FINDING 2024-011 Subject: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listings Number: 84.010 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S010A210014, S010A220014 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles 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 2022-010. Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly designed or implemented a system of internal controls to ensure that proper documentation was retained for audit. A sample of 60 transactions charged to the Title I grant during the audit period was selected for testing. The following errors were noted: • A total of 29 transactions, totaling $13,621, were fringe benefit claims; however, the supporting documentation provided did not include details to identify the employees for which the benefit was paid. As a result, we were unable to determine if the payments were on behalf of allowable staff related to the Title I program. • The School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation for 2 transactions totaling $551. As such, these transactions were unable to be verified as allowable activities or costs for the Title I program. The errors noted above were considered questioned costs. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were systemic issues throughout the audit period. Criteria 2 CFR 200.303 states in part: "The non-Federal entity must: (a) Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in 'Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government' issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the 'Internal Control Integrated Framework', issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 39 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.334 states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for the Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annual, from the date of submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.430(i) states in part: "Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses (1) Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non- Federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities (for IHE, this per the IHE's definition of IBS); . . . (vii) Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives if the employee works on more than one Federal award; a Federal award and non-Federal award; an indirect cost activity and a direct cost activity; two or more indirect activities which are allocated using different allocation bases; or an unallowable activity and a direct or indirect cost activity. . . ." Cause Due to turnover of staffing in the School Corporation's administrative office, the School Corporation's management had not established an effective system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 40 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Effect Without a proper system of internal controls in place that operated effectively, the School Corporation did not retain and provide appropriate supporting documentation. This prevented the determination of the School Corporation's compliance with the compliance requirements listed above. Questioned Costs We identified $14,172 in known questioned costs as noted above in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish an effective system of internal controls to ensure documentation will be maintained and made available for audit as related to the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-012 Subject: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies - Level of Effort - Maintenance of Effort, Earmarking Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies Assistance Listings Number: 84.010 Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S010A210014, S010A220014 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirement: Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking 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 2022-011. Condition and Context An effective internal control system was not in place at the School Corporation to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking compliance requirement. Level of Effort - Maintenance of Effort Maintenance of effort is a district-level test that determines whether the School Corporation is providing a consistent level of financial support to public schools from year-to-year. This rule ensures that the School Corporation does not use Title I funds to shore up reductions in state and local support for public education. The Indiana Department of Education (IDOE) performs the maintenance of effort calculation utilizing Form 9 information provided by the School Corporation. As such, the amounts submitted to the IDOE to be used in the computation are tested to ensure they were recorded properly in the School Corporation's records as to the account and object code. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 41 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) In fiscal years 2022-2023 and 2023-2024, 60 transactions were tested each year to ensure the disbursements were posted to the proper account and object code. For 10 of the 60 transactions selected in 2022-2023, as well as 11 of the 60 transactions selected in 2023-2024, appropriate supporting documentation was not provided for audit. As a result, 21 disbursements could not be verified as to whether they were posted to the proper account or object codes. In addition, 60 disbursement line items were sampled from the IDOE Form 9 for both 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 to ensure the amounts agreed to the ledger. A total of 2 of the 60 disbursement line items in 2022-2023 and 6 of the 60 disbursement line items in 2023-2024 could not be traced to the ledger. Therefore, we were unable to determine if the disbursements for 8 disbursement line items were posted to the proper account or object code. Earmarking The School Corporation did not expend the required minimum amount from grant S010A210014 for parent and family engagement. In addition, the Homelessness Reservation for grants S010A210014 and S010A220014 did not expend the required minimum amounts. 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 200.400 states in part: "(a) The non-Federal entity is responsible for the efficient and effective administration of the Federal award through the application of sound management practices. (b) The non-Federal entity assumes responsibility for administering Federal funds in a manner consistent with underlying agreements, program objectives, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." 2 CFR 200.208(b) states in part: "The Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity may adjust specific Federal award conditions as needed . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 42 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 20 USC 6313(c)3 states: "(A) In general A local educational agency shall reserve such funds as are necessary under this part, determined in accordance with subparagraphs (B) and (C), to provide services comparable to those provided to children in schools funded under this part to serve— (i) homeless children and youths, including providing educationally related support services to children in shelters and other locations where children may live; (ii) children in local institutions for neglected children; and (iii) if appropriate, children in local institutions for delinquent children, and neglected or delinquent children in community day programs. (B) Method of determination The share of funds determined under subparagraph (A) shall be determined— (i) based on the total allocation received by the local educational agency; and (ii) prior to any allowable expenditures or transfers by the local educational agency. (C) Homeless children and youths Funds reserved under subparagraph (A)(i) may be— (i) determined based on a needs assessment of homeless children and youths in the local educational agency, taking into consideration the number and needs of homeless children and youths in the local educational agency, and which needs assessment may be the same needs assessment as conducted under section 11433(b)(1) of title 42; and (ii) used to provide homeless children and youths with services not ordinarily provided to other students under this part, including providing— (I) funding for the liaison designated pursuant to section 11432(g)(1)(J)(ii) of title 42; and (II) transportation pursuant to section 11432(g)(1)(J)(iii) of such title." 34 CFR 200.77 states in part: "Before allocating funds in accordance with § 200.78, an LEA must reserve funds as are reasonable and necessary to— (a) Provide services comparable to those provided to children in participating school attendance areas and schools to serve— (1) INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 43 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (i) Homeless children and youths, including providing educationally related support services to children in shelters and other locations where homeless children may live. (ii) Funds reserved under paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section may be— (A) Determined based on a needs assessment of homeless children and youths in the LEA, taking into consideration the number and needs of those children, which may be the same needs assessment as conducted under section 723(b)(1) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act; and (B) Used to provide homeless children and youths with services not ordinarily provided to other students under this subpart, including providing— (1) Funding for the liaison designated under section 722(g)(1)(J)(ii) of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act; and (2) Transportation pursuant to section 722(g)(1)(J)(iii) of that Act; (2) Children in local institutions for neglected children; and (2) Children in local institutions for neglected children; and (3) If appropriate (i) Children in local institutions for delinquent children; and (ii) Neglected and delinquent children in community-day school programs; (4) An LEA must determine the amount of funds reserved under paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(2) and (3) of this section based on the total allocation received by the LEA under subpart 2 of part A of title I of the ESEA prior to any allowable expenditures or transfers by the LEA; . . ." Cause Due to turnover of staffing in the School Corporation's administrative office and recordkeeping issues, the School Corporation's management had not developed a system of internal controls that would have ensured compliance, or that supporting documentation would have been maintained and made available for audit, related to the Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking compliance requirement. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the School Corporation cannot ensure compliance with level of effort - maintenance of effort and earmarking requirements. As a result, amounts reported to the oversight agency were not accurately reported. Questioned Costs There were no questioned costs identified. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 44 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish internal controls to ensure Homelessness Reservation and Parental set-aside expenditures are monitored throughout the period of performance to ensure earmarking compliance requirements are met before expiration of the grant. Supporting documentation for these expenditures should be maintained. In addition, proper recordkeeping should be maintained to ensure compliance and comply with the grant agreement and the Matching, Level of Effort, Earmarking compliance requirement. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FINDING 2024-015 Subject: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund Assistance Listings Number: 84.425D Federal Award Numbers and Years (or Other Identifying Numbers): S425D200013, S425D210013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles 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 2022-018. Condition and Context The School Corporation had not properly implemented a system of internal controls that would likely be effective in preventing, or detecting and correcting, noncompliance. Vendor Disbursements Per inquiry with the School Corporation, one employee prepares the reimbursement requests, and another employee reviews the requests to ensure all costs are correct and allowable before giving their approval. A total of 60 claims were sampled for audit. Of the 30 vendor claims tested, there were 3 claims, totaling $2,563, that had no supporting documentation provided to determine if they were an allowable cost nor did they provide support of review and approval of the expenditure. Payroll Disbursements The School Corporation had established internal controls that all payroll is approved by the Treasurer and the School Board. However, during the audit, the School Corporation was unable to provide supporting documentation to show where the governing board approved the rate or pay or stipend amount for 2 of the payrolls selected for testing of $341 in order to determine if the costs were allowable. 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). . . ." INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 49 NORTH LAWRENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 2 CFR 200.334 states in part: "Financial records, supporting documents, statistical records, and all other non-Federal entity records pertinent to a Federal award must be retained for a period of three years from the date of submission of the final expenditure report or, for the Federal awards that are renewed quarterly or annual, from the date of submission of the quarterly or annual financial report, respectively, as reported to the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity in the case of a subrecipient. . . ." 2 CFR 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. . . . (g) Be adequately documented. . . ." Cause Due to turnover in staff, supporting documentation could not be located to support for some expenditures paid from the COVID-19 - Education Stabilization Fund during the audit period. Effect The failure to establish an effective system of internal controls could have enabled noncompliance with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. Questioned Costs We identified $2,904 in known questioned costs as noted above in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that the School Corporation's management establish a system of internal controls to ensure supporting documentation is maintained and available for audit to ensure compliance with the grant agreement and the Activities Allowed or Unallowed and the Allowable Costs/Cost Principles compliance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
FA 2024-002 Strengthen Controls over Journal Entries Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Internal Control Impact: Material Weakness Compliance Impact: Material Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 10.553 – School Breakfast Program 10.555 – National School Lunch Program COVID-19 – 10.555 – National School Lunch Program Federal Award Numbers: 245GA32N1199 (Year: 2024), 225GA324N1099 (Year: 2024) Questioned Costs: Unknown Description: The policies and procedures of the School District were insufficient to ensure that journal entries made for the Child Nutrition Cluster were properly documented. Background Information: The Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) is comprised of various programs that are intended to assist states in administering and overseeing food service program operators that provide healthful, nutritious meals to eligible children in public and non-profit private schools, residential childcare institutions, and summer programs. This Cluster of programs also fosters healthy eating habits in children by providing fresh fruits and fresh vegetables to children attending elementary and secondary schools and encourages the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities. CNC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the various CNC programs. CNC funds totaling $2,692,854.62 were expended and reported on the Monroe County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 – Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that “costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity… (g) Be adequately documented…” In addition, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.404 – Reasonable Costs state that “a cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the cost. The question of reasonableness is particularly important when the non-Federal entity is predominantly federally-funded. In determining reasonableness of a given cost, consideration must be given to: (a) Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the operation of the non-Federal entity or the proper and efficient performance of the Federal award. (b) The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as: sound business practices; arm’s-length bargaining; Federal, state, local, tribal, and other laws and regulations; and terms and conditions of the Federal award… (d) Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the circumstances considering their responsibilities to the non-Federal entity, its employees, where applicable its students or membership, the public at large, and the Federal Government. (e) Whether the non-Federal entity significantly deviates from its established practices and policies regarding the incurrence of costs, which may unjustifiably increase the Federal award’s cost.” Furthermore, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.1 state “Improper payment means: (1) Any payment that should not have been made or that was made in an incorrect amount under statutory, contractual, administrative, or other legally applicable requirements. (v) The term ‘‘payment’’ in this definition means any disbursement or transfer of Federal funds (including a commitment for future payment, such as cash, securities, loans, loan guarantees, and insurance subsidies) to any non-Federal person, non-Federal entity, or Federal employee, that is made by a Federal agency, a Federal contractor, a Federal grantee, or a governmental or other organization administering a Federal program or activity.” Lastly, provisions included in Title 34 CFR Section 210.14(a) state that “school food authorities shall maintain a nonprofit school food service. Revenues received by the nonprofit school food service are to be used only for the operation or improvement of such food service, except that, such revenues shall not be used to purchase land or buildings, unless otherwise approved… FNS, or to construct buildings.” Condition: Auditors performed a review of transfer activity associated with CNC to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. This testing revealed that journal entries utilized to transfer cash totaling $6,000,000 from the School Nutrition Fund to the General Fund were not properly supported by adequate documentation. Questioned Costs: Though questioned costs may exist, these amounts are unknown as adequate documentation to support the transfer of $6,000,000 in cash was not maintained. Cause: The School District transferred funds from the School Nutrition Fund to the General Fund in an attempt to reimburse the General Fund for several years’ worth of salary payments made on behalf of the School Food Service program; however, adequate documentation was not maintained due to oversight. Effect or Potential Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance or GaDOE guidance related to the CNC programs. Failure to ensure that appropriate policies and procedures are followed when managing federal funds may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with unallowable transfers. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to School Nutrition Fund journal entries. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all journal entries, including transfers, are supported by adequate documentation. In addition, the transfer of cash associated with salary reimbursements should be made on a more timely basis and supported by payroll data. Furthermore, the School District should implement a monitoring process to ensure that all journal entry activity is compliant with the School District’s policies and procedures. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
FA 2024-003 Strengthen Controls over Expenditures Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Internal Control Impact: Significant Deficiency Compliance Impact: Nonmaterial Noncompliance Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture Pass-Through Entity: Georgia Department of Education AL Numbers and Titles: 10.553 – School Breakfast Program 10.555 – National School Lunch Program COVID-19 – 10.555 – National School Lunch Program Federal Award Numbers: 245GA32N1199 (Year: 2024), 225GA324N1099 (Year: 2024) Questioned Costs: $2,641.33 Description: A review of expenditures charged to the Child Nutrition Cluster revealed that the School District’s internal control procedures were not operating to ensure that expenditures were appropriately reviewed, approved, and documented. Background Information: The Child Nutrition Cluster (CNC) is comprised of various programs that are intended to assist states in administering and overseeing food service program operators that provide healthful, nutritious meals to eligible children in public and non-profit private schools, residential childcare institutions, and summer programs. This Cluster of programs also fosters healthy eating habits in children by providing fresh fruits and fresh vegetables to children attending elementary and secondary schools and encourages the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities. CNC funding was granted to the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. GaDOE is responsible for distributing funds to local educational agencies (LEAs) and overseeing the various CNC programs. CNC funds totaling $2,692,854.62 were expended and reported on the Monroe County Board of Education’s Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA) for fiscal year 2024. Criteria: As a recipient of federal awards, the School District is required to establish and maintain effective internal control over federal awards that provides reasonable assurance of managing the federal awards in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal awards pursuant to Title 2 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance), Section 200.303 – Internal Controls. Additionally, provisions included in the Uniform Guidance, Section 200.403 – Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs state that “costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items, (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non- Federal entity… (g) Be adequately documented…” Condition: A sample of 60 expenditures was randomly selected for testing using a non-statistical sampling approach. These expenditures were reviewed to determine if appropriate internal controls were implemented and applicable compliance requirements were met. Three voucher packages could not be located by the entity for review. Questioned Costs: Upon testing a sample of $70,823.01 in nonpersonal services expenditures, known questioned costs of $2,641.33 were identified. Using the total population amount of $1,574,361.98, we project the likely questioned costs to be approximately $58,715.52. The following Assistance Listing Numbers were affected by known and likely questioned costs: 10.553 and 10.555. Cause: Due to staffing shortages during the fiscal year under review, documentation was not properly maintained by entity personnel. Effect or Potential Effect: The School District is not in compliance with the Uniform Guidance or ED guidance related to the CNC programs. Failure to ensure that appropriate documentation exists to support the allowability of payments from the CNC fund may expose the School District to unnecessary financial strains and shortages as GaDOE may require the School District to return funds associated with improperly documented expenditures. Recommendation: The School District should review current internal control procedures related to CNC expenditures. Where vulnerable, the School District should develop and/or modify its policies and procedures to ensure that all expenditure voucher packages are maintained on-file according to the School District’s record retention policy and contain all required components. Furthermore, management should develop and implement a monitoring process to ensure that controls are operating appropriately. Views of Responsible Officials: We concur with this finding.
Criteria: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Adult and Dislocated Worker funds must be used at the local level to pay for career and training services through the AJC system for program participants. Other activities allowed include basic career services, individualized career services, and training services. Activities allowed under Youth Activities include tutoring, alternative secondary school services, paid and unpaid work experiences, occupational skill training, leadership development, adult mentoring, follow-up services, financial literacy education, and entrepreneurial skills training. 2 CFR 200.403 Factors affecting allowability of costs. Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following criteria to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. (g) Be adequately documented. See §§ 200.300 through 200.309. 2 CFR 200.303 Internal Controls (a) Establish, document, and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the recipient or subrecipient is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should align with the guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control- Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Funds were expended for costs that are not explicitly allowable under the compliance requirements for activities allowed or unallowed including charges for conferences and travel. • Travel and conference expense reimbursements did not establish a clear business purpose or provide other evidence of attendance. Receipts lacked a detailed breakdown of costs charged to the federal award. • Employee reimbursements did not include itemized breakdowns and were not reported on the entity’s Expense Form. • The entity’s policy does not outline the approval requirements for Executive Director expense reimbursements. Cause: Employee expenditures were not reviewed and approved prior to being charged to the federal award program. • The necessary approvals were not obtained prior to incurring costs charged to the federal award program. • The entity’s policy does not explicitly state approvals required for Executive Director expense reimbursements. • Expense Forms were not utilized for employee reimbursements per the entity’s written policy. Effect: Lack of proper approvals and documentation could result in unallowable costs being charged to the federal award, possibly resulting in the entity having to return funds to the federal agency or pass-through entity. This may also lead to reduction of future federal funding due to noncompliance. This also creates an opportunity for fraud to occur. • Unnecessary or unreasonable costs charged to the federal award program. • Possible reduction of future funding or requirement to return funding used for unallowable costs to awarding agency. Questioned Costs: $14,548 Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: We recommend that management review policies over employee travel expenses, conferences, and reimbursements to ensure they align with federal award requirements, are communicated to all employees, and provide necessary training. In addition, we recommend the WIB ensure that all employee reimbursement expenses are reviewed and approved prior to being incurred, approvals are obtained by an appropriate level of management or those charged with governance and are sufficiently documented.
Reference Number: 2024-011 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Defense State Agency: Military Department Federal Program: National Guard Military Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Projects Assistance Listing Number: 12.401 Award Number and Year: W912K6-24-2 (10/1/2023 – 9/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance, Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Military Department (Department) charged costs to the federal grant prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. The expenditures were incurred from six to twenty-three days prior to the start of the award period. Context: Two of forty transactions selected for testing were incurred prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. Cause: The Department’s procedures were not operating sufficiently to ensure that expenditures charged to the program were incurred within the awards’ period of performance. Internal controls did not prevent or detect the errors. Effect: Costs could be deemed unallowable by the awarding agency if funds are expended outside of the allowable period of performance. Questioned costs: $ 4,699, which represents the total of the expenditures incurred prior to the awards’ period of performance. Recommendation: The Department should review and enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it charges expenditures to the program that are incurred within an award’s allowable period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2024-020 Prior Year Finding: 2023-012 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education State Agency Name: Bowie State University (BSU) Federal Program: Higher Education Institutional Aid Assistance Listing Number: 84.031B, 84.031E, 84.031K Award Number and Year: P031B220039(10/1/2022-9/30/2024), P031E200007 (10/1/2022-9/30/2024), P031K190021 (10/1/2022-9/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Allowable Activities/Costs Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: Per 2 CFR § 200.403, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award to be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award regarding types or amount of cost items. (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity. (d) Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. (e) Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except for state and local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. (f) Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. See also §200.306 Cost sharing or matching paragraph (b). (g) Be adequately documented. See also §200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance of this part. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should 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). Condition: Time and Effort documentation was not documented and reviewed timely. Questioned costs: None. Context: For all seventeen samples selected for testing, Time and Effort was not documented in a timely manner or reviewed appropriately. Cause: The Institution’s internal controls were not operating effectively to ensure that time and effort reporting was performed and documented in a timely manner in accordance with federal requirements. Effect: Expenditures may be incorrectly charged to the program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Institution strengthen its internal controls to ensure that Time and Effort is documented, and expenditures are reviewed and adjusted for, if necessary, in a timely manner. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Reference Number: 2024-021 Prior Year Finding: 2023-013 Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education State Agency Name: Coppin State University (CSU) Federal Program: Higher Education Institutional Aid Assistance Listing Number: 84.031B, 84.031E Award Number and Year: P031B170054(10/1/2021-9/30/2024), P031B220065(10/1/2022-9/30/2024), P031E200078 (10/1/2022-9/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Allowable Activities/Costs Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: Per 2 CFR § 200.403, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria to be allowable under Federal awards: (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award to be allocable thereto under these principles. (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award regarding types or amount of cost items. (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity. (d) Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. (e) Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except for state and local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. (f) Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. See also §200.306 Cost sharing or matching paragraph (b). (g) Be adequately documented. See also §§200.300 Statutory and national policy requirements through 200.309 Period of performance of this part. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should 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). Condition: Coppin State University (Institution) did not adjust the employee’s payroll costs to reflect the reported effort. We noted that the actual time and effort charged to the grant did not agree to the time and effort report. Questioned costs: $45 Context: For one out of ten samples selected for testing, the payroll calculation did not agree to the employee's time and effort report. Cause: The Institution’s internal controls were not operating effectively to ensure that time and effort reporting was accurate and agreed with supporting documentation. Effect: Expenditures may be incorrectly charged to the program. Recommendation: We recommend that the Institution strengthen its internal controls to ensure that Time and Effort is documented, expenditures are reviewed and adjusted for, if necessary, in a timely manner. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
Reference Number: 2024-023 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Education State Agency: Department of Education Federal Program: Special Education Cluster (IDEA) Assistance Listing Number: 84.027, 84.173 Award Number and Year: H027A230035 (7/1/2023 – 9/30/2024) H173A230089 (7/1/2023 – 9/30/2024) Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Department of Education (Department) charged costs to the federal grant prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. We noted that five of the seven exceptions were incurred from 213 to 92 days prior to the beginning of the period of performance. Context: Seven of eleven transactions selected for testing were incurred prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. Cause: The Department’s procedures were not operating sufficiently to ensure that expenditures charged to the program were incurred within the awards’ period of performance. Internal controls did not prevent or detect the errors. Effect: Costs could be deemed unallowable by the awarding agency if funds are expended outside of the allowable period of performance. Questioned costs: $4,411, which represents the total of the expenditures incurred prior to the awards’ period of performance. Recommendation: The Department should review and enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it charges expenditures to the program that are incurred within an award’s allowable period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Reference Number: 2024-025 Prior Year Finding: No Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services State Agency: Department of Human Services Federal Program: Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program Assistance Listing Number: 93.568 Award Number and Year: 2401MDLIEA (10/1/2023-9/30/2025) Compliance Requirement: Period of Performance Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control Over Compliance, Material Noncompliance Criteria or specific requirement: Compliance: A non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). A period of performance may contain one or more budget periods. Internal Control: Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-Federal entity must: Establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should comply with guidance in “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the “Internal Control Integrated Framework”, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Condition: The Department of Human Services (Department) charged costs to the federal grant prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. The expenditures were incurred from one to twenty-six days prior to the start of the award period. Context: Seventeen of forty transactions selected for testing were incurred prior to the allowable start of the period of performance. Cause: The Department’s procedures were not operating sufficiently to ensure that expenditures charged to the program were incurred within the awards’ period of performance. Internal controls did not prevent or detect the errors. Effect: Costs could be deemed unallowable by the awarding agency if funds are expended outside of the allowable period of performance. Questioned costs: $778,473, which represents the total of the expenditures incurred prior to the awards’ period of performance. Recommendation: The Department should review and enhance its procedures and internal controls to ensure that it charges expenditures to the program that are incurred within an award’s allowable period of performance. Views of responsible officials: Management agrees with the finding.
Health Center Program Cluster – Assistance Listing Nos. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. 6 H80CS00751-22-03, April 1, 2023 – March 31, 2024 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089‐01‐03, April 1, 2021 – March 31, 2024 Community Health Center Program – State Identifying No. 435.151301 Wisconsin Department of Health Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90, July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 Agreement No. 435100-G23-3919588107-390, July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 Criteria or Specific Requirement – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Federal: 45 CFR 75.403. State: Wisconsin Department of Health Services Allowable Cost Policy Manual (ACPM) and 2 CFR 200.403. Condition – Costs were included as a cost on more than one federal and/or state award program in the current period. Questioned Costs – Federal: $88,199. State: $4,792. Questioned costs were determined by identifying all employees who appeared on more than one grant expenditure listing and reviewing the specific payroll periods charged to each award for duplicates. Questioned costs by federal award identification number are: • Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-390 - $2,056 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90 – $2,736 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6H80CS00751 and Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 – $83,407 Context – Salaries and wages for two employees of the Organization were identified as being charged to both Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and 6 H8FCS41089 within the Health Center Program Cluster (HCP) for five to seven months during the fiscal year. For two other employees, salaries and wages were identified as being charged to both the Wisconsin Department of Health Community Health Center Program (CHCG) and one of the awards in the HCP, but instances were limited to only certain payroll periods. Effect – The Organization charged payroll expenditures to more than one funding stream within the HCP and CHCG grant awards. Cause – Salaries and wages are charged to federal and state awards through separate manual tracking spreadsheets, which link back to payroll supporting documentation summarized monthly based on pay date. The Organization’s internal controls intended to prevent charging amounts to more than one award includes a separate spreadsheet listing all employees and identifying the budgeted percentage of salaries and wages associated with each federal and state awards. The system was not accurately updated to reflect changes throughout the year or monitored when the Organization prepared “catch-up” drawdowns after-the-fact to justify use of remaining available grant funds. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding Recommendation – The Organization should consolidate tracking of salaries and wages charged to federal and state awards into a single listing for each payroll period rather than separate spreadsheets based on summarized monthly payroll data. The Organization should support the distribution of employees’ salaries and wages amongst federal and state awards to accurately reflect the work performed through the timekeeping system and payroll records. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Upon identification of costs allocated to more than one grant, the Organization identified allowable costs previously charged to program income and reallocated the duplicated expenditures without creating other instances of noncompliance (such as cash management or period of performance). Although the initial support provided to auditors contained instances of expenditures charged to more than one grant, expenditure justification has been updated to reflect corrections and all subsequent grant expenditure detail has been reviewed to ensure no recurrence in the subsequent period. The Organization has also reviewed our internal processes to capture all salaries supported by grants accurately and timely. Additional internal controls such as limiting the number of grants an employee can be on at one time and the reduction of more catch-up drawdowns to account for staffing changes within the organization were implemented. We are also working with our accounting software vendor and payroll vendor to automate the allocation of grant salaries based on time and effort of each individual rather than after-the-fact allocations to grants. This will reduce the need to maintain manual spreadsheets to track staff and essentially eliminate the risk of charging expenditures to more than one grant. Further, relevant staff participated in a training focused on CHC grants management matters in December 2024 and will continue to look for learning opportunities to support and challenge compliance matters.
Health Center Program Cluster – Assistance Listing Nos. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. 6 H80CS00751-22-03, April 1, 2023 – March 31, 2024 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089‐01‐03, April 1, 2021 – March 31, 2024 Community Health Center Program – State Identifying No. 435.151301 Wisconsin Department of Health Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90, July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 Agreement No. 435100-G23-3919588107-390, July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 Criteria or Specific Requirement – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Federal: 45 CFR 75.403. State: Wisconsin Department of Health Services Allowable Cost Policy Manual (ACPM) and 2 CFR 200.403. Condition – Costs were included as a cost on more than one federal and/or state award program in the current period. Questioned Costs – Federal: $88,199. State: $4,792. Questioned costs were determined by identifying all employees who appeared on more than one grant expenditure listing and reviewing the specific payroll periods charged to each award for duplicates. Questioned costs by federal award identification number are: • Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-390 - $2,056 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90 – $2,736 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6H80CS00751 and Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 – $83,407 Context – Salaries and wages for two employees of the Organization were identified as being charged to both Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and 6 H8FCS41089 within the Health Center Program Cluster (HCP) for five to seven months during the fiscal year. For two other employees, salaries and wages were identified as being charged to both the Wisconsin Department of Health Community Health Center Program (CHCG) and one of the awards in the HCP, but instances were limited to only certain payroll periods. Effect – The Organization charged payroll expenditures to more than one funding stream within the HCP and CHCG grant awards. Cause – Salaries and wages are charged to federal and state awards through separate manual tracking spreadsheets, which link back to payroll supporting documentation summarized monthly based on pay date. The Organization’s internal controls intended to prevent charging amounts to more than one award includes a separate spreadsheet listing all employees and identifying the budgeted percentage of salaries and wages associated with each federal and state awards. The system was not accurately updated to reflect changes throughout the year or monitored when the Organization prepared “catch-up” drawdowns after-the-fact to justify use of remaining available grant funds. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding Recommendation – The Organization should consolidate tracking of salaries and wages charged to federal and state awards into a single listing for each payroll period rather than separate spreadsheets based on summarized monthly payroll data. The Organization should support the distribution of employees’ salaries and wages amongst federal and state awards to accurately reflect the work performed through the timekeeping system and payroll records. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Upon identification of costs allocated to more than one grant, the Organization identified allowable costs previously charged to program income and reallocated the duplicated expenditures without creating other instances of noncompliance (such as cash management or period of performance). Although the initial support provided to auditors contained instances of expenditures charged to more than one grant, expenditure justification has been updated to reflect corrections and all subsequent grant expenditure detail has been reviewed to ensure no recurrence in the subsequent period. The Organization has also reviewed our internal processes to capture all salaries supported by grants accurately and timely. Additional internal controls such as limiting the number of grants an employee can be on at one time and the reduction of more catch-up drawdowns to account for staffing changes within the organization were implemented. We are also working with our accounting software vendor and payroll vendor to automate the allocation of grant salaries based on time and effort of each individual rather than after-the-fact allocations to grants. This will reduce the need to maintain manual spreadsheets to track staff and essentially eliminate the risk of charging expenditures to more than one grant. Further, relevant staff participated in a training focused on CHC grants management matters in December 2024 and will continue to look for learning opportunities to support and challenge compliance matters.
Health Center Program Cluster – Assistance Listing Nos. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. 6 H80CS00751-22-03, April 1, 2023 – March 31, 2024 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089‐01‐03, April 1, 2021 – March 31, 2024 Community Health Center Program – State Identifying No. 435.151301 Wisconsin Department of Health Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90, July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 Agreement No. 435100-G23-3919588107-390, July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 Criteria or Specific Requirement – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Federal: 45 CFR 75.403. State: Wisconsin Department of Health Services Allowable Cost Policy Manual (ACPM) and 2 CFR 200.403. Condition – Costs were included as a cost on more than one federal and/or state award program in the current period. Questioned Costs – Federal: $88,199. State: $4,792. Questioned costs were determined by identifying all employees who appeared on more than one grant expenditure listing and reviewing the specific payroll periods charged to each award for duplicates. Questioned costs by federal award identification number are: • Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-390 - $2,056 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90 – $2,736 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6H80CS00751 and Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 – $83,407 Context – Salaries and wages for two employees of the Organization were identified as being charged to both Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and 6 H8FCS41089 within the Health Center Program Cluster (HCP) for five to seven months during the fiscal year. For two other employees, salaries and wages were identified as being charged to both the Wisconsin Department of Health Community Health Center Program (CHCG) and one of the awards in the HCP, but instances were limited to only certain payroll periods. Effect – The Organization charged payroll expenditures to more than one funding stream within the HCP and CHCG grant awards. Cause – Salaries and wages are charged to federal and state awards through separate manual tracking spreadsheets, which link back to payroll supporting documentation summarized monthly based on pay date. The Organization’s internal controls intended to prevent charging amounts to more than one award includes a separate spreadsheet listing all employees and identifying the budgeted percentage of salaries and wages associated with each federal and state awards. The system was not accurately updated to reflect changes throughout the year or monitored when the Organization prepared “catch-up” drawdowns after-the-fact to justify use of remaining available grant funds. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding Recommendation – The Organization should consolidate tracking of salaries and wages charged to federal and state awards into a single listing for each payroll period rather than separate spreadsheets based on summarized monthly payroll data. The Organization should support the distribution of employees’ salaries and wages amongst federal and state awards to accurately reflect the work performed through the timekeeping system and payroll records. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Upon identification of costs allocated to more than one grant, the Organization identified allowable costs previously charged to program income and reallocated the duplicated expenditures without creating other instances of noncompliance (such as cash management or period of performance). Although the initial support provided to auditors contained instances of expenditures charged to more than one grant, expenditure justification has been updated to reflect corrections and all subsequent grant expenditure detail has been reviewed to ensure no recurrence in the subsequent period. The Organization has also reviewed our internal processes to capture all salaries supported by grants accurately and timely. Additional internal controls such as limiting the number of grants an employee can be on at one time and the reduction of more catch-up drawdowns to account for staffing changes within the organization were implemented. We are also working with our accounting software vendor and payroll vendor to automate the allocation of grant salaries based on time and effort of each individual rather than after-the-fact allocations to grants. This will reduce the need to maintain manual spreadsheets to track staff and essentially eliminate the risk of charging expenditures to more than one grant. Further, relevant staff participated in a training focused on CHC grants management matters in December 2024 and will continue to look for learning opportunities to support and challenge compliance matters.
Health Center Program Cluster – Assistance Listing Nos. 93.224 and 93.527 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Award No. 6 H80CS00751-22-03, April 1, 2023 – March 31, 2024 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089‐01‐03, April 1, 2021 – March 31, 2024 Community Health Center Program – State Identifying No. 435.151301 Wisconsin Department of Health Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90, July 1, 2023 – June 30, 2024 Agreement No. 435100-G23-3919588107-390, July 1, 2022 – June 30, 2023 Criteria or Specific Requirement – Allowable Costs/Cost Principles – Federal: 45 CFR 75.403. State: Wisconsin Department of Health Services Allowable Cost Policy Manual (ACPM) and 2 CFR 200.403. Condition – Costs were included as a cost on more than one federal and/or state award program in the current period. Questioned Costs – Federal: $88,199. State: $4,792. Questioned costs were determined by identifying all employees who appeared on more than one grant expenditure listing and reviewing the specific payroll periods charged to each award for duplicates. Questioned costs by federal award identification number are: • Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-390 - $2,056 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and Agreement No. 435100-G24-3919588107-90 – $2,736 • Assistance Listing No. 93.527 Award No. 6H80CS00751 and Assistance Listing No. 93.224 Award No. 6 H8FCS41089 – $83,407 Context – Salaries and wages for two employees of the Organization were identified as being charged to both Award No. 6 H80CS00751 and 6 H8FCS41089 within the Health Center Program Cluster (HCP) for five to seven months during the fiscal year. For two other employees, salaries and wages were identified as being charged to both the Wisconsin Department of Health Community Health Center Program (CHCG) and one of the awards in the HCP, but instances were limited to only certain payroll periods. Effect – The Organization charged payroll expenditures to more than one funding stream within the HCP and CHCG grant awards. Cause – Salaries and wages are charged to federal and state awards through separate manual tracking spreadsheets, which link back to payroll supporting documentation summarized monthly based on pay date. The Organization’s internal controls intended to prevent charging amounts to more than one award includes a separate spreadsheet listing all employees and identifying the budgeted percentage of salaries and wages associated with each federal and state awards. The system was not accurately updated to reflect changes throughout the year or monitored when the Organization prepared “catch-up” drawdowns after-the-fact to justify use of remaining available grant funds. Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable – Not a repeat finding Recommendation – The Organization should consolidate tracking of salaries and wages charged to federal and state awards into a single listing for each payroll period rather than separate spreadsheets based on summarized monthly payroll data. The Organization should support the distribution of employees’ salaries and wages amongst federal and state awards to accurately reflect the work performed through the timekeeping system and payroll records. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions – Upon identification of costs allocated to more than one grant, the Organization identified allowable costs previously charged to program income and reallocated the duplicated expenditures without creating other instances of noncompliance (such as cash management or period of performance). Although the initial support provided to auditors contained instances of expenditures charged to more than one grant, expenditure justification has been updated to reflect corrections and all subsequent grant expenditure detail has been reviewed to ensure no recurrence in the subsequent period. The Organization has also reviewed our internal processes to capture all salaries supported by grants accurately and timely. Additional internal controls such as limiting the number of grants an employee can be on at one time and the reduction of more catch-up drawdowns to account for staffing changes within the organization were implemented. We are also working with our accounting software vendor and payroll vendor to automate the allocation of grant salaries based on time and effort of each individual rather than after-the-fact allocations to grants. This will reduce the need to maintain manual spreadsheets to track staff and essentially eliminate the risk of charging expenditures to more than one grant. Further, relevant staff participated in a training focused on CHC grants management matters in December 2024 and will continue to look for learning opportunities to support and challenge compliance matters.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
2024-005 Period of Performance Program Information Federal Organization U.S Department of Health and Human Services Assistance Listing Numbers 93.224 & 93.527 Health Center Program Cluster Award Numbers H80CS00513, H8FCS41684, H8GC48547, H8LCS51197 Criteria [X] Compliance Finding [ ] Significant Deficiency [X] Material Weakness Title 2 CFR 200.403(h) requires that costs be incurred in the approved budget period for the applicable awards and Title 2 CFR 200.403(e) requires that those costs be determined according to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Condition The Organization’s federal expenditures includes costs for goods and/or services outside of the approved budget periods for the awards. Cause The Organization’s internal controls over compliance did not include consideration of when the goods were received or services were performed compared to the budget periods for the awards. Lack of understanding of GAAP and the requirements of accrual basis accounting allowed expenditures outside of the applicable budget periods to be approved and claimed as current federal expenditures based solely on management’s decision to pay for the expenditure in the current year. Effect The Organization may allocate unallowable costs to the federal awards. Questioned Costs $321,877 (of which $283,128 was previously reported in finding 2024-004 above) Context In a sample of sixty invoices, we noted eight included expenditures for goods or services that were not provided in the current budget period. $283,129 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to future budget periods. $38,748 of expenditures charged to the program were for goods or services related to previous budget periods. Recommendation We recommend management personnel authorized to approve expenditures of federal awards be limited to those who have a basic understanding of GAAP and the relationship between the accrual basis of accounting and the period of performance requirements. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective action Management is in agreement with this finding and will take corrective action as outlined below.
Condition: We identified unallowable costs totaling $11,454, comprised of $2,275 of employee meals and $9,179 of investment advisory fees. Criteria: Title 2, CFR, Part 200, Subpart E-Cost Principles, Basic Considerations, section 200.403, Factors Affecting Allowability of Costs, states, in part, that “Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: a) be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award, b) be properly documented showing the business nature of the charge. Cause: Internal controls over reporting compliance requirements were not properly designed and were not placed in operation. Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements of allowable/unallowable costs and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of effective internal controls over compliance with the requirements of laws, statutes, regulations, rules, and provisions of grant agreements applicable to its federal program. Effect: The lack of internal controls and procedures over compliance increases the risk of using federal funds for unallowable costs. Recommendation: We recommend the Agency develop a written policies and procedures manual for allowable/unallowable costs compliance, which should include a checklist detailing all the necessary steps to ensure a proper review of all costs charged to the federal program.
Eligibility and Allowable Costs Material Weakness U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY – FEMA Passed through from United Way Worldwide ALN #: 97.024 Federal Award Identification #: LRO #782600077 Condition: Documentation was not retained to prove eligibility and allowable costs to the program for both rental assistance and utility assistance participants. Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200.403 Questioned Costs: $28,604 Context: Out of 26 tested for eligibility, 11 recipients did not have adequate support to prove eligibility for both rental assistance and utility assistance. Harmony could not locate documentation to support certain participants including the participant's lease and did not maintain proper participant identification on file. Additionally, within the sample selected, there were individuals who received utility assistance; however, Harmony could not locate the utility bill to support the amounts paid on behalf of the participant. Therefore, there was not a way to verify that the utility assistance met the various utility assistance eligibility requirements as outlined in the grant agreement. Lastly, for one rental assistance recipient, the amount of support provided was greater than three months of assistance as limited by the program. Cause: Lack of supporting documentation or not properly retaining documentation to support the eligibility of recipients. Effect: Lack of supporting documentation or not retaining the documentation to support the eligibility causes the funds to become questioned costs. Identification as repeat finding, if applicable: Not applicable. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization periodically review supporting documentation for completed applications to ensure all support is retained. We also recommend implementing enhanced internal controls to verify all support is properly retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan.
Eligibility and Allowable Costs Material Weakness U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY – FEMA Passed through from United Way Worldwide ALN #: 97.024 Federal Award Identification #: LRO #782600077 Condition: Documentation was not retained to prove eligibility and allowable costs to the program for both rental assistance and utility assistance participants. Criteria: 2 CFR Part 200.403 Questioned Costs: $28,604 Context: Out of 26 tested for eligibility, 11 recipients did not have adequate support to prove eligibility for both rental assistance and utility assistance. Harmony could not locate documentation to support certain participants including the participant's lease and did not maintain proper participant identification on file. Additionally, within the sample selected, there were individuals who received utility assistance; however, Harmony could not locate the utility bill to support the amounts paid on behalf of the participant. Therefore, there was not a way to verify that the utility assistance met the various utility assistance eligibility requirements as outlined in the grant agreement. Lastly, for one rental assistance recipient, the amount of support provided was greater than three months of assistance as limited by the program. Cause: Lack of supporting documentation or not properly retaining documentation to support the eligibility of recipients. Effect: Lack of supporting documentation or not retaining the documentation to support the eligibility causes the funds to become questioned costs. Identification as repeat finding, if applicable: Not applicable. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization periodically review supporting documentation for completed applications to ensure all support is retained. We also recommend implementing enhanced internal controls to verify all support is properly retained. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action: Management agrees with the finding. See corrective action plan.
2023 001 Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs/ Cost Principles U.S. Department of Homeland Security: Passed through the State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety: Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) – ALN 97.036 Federal Grant Numbers and Years State of New Jersey pass-through number: UH1WX Project Worksheet #1822 – October 5, 2021 to March 5, 2022 (Application 553330) Statistically Valid Sample: The sample was not intended to be, and was not, a statistically valid sample. Prior Year Findings: None Criteria Compliance – Program Specific The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as part of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, evaluates the eligibility of all costs claimed by the applicant. Not all costs incurred as a result of the incident are eligible. (PAPPG v4) Chapter 4, page(s) 51-54; Chapter 6, page(s) 65 & 93-95. Cost must be: • Directly tied to the performance of eligible work; • Adequately documented (2 CFR section 200.403(g)); • Reduced by all applicable credits, such as insurance proceeds and salvage values (Stafford Act section 312, 42 USC section 5155, and 2 CFR section 200.406); • Authorized and not prohibited under federal, state, territorial, tribal, or local government laws or regulations; • Consistent with applicant’s internal policies, regulations, and procedures that apply uniformly to both federal awards and other activities of the applicant; and • Necessary and reasonable to accomplish the work properly and efficiently (2 CFR section 200.403). 1. Applicant (Force Account) Labor FEMA refers to the applicant’s personnel as “force account.” FEMA reimburses force account labor based on actual hourly rates plus the cost of the employee’s actual fringe benefits. FEMA calculates the fringe benefit cost based on a percentage of the hourly pay rate. Because certain items in a benefit package are not dependent on hours worked (e.g., health insurance), the percentage for overtime is usually different than the percentage for straight-time. Compliance – General Per 2 CFR Section 200.430, charges to federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (ii) Be incorporated into the official records of the non-federal entity; (iii) Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-federal entity, not exceeding 100% of compensated activities; (iv) Encompass federally assisted and all other activities compensated by the non-federal entity on an integrated basis, but may include the use of subsidiary records as defined in the non-federal entity's written policy; (v) Comply with the established accounting policies and practices of the non-federal entity. Internal Control Per 2 CFR section 200.303(a), a non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing the federal award in compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. These internal controls should 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). Condition and Context The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (the “Authority”), through the State of New Jersey, Department of Homeland Security (the State), administers the federal Disaster Grants – Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters) program and is reimbursed for eligible expenditures when a presidentially declared disaster occurs. For the Authority’s force account labor costs, the Authority utilizes manual Daily Worksheets (timesheets) as the official records for time and effort worked during an event by the Authority’s personnel. These timesheets are then entered into the Authority’s information system (PeopleSoft) for review and approval, reconciling back to the information entered on the respective timesheet. For two of forty timesheets selected for testwork, the Authority was unable to provide the timesheets as the official record for the time and effort charged to the federal program. However, the Authority successfully demonstrated through PeopleSoft system that the time and effort charged to the federal program was properly reviewed and approved and reconciled to the amounts of reimbursement requested from the State. Cause The Authority did not maintain and make readily available certain timesheets used as the official record for the time and effort charged to the federal program in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Effect The Authority did not comply with 2 CFR Section 200.430 related to incorporating the physical timesheets into the official records of the Authority. Questioned Costs None as the time and effort amounts charged were determined to be allowable. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority strengthen its processes to ensure that all timesheets for disaster related events that are federally funded are maintained and are made readily available if subject to audit or other inspection in accordance with the Uniform Guidance. Views of Responsible Officials Management agrees with the finding. We are committed to strengthening our processes to ensure that all physical timesheets related to FEMA-declared disaster events are properly maintained and readily accessible. To achieve this, we will implement enhanced procedures and controls to ensure full compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements.
2023-001- Internal Control over Compliance and Compliance with Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs and Cost Principles Information on the Major Federal Program U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Center for Disease Control and Prevention Assistance Listing Number: 93.988 Assistance Listing Name: Cooperative Agreements for State-Based Diabetes Control Programs and Evaluation of Surveillance Systems Grant Award Number(s): 1 NU58DP007372-01-00 Award Period: June 30, 2023 to June 29, 2028 Criteria or Specific Requirement – The Uniform Guidance 2 CFR Section 200.303 requires non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards establish and maintain internal control to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In addition, per 2 CFR Section 200.403, “Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles. b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to types or amount of cost items. c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity. d) Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if any other cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award as an indirect cost. e) Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for state and local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f) Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally- financed program in either the current or a prior period. g) Be adequately documented. h) Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carry forward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to § 200.308(e)(3).” Furthermore, according to the Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200), specifically §200.430(i), “charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated”. The records must also be supported by the approval of an individual with firsthand knowledge of the work performed. Condition - During our audit, within the tested sample of seven timesheets out of a population of twenty-six, three timesheets for employees charged to the federal program did not have proper approval in the system. The lack of signed approval indicates that the timesheets were not reviewed and approved by an individual with knowledge of the work performed, as required under the Uniform Guidance. ADA has documented expenditure policies and procedures. However, the review and approval process did not operate as designed. Cause – ADA did not adhere to its internal policies and procedures to ensure timesheets were properly reviewed and approved. Effect or Potential Effect – Without adequate internal controls in place to ensure costs are properly verified and approved, ADA could unallowably and inaccurately charge salary and wages expenditures to the federal program. Questioned Costs – None Context - This is a condition based on testing of ADA’s compliance. Based on tested samples, we noted four out of seven sampled timesheets were not properly approved in the system. The samples were selected using a non-statistical method. Repeat Finding - This finding is not a repeat finding. Recommendation - BDO recommends that ADA adhere to its documented policies and procedures to ensure all timesheets are reviewed and approved by authorized personnel with knowledge of the work performed. ADA should also provide training to all employees involved in the timesheet preparation and approval process to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements. Views of Responsible Officials: The findings were primarily related to a change that ADA made to the Human Resources Information System. Going forward, ADA will adhere to our documented policies and procedures to ensure all timesheets are reviewed and approved by authorized personnel with knowledge of the work performed. Additionally, we will provide training to all employees involved in the timesheet preparation and approval process to ensure compliance with the Uniform Guidance requirements.
Federal agency: All agencies in the SEFA Assistance Listing Number: See SEFA Award Period: 01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The compliance requirements for Federal Assistance Number 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Programs includes a Period of Performance element. The compliance requirement related to period of performance is that a non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period (also identified as the grant period) of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition: Allocations of indirect costs are performed once during the year-end closing process based on time study data for the entire year, and when program attendance data for programs that are ran for various increments throughout the year is available. The TANF grant period that was tested as a major program was December 2022 – August 2023. As the grant period ended in September, no costs incurred after that date should be considered major program expenditures. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. The questioned costs could be considered those indirect costs considered TANF expenditures that were incurred after August 2023. In addition, because the program attendance is used to allocate costs between programs, program attendance after August 2023 may be inappropriate to be considered when allocating those indirect costs to specific programs. Context: Indirect cost allocations are performed once during the year-end closing process by the auditee. Time studies are performed to allocate indirect costs between supporting and program functions. The indirect costs allocated to the program functions are then allocated between individual programs, including federally funded programs, based on the number of participant hours in each program. The time study and program hours used to allocate indirect costs are based on the entire year and not just the major program grant period. In addition, indirect costs that are allocated are incurred during the entire year and not just the major program grant period. Cause: Time and program participation data used to allocate costs are not consistent with the grant period. In addition, the costs that are allocated are not consistent with the grant period. Effect: The single annual allocation of costs means that costs incurred outside the major program grant/budget period are being allocated to the major program. In addition, allocation base data from outside the grant/budget period is being used as a base for the indirect cost allocation. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the auditee perform indirect cost allocations so that the costs and allocation base align with the grant/budget period. Performing the allocation of indirect costs annually may not create an equitable allocation at the individual program level. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree that the allocation being performed once annually does not create the most equitable allocation of costs between our individual programs. We will perform our indirect cost allocations more periodically during the course of the fiscal year to ensure that more appropriate times studies and applicable participant hours are being utilized to limit the potential of allocating unrelated indirect costs from the year to individual programs, including the federally funded programs.
Federal agency: All agencies in the SEFA Assistance Listing Number: See SEFA Award Period: 01/01/2023 to 12/31/2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance Criteria or Specific Requirement: The compliance requirements for Federal Assistance Number 93.558 – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) State Programs includes a Period of Performance element. The compliance requirement related to period of performance is that a non-federal entity may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period (also identified as the grant period) of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass-through entity (2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)). Condition: Allocations of indirect costs are performed once during the year-end closing process based on time study data for the entire year, and when program attendance data for programs that are ran for various increments throughout the year is available. The TANF grant period that was tested as a major program was December 2022 – August 2023. As the grant period ended in September, no costs incurred after that date should be considered major program expenditures. Questioned Costs: Indeterminable. The questioned costs could be considered those indirect costs considered TANF expenditures that were incurred after August 2023. In addition, because the program attendance is used to allocate costs between programs, program attendance after August 2023 may be inappropriate to be considered when allocating those indirect costs to specific programs. Context: Indirect cost allocations are performed once during the year-end closing process by the auditee. Time studies are performed to allocate indirect costs between supporting and program functions. The indirect costs allocated to the program functions are then allocated between individual programs, including federally funded programs, based on the number of participant hours in each program. The time study and program hours used to allocate indirect costs are based on the entire year and not just the major program grant period. In addition, indirect costs that are allocated are incurred during the entire year and not just the major program grant period. Cause: Time and program participation data used to allocate costs are not consistent with the grant period. In addition, the costs that are allocated are not consistent with the grant period. Effect: The single annual allocation of costs means that costs incurred outside the major program grant/budget period are being allocated to the major program. In addition, allocation base data from outside the grant/budget period is being used as a base for the indirect cost allocation. Repeat Finding: No Auditor’s Recommendation: We recommend the auditee perform indirect cost allocations so that the costs and allocation base align with the grant/budget period. Performing the allocation of indirect costs annually may not create an equitable allocation at the individual program level. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Actions: We agree that the allocation being performed once annually does not create the most equitable allocation of costs between our individual programs. We will perform our indirect cost allocations more periodically during the course of the fiscal year to ensure that more appropriate times studies and applicable participant hours are being utilized to limit the potential of allocating unrelated indirect costs from the year to individual programs, including the federally funded programs.
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 004: Cost Allocation of Fringe Benefits to LSC Grants Federal Agency: Legal Services Corporation (LSC) Federal Program Name: LSC Native American Grant Assistance Listing Number: 09.706060 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 09-706060 - 2023 Award Period: January 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023 Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (45 CFR 1630.5 and 2 CFR 200.403) state that expenditures are allowable under an LSC (or federal) grant or contract only if the recipient can demonstrate that the cost was consistent with accounting policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Condition: During our testing we noted that 100% of medical insurance for a specific location was allocated to the grant. However, we noted that medical insurance for other pay periods and locations were allocated on a trimester basis using an allocation base of total grant hours for the period divided by total general fund hours. As such, the fringe benefit cost mentioned above was allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant fringe benefit costs was not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort. However, management noted that these costs were allocated in a manner to comply with 45 CFR 1630.5(g) which allows LSC award recipients to allocate proportional share of another funding source’s share of an indirect cost to LSC funds. Questioned costs: None. Context: This single instance was noted during testing of 26 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual expense data. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments in the Organization’s employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants in a manner where costs are not applied uniformly to both LSC (or, federal)-funded and non-LSC (of, federal) -funded activities. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations that are calculated in a consistent manner that ensure costs are applied uniformly to respective benefited activities. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that: We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month. Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549. One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that: We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month. Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549. One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
2023 – 009: Cost Allocation of Compensation to Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Grants Federal Agency: Department of Treasury Federal Program Name: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery, Various – See SEFA Assistance Listing Number: 21.027 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Agency: Various – See SEFA Pass-Through Numbers: Various – See SEFA Award Period: Various – see SEFA Type of Finding: Material Weakness in Internal Control over Compliance Other Matters Criteria or specific requirement: Federal regulations (CFR 200.403), state that allowable costs must be consistent with policies and procedures of federal award recipients that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and other activities of the Organization. It also states that costs must be adequately documented. Condition: During our testing, we noted that: We were unable to view evidence for one allocation of $23 of medical insurance expenses for one employee related to one month. Three allocations of medical and dental insurance expenses totaling $1,903 were allocated using the percentage of total grant hours of the period instead of the percentage of total grant salary expense, which was the base used for other similar benefit expense allocations. We were unable to view support of the allocation based on total grant hours for the period. These amounts appeared to be under allocated by $549. One salary allocation of $848 appeared to be under allocated by $1,689 when compared to time and effort records and compensation information. We were unable to see evidence that supported the allocation. As such, the salary costs and fringe mentioned above were allocated in an inconsistent manner to other grant payroll costs were not fully representative of the employees’ time and effort and benefit obtained by grant from the allocated cost. Questioned costs: $23 of allocated medical insurance expense described above, which is related to Assistance Listing Number 21.027 and the Eviction Clinic grant passed through from Arapahoe County. Context: These six instances were noting during testing of 47 payroll and payroll-related disbursements. Cause: The Organization’s salary, wage and employee benefit cost allocation methodology is primarily based on time and effort records and a periodic calculation of grant hours versus general fund hours multiplied by period costs, but it often includes manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data. Management also sometimes allocates employee benefit expense using a base of total grant salary expense for a period when compared to total salary expense for the same period. Therefore, the methodology is challenging to apply consistently, document contemporaneously, and apply in accordance with federal regulations. Effect: The inclusion of frequent manual adjustments and varying allocation bases in the Organization’s salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology could cause costs to be allocated to grants that are not reflective of the time and effort spent on grant activities nor compensation paid to employees during relevant work periods. It would also lead to challenges in maintaining sufficient supporting documentation of such cost allocations. Repeat Finding: This is not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend that the Organization consider updating its salaries, wages, and employee benefit cost allocation methodology and process to reduce the frequency of manual adjustments based on review of individual time records and expense data and maximize the use of automated allocations based on employees’ time and effort records, effective compensation during work periods, and that are calculated in a consistent manner. We also recommend that the Organization maintain contemporaneous documentation supporting all cost allocations. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding
ACTIVITIES ALLOWED OR UNALLOWED AND ALLOWABLE COSTS/COST PRINCIPLES Significant Deficiency in Internal Control Over Compliance and Noncompliance ALN 93.391 – Activities to Support State, Tribal, Local and Territorial (STLT) Health Department Response to Public Health or Healthcare Crises Department of Health and Human Services Award Number: NH75OT0000010 Award Year: 2021 Criteria or Specific Requirement: The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.303, Internal Controls, requires that non-Federal entities receiving Federal awards (i.e., auditee management) establish and maintain internal controls designed to reasonably ensure compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. The Uniform Guidance in 2 CFR Section 200.403(g) states that for costs to be allowable under Federal awards, they must be adequately documented. Condition: Controls in place at the City’s Department of Public Health and Environment (DDPHE) were not effective in preventing incorrect expenditures from being charged to the grant. There was one instance where the existence of a control failed to detect an error within an invoice selected, which resulted in an overpayment to the subrecipient. Cause: Personnel reviewing expenditures did not adequately review to ensure invoices were correct prior to payment. Effect or Potential Effect: An invoice to a subrecipient was overpaid. Questioned Costs: $431 Context: BDO selected a sample of 20 expenditures totaling to $216,560 from a population of 162 expenditures totaling to $625,782. There was one expenditure in the amount of $4,101 that was overpaid. The compliance sample was expanded, and another 12 expenditures were selected totaling to $29,975. There were no additional compliance deviations noted. This is a condition identified per review of the City’s compliance with specified requirements using a sample that was not statistically valid. Identification as a Repeat Finding: N/A Recommendation: DDPHE should improve existing review controls to ensure the mathematical accuracy of invoices has been checked, especially with respect to payments to subrecipients. Payroll and other costs reported on the face of the invoice should agree to supporting payroll documentation received. Views of Responsible Officials: The City agrees with the finding. DDPHE will implement additional trainings and is encouraging a standard template in Excel to avoid calculation errors. For additional information, see the City’s separate report for planned corrective actions.
Section II – Financial Statement FindingsFinding 2023-001 Significant Deficiency in Internal Controls and Compliance with major program AIL Number: 93.658 Description: Approval of Credit Card Expenditures Criteria: Title 2, CFR, Part 200, Subpart D – Post Federal Award Requirements, section 200.303, Internal controls. states, in part, that “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…” Title 2, CFR, Part 200, Subpart E - Cost Principles, Basic Considerations, section 200.403, Factors affecting allowability of costs. states, in part, that “Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: (g) Be adequately documented.” Condition: In our testing we were unable to verify that credit card transactions were tied out to source documents and approval to ensure allowable costs under Uniform Guidance. Cause: Management is not following their policies to reconciling credit card charges to underlying source documents and document approval prior to payments made. Effect: By not reviewing and approving credit card transactions there is a heightened risk of unallowable costs and fraudulent charges. Recommendation: We recommend that management improve internal controls around credit card expenditures by reviewing credit card transactions and underlying receipts and approving prior to payment. Management’s Response: Management’s response to the finding is discussed in the attached Corrective Action Plan. Section III – Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs Finding 2023-001 Significant deficiency in internal control over compliance with major program AIL Number: 93.658 Program Name: Foster Care Title IV-E Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Pass-through Agency: California Department of Social Services Questioned Costs: None Compliance Requirement: Activities Allowed or Unallowed and Allowable Costs, Cost Principles See Finding 2023-01 in Section II above.
FINDING 2023-003 Subject: COVID-19: Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds - Body Camera - Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles, Period of Performance 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): 71391 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Homeland Security Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/ Cost Principles, Period of Performance Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Other Matters INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 17 CITY OF MICHIGAN CITY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Condition and Context The City's Police Department applied for and was awarded a body camera grant from the Indiana Department of Homeland Security (IDHS). The City's Police Department sought reimbursement from the IDHS in October of 2023. An invoice from Utility, dated October 28, 2022, in the amount of $600,000 for body cameras was submitted for the reimbursement. The invoice was originally paid by the City with American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds on April 3, 2023. The City received reimbursement of $61,740 from the IDHS on December 5, 2023, which was receipted into the City's Grant Fund along with the City's local match in the amount of $30,870. The Controller's Office did an adjustment on December 31, 2023, in the amount of $92,610, to reimburse the ARP Coronavirus LF Recovery Fund and decrease the Grant Fund, for the reimbursement of $61,740 and the local share of $30,870. However, per the grant agreement with the IDHS, "If the subrecipient incurs a financial obligation prior to approval of the State, then the subrecipient will be required to reimburse the State for the amount of funds that were not approved." As such, the expenditure was not an allowable activity or allowable cost and was outside of the period of performance due to the City incurring the expense prior to signing the grant agreement with the IDHS on March 3, 2023. The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the purchase noted above. 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 200.403 states in part: "Except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: . . . (c) Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federallyfinanced and other activities of the non-Federal entity. . . . (f) Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federally-financed program in either the current or a prior period. . . ." 2 CFR 200.306(b) states: "For all Federal awards, any shared costs or matching funds and all contributions, including cash and third-party in-kind contributions, must be accepted as part of the non-Federal entity's cost sharing or matching when such contributions meet all of the following criteria: (1) Are verifiable from the non-Federal entity's records; INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 18 CITY OF MICHIGAN CITY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) (2) Are not included as contributions for any other Federal award; (3) Are necessary and reasonable for accomplishment of project or program objectives; (4) Are allowable under subpart E of this part; (5) Are not paid by the Federal Government under another Federal award, except where the Federal statute authorizing a program specifically provides that Federal funds made available for such program can be applied to matching or cost sharing requirements of other Federal programs; (6) Are provided for in the approved budget when required by the Federal awarding agency; and (7) Conform to other provisions of this part, as applicable." The Grant Agreement states in part: "Any purchases made by the Subrecipient that are not authorized by the U.S. Department of the Treasury allowability guidelines, the Subrecipient's Project or State, will not be reimbursed under this grant." "Pre-award costs, as defined in 2 CFR 200.458, may not be paid with funding from this award." 2 CFR 200.458 states: "Pre-award costs are those incurred prior to the effective date of the Federal award or subaward directly pursuant to the negotiation and in anticipation of the Federal award where such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work. Such costs are allowable only to the extent that they would have been allowable if incurred after the date of the Federal award and only with the written approval of the Federal awarding agency. If charged to the award, these costs must be charged to the initial budget period of the award, unless otherwise specified by the Federal awarding agency or pass-through entity." Cause Management had not developed a system of internal controls that would have prevented or detected material noncompliance. The City did not ensure that the policies and procedures in place related to allowable or unallowable activities, allowable costs and cost principles, and period of performance were complied with at the acceptance of the grant from the IDHS. Effect Without the proper implementation of an effectively designed system of internal controls, the internal control system cannot be capable of effectively preventing, or detecting and correcting, material noncompliance. As a result, an invoice that was previously paid with other federal award funds was submitted for reimbursement to another agency. The original invoice was outside of the period of performance and unallowable as related to the award from the IDHS. Furthermore, noncompliance with the provisions of federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award could result in the loss of future federal funding to the City. Questioned Costs We identified $61,740 in questioned costs as noted above in the Condition and Context. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 19 CITY OF MICHIGAN CITY SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) Recommendation We recommended that management of the City establish a proper system of internal controls, including strengthening its policies and procedures to ensure all costs submitted for reimbursement are not already reimbursed by another federal award and are within the period of performance. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report.
Criteria As noted throughout the Uniform Guidance, including Part 2, CFR Part 200.403 notes “Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period.” Condition While performing tests of the Garden’s internal controls over compliance, we noted multiple transactions had occurred after the respective period of performance for the Federal Award had expired. Cause of Condition The Garden has not implemented proper internal control policies to adhere to the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Effect of Condition Noncompliance may impact future funding from Federal awards. Recommendation We recommend the Garden implement proper internal control procedures to track the period of performance for each Federal Award, and ensure costs are only charged to programs during the proper period.
Criteria As noted throughout the Uniform Guidance, including Part 2, CFR Part 200.403 notes “Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period.” Condition While performing tests of the Garden’s internal controls over compliance, we noted multiple transactions had occurred after the respective period of performance for the Federal Award had expired. Cause of Condition The Garden has not implemented proper internal control policies to adhere to the requirements of the Uniform Guidance. Effect of Condition Noncompliance may impact future funding from Federal awards. Recommendation We recommend the Garden implement proper internal control procedures to track the period of performance for each Federal Award, and ensure costs are only charged to programs during the proper period.
Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S Department of Health and Human Services FALN: 93.926 Federal Award Identification Number: H49MC00119‐19‐00 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Department of Human Services Award Year: 2018‐2020 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)), the Organization may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity. Condition: The Organization lacked supporting documentation for non‐payroll expenses. Due to lack of supporting documentation, period of performance could not be verified. Of the sixty (60) nonpayroll transactions examined, ten (10) lacked supporting documentation for review, and 1 expense was for services performed in a prior period. Effect: Management possibly did not expend funds in accordance with the approved detailed lineitem budget and grant agreement and possibly expended funds in the incorrect period of performance. Cause: Expenses including approved invoices and/or supporting documentation were not properly maintained in part due to several changes in personnel within the accounting area and overall limited number of personnel for certain functions and lack of board oversight. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $7,674 and likely questioned costs of $34,117 for Healthy Start. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls be strengthened and processes implemented to ensure all expenses include supporting documentation/invoice indicating period of performance.
Federal Program Information: Funding Agency: U.S Department of Health and Human Services FALN: 93.926 Federal Award Identification Number: H49MC00119‐19‐00 Pass Through Entity: State of Georgia Department of Human Services Award Year: 2018‐2020 Criteria: Under 2 CFR Section 200.303(a), non‐federal entities must establish and maintain effective internal controls to provide reasonable assurance that the entity is managing the federal awards in compliance with statues, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the award. Additionally, under 2 CFR sections 200.308 200.309 and 200.403(h)), the Organization may charge only allowable costs incurred during the approved budget period of a federal award’s period of performance and any costs incurred before the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity made the federal award that were authorized by the federal awarding agency or pass‐through entity. Condition: The Organization lacked supporting documentation for non‐payroll expenses. Due to lack of supporting documentation, period of performance could not be verified. Of the sixty (60) nonpayroll transactions examined, ten (10) lacked supporting documentation for review, and 1 expense was for services performed in a prior period. Effect: Management possibly did not expend funds in accordance with the approved detailed lineitem budget and grant agreement and possibly expended funds in the incorrect period of performance. Cause: Expenses including approved invoices and/or supporting documentation were not properly maintained in part due to several changes in personnel within the accounting area and overall limited number of personnel for certain functions and lack of board oversight. Questioned costs: Known questioned costs of $7,674 and likely questioned costs of $34,117 for Healthy Start. Recommendation: We recommend that internal controls be strengthened and processes implemented to ensure all expenses include supporting documentation/invoice indicating period of performance.
Unallowable Use of Housing Choice Voucher Cluster Programs’ Funds (Material Weakness, Material Non-Compliance) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program (Housing Choice Voucher Cluster) – Assistance Listing No. 14.871, Emergency Housing Voucher Program (Housing Choice Voucher Cluster) – Assistance Listing No. 14.EHV, Grant Period: Year-End December 31, 2023 Criteria The cost principles in 2 CFR Part 200, Sub-part E of the Uniform Guidance describe allowable and unallowable uses of federal award program subsidies. Parts 200.403 and 200.405 prohibit the use of federal award program subsidies to fund expenditures outside of the applicable federal award program. Specifically, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Emergency Housing Voucher Programs’ subsidies and reserves cannot be used to fund expenditures and/or deficits of other federal or non-federal programs, except through allowable Management and Book-keeping Fees. Condition and Perspective During 2023, the Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program advanced $255,941 out of its Program. The Emergency Housing Choice Voucher Program advanced $186,741 out of its Program. Questioned Costs – $255,941 and $186,741 from the Programs. Cause Lack of non-federal funds available to finance non-federal expenditures. Effect Non-compliance with federal Allowable Cost requirements. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority limit advancing funds from the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Emergency Housing Voucher Programs, to allowable Fees only as specified in the Uniform Guidance and applicable HUD literature. Management’s Response The Authority will limit advancing funds from the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Emergency Housing Voucher Programs, to allowable Fees only. The Authority’s Executive Director, Trey George, has assumed the responsibility of executing this corrective action as of November 1, 2024.
Unallowable Use of Housing Choice Voucher Cluster Programs’ Funds (Material Weakness, Material Non-Compliance) Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program (Housing Choice Voucher Cluster) – Assistance Listing No. 14.871, Emergency Housing Voucher Program (Housing Choice Voucher Cluster) – Assistance Listing No. 14.EHV, Grant Period: Year-End December 31, 2023 Criteria The cost principles in 2 CFR Part 200, Sub-part E of the Uniform Guidance describe allowable and unallowable uses of federal award program subsidies. Parts 200.403 and 200.405 prohibit the use of federal award program subsidies to fund expenditures outside of the applicable federal award program. Specifically, the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Emergency Housing Voucher Programs’ subsidies and reserves cannot be used to fund expenditures and/or deficits of other federal or non-federal programs, except through allowable Management and Book-keeping Fees. Condition and Perspective During 2023, the Authority’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program advanced $255,941 out of its Program. The Emergency Housing Choice Voucher Program advanced $186,741 out of its Program. Questioned Costs – $255,941 and $186,741 from the Programs. Cause Lack of non-federal funds available to finance non-federal expenditures. Effect Non-compliance with federal Allowable Cost requirements. Recommendation We recommend that the Authority limit advancing funds from the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Emergency Housing Voucher Programs, to allowable Fees only as specified in the Uniform Guidance and applicable HUD literature. Management’s Response The Authority will limit advancing funds from the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher and Emergency Housing Voucher Programs, to allowable Fees only. The Authority’s Executive Director, Trey George, has assumed the responsibility of executing this corrective action as of November 1, 2024.
Finding 2023-001 - Controls Over Payroll Expenditures (Material Weakness) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.403 establishes principles and standards for determining costs for federal awards carried out through grants, cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements with state and local governments. To be allowable, under federal awards, cost must meet certain criteria: a)Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto underthese principles. b)Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to typesor amount of cost items. c)Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and otheractivities of the non-Federal entity. d)Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if anyother cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award asan indirect cost. e)Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for stateand local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f)Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federallyfinanced program in either the current or a prior period. g)Be adequately documented. h)Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non-Federal Entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonFederal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and terms and conditions of the Federal award. The Corporation should have controls in place to document that salaries and overtime paid with federal funds were allowable. Timecards supporting hours worked should be approved and pay rates reviewed. Condition and Context: A summary of allowable charges for the grant was prepared for submission. Within a sample of 45, we noted that 25 timecards did not have a documented review. Effect: Payroll expenditures could be inaccurately charged to the federal grant. Cause: Management noted that time is tracked in a spreadsheet and is reviewed but formal documentation of review is not maintained. Questioned Costs: None Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: This is a repeat finding. Appeared as finding 2022-002 in the prior report. Recommendation: We recommend the Corporation maintain documented approval of all timecards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-001 - Controls Over Payroll Expenditures (Material Weakness) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.403 establishes principles and standards for determining costs for federal awards carried out through grants, cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements with state and local governments. To be allowable, under federal awards, cost must meet certain criteria: a)Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto underthese principles. b)Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to typesor amount of cost items. c)Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and otheractivities of the non-Federal entity. d)Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if anyother cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award asan indirect cost. e)Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for stateand local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f)Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federallyfinanced program in either the current or a prior period. g)Be adequately documented. h)Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non-Federal Entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonFederal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and terms and conditions of the Federal award. The Corporation should have controls in place to document that salaries and overtime paid with federal funds were allowable. Timecards supporting hours worked should be approved and pay rates reviewed. Condition and Context: A summary of allowable charges for the grant was prepared for submission. Within a sample of 45, we noted that 25 timecards did not have a documented review. Effect: Payroll expenditures could be inaccurately charged to the federal grant. Cause: Management noted that time is tracked in a spreadsheet and is reviewed but formal documentation of review is not maintained. Questioned Costs: None Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: This is a repeat finding. Appeared as finding 2022-002 in the prior report. Recommendation: We recommend the Corporation maintain documented approval of all timecards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-001 - Controls Over Payroll Expenditures (Material Weakness) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.403 establishes principles and standards for determining costs for federal awards carried out through grants, cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements with state and local governments. To be allowable, under federal awards, cost must meet certain criteria: a)Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto underthese principles. b)Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to typesor amount of cost items. c)Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and otheractivities of the non-Federal entity. d)Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if anyother cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award asan indirect cost. e)Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for stateand local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f)Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federallyfinanced program in either the current or a prior period. g)Be adequately documented. h)Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non-Federal Entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonFederal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and terms and conditions of the Federal award. The Corporation should have controls in place to document that salaries and overtime paid with federal funds were allowable. Timecards supporting hours worked should be approved and pay rates reviewed. Condition and Context: A summary of allowable charges for the grant was prepared for submission. Within a sample of 45, we noted that 25 timecards did not have a documented review. Effect: Payroll expenditures could be inaccurately charged to the federal grant. Cause: Management noted that time is tracked in a spreadsheet and is reviewed but formal documentation of review is not maintained. Questioned Costs: None Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: This is a repeat finding. Appeared as finding 2022-002 in the prior report. Recommendation: We recommend the Corporation maintain documented approval of all timecards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.
Finding 2023-001 - Controls Over Payroll Expenditures (Material Weakness) Criteria: 2 CFR 200.403 establishes principles and standards for determining costs for federal awards carried out through grants, cost reimbursement contracts, and other agreements with state and local governments. To be allowable, under federal awards, cost must meet certain criteria: a)Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto underthese principles. b)Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award as to typesor amount of cost items. c)Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally-financed and otheractivities of the non-Federal entity. d)Be accorded consistent treatment. A cost may not be assigned to a Federal award as a direct cost if anyother cost incurred for the same purpose in like circumstances has been allocated to the Federal award asan indirect cost. e)Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), except, for stateand local governments and Indian tribes only, as otherwise provided for in this part. f)Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching requirements of any other federallyfinanced program in either the current or a prior period. g)Be adequately documented. h)Cost must be incurred during the approved budget period. Additionally, 2 CFR 200.303 indicates that non-Federal Entities receiving Federal awards must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the nonFederal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations and terms and conditions of the Federal award. The Corporation should have controls in place to document that salaries and overtime paid with federal funds were allowable. Timecards supporting hours worked should be approved and pay rates reviewed. Condition and Context: A summary of allowable charges for the grant was prepared for submission. Within a sample of 45, we noted that 25 timecards did not have a documented review. Effect: Payroll expenditures could be inaccurately charged to the federal grant. Cause: Management noted that time is tracked in a spreadsheet and is reviewed but formal documentation of review is not maintained. Questioned Costs: None Identification as a repeat finding, if applicable: This is a repeat finding. Appeared as finding 2022-002 in the prior report. Recommendation: We recommend the Corporation maintain documented approval of all timecards. Views of responsible officials and planned corrective actions: Management agrees with the finding and has prepared a corrective action plan.