient Monitoring Federal Agency: Department of the Treasury Federal Program: COVID-19 - Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Assistance Listings Number: 21.027 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): FY 2023 Compliance Requirement: Subrecipient Monitoring Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Repeat Finding This is a repeat finding from the immediately prior audit report. The prior audit finding number was 2022-005. Condition and Context The County received a total State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds (SLFRF) allocation of $13,177,707. During the audit period, the County provided subawards of SLFRF funds to other entities. As a pass-through entity, the County must: Identify the award and the applicable requirements to each subrecipient. Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance for purposes of determining the appropriate subrecipient monitoring related to the subaward. Monitor the activities of the subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subaward is used for an authorized purpose, complies with the terms and conditions of the subaward, and achieves performance goals. Subawards, totaling $290,000, were provided to two different entities. Both subrecipient agreements associated with the subawards were selected for testing. For the two agreements tested, the following information was incomplete or missing: The federal award identification number (FAIN). The federal award date of award to the recipient by the federal agency. The name of the federal awarding agency, pass-through entity (auditee), and contact information for awarding official of the pass-through entity (auditee). The 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. Furthermore, the County did not have an evaluation of the subrecipients' risk of noncompliance or monitoring activities demonstrating compliance with the subrecipient monitoring requirement. The County did not request any financial or audit documentation from the subrecipients. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 21 BOONE COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." 2 CFR 200.331(a) states: "Subrecipients. A subaward is for the purpose of carrying out a portion of a Federal award and creates a Federal assistance relationship with the subrecipient. See definition for Subaward in § 200.1 of this part. Characteristics which support the classification of the non-Federal entity as a subrecipient include when the non-Federal entity: (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." 2 CFR 200.332 states in part: "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 . . . (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; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 22 BOONE COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (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 passthrough entity including the current financial obligation; (ix) Total Amount of the Federal Award committed to the subrecipient by the passthrough 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 official of the Pass-through entity; (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; (4) (i) An approved federally recognized indirect cost rate negotiated between the subrecipient and the Federal Government. If no approved rate exists, the passthrough entity must determine the appropriate rate in collaboration with the subrecipient, which is either: (A) The negotiated indirect cost rate between the pass-through entity and the subrecipient; which can be based on a prior negotiated rate between a different PTE and the same subrecipient. If basing the rate on a previously negotiated rate, the pass-through entity is not required to collect information justifying this rate, but may elect to do so; (B) The de minimis indirect cost rate. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 23 BOONE COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (ii) The pass-through entity must not require use of a de minimis indirect cost rate if the subrecipient has a Federally approved rate. Subrecipients can elect to use the cost allocation method to account for indirect costs in accordance with § 200.405(d). (5) A requirement that the subrecipient permit the pass-through entity and auditors to have access to the subrecipient's records and financial statements as necessary for the pass-through entity to meet the requirements of this part; and (6) Appropriate terms and conditions concerning closeout of the subaward. (b) Evaluate each subrecipient's risk of noncompliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward for purposes of determined the appropriate subrecipient monitoring . . . (d) 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. Pass-through entity monitoring of the subrecipient must include: (1) Reviewing financial and performance reports required by the pass-through entity. (2) Following-up and ensuring that the subrecipient takes timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies pertaining to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity detected through audits, on-site reviews, and written confirmation from the subrecipient, highlighting the status of actions planned or taken to address Single Audit findings related to the particular subaward. (3) Issuing a management decision for applicable audit findings pertaining only to the Federal award provided to the subrecipient from the pass-through entity as required by § 200.521. (4) The pass-through entity is responsible for resolving audit findings specifically related to the subaward and not responsible for resolving crosscutting findings. . . ." Cause The system of internal controls as established by the management of the County was not properly designed nor implemented. The County was unable to provide documentation that monitoring procedures were in place over subrecipients. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the County cannot be sure subrecipients are provided an adequate subaward agreement, with all required elements and are adequately monitored. As such, subaward agreements entered into by the County did not include all the required elements. In addition, the County did not properly monitor the non-profit to ensure proper spending of the federal funds. Noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the County. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 24 BOONE COUNTY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. Recommendation We recommended that management of the County design and implement a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure subrecipients are provided with an adequate subaward agreement and monitored as appropriate. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.