Condition -The Municipality’s staff could not provide us with the officially prepared and certified reports that supported compliance with the filing or submission of reports and financial information, as required by federal award and regulatory agreements. Likewise, reconciliations were not provided between the information used to prepare the required and submitted reports with the formal information presented and accounted for in the official Municipality’s accounting system. Criteria - The state is required to make an accounting to FEMA of eligible costs. Similarly, the subrecipient must make an accounting to the state. In submitting the accounting, the entity is required to certify that reported costs were incurred in performance of eligible work, that the approved work was completed, that the project in in compliance with the provisions of the FEMA-State Agreement, all grants conditions were met, ant the provisions for that project were made in accordance with the applicable payment provisions. Also, as established in the 2 CFR Section 200.302 (a) of the Uniform Guidance, the non-Federal entity’s financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In addition, 2 CFR Section 200.403, states that otherwise authorized by statue, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity and be adequately documented. Cause - There is a lack of knowledge and training to the personnel assigned to the management and reports preparation, as required by this federal award. Additionally, the Municipality does not have an adequate monitoring and internal control regarding the activity, filing and custody of reports, as required by the federal awards and the pass-through entity, and in a way that documents and supports the compliance with reporting requirements. Effect - The program is exposed to not being in compliance with the Reporting Requirements as established in agreement. Also, the Municipality is exposed to the Grantor questioning the use of funds. Recommendation - We recommend that the staff or department in charge locate and document all required reports that were filed according to the requirements of the grant agreement, including the reconciliation thereof with the official Municipality’s accounting subsidiaries. Also, it is absolutely necessary for the Municipality to design, document, establish and provide the necessary and required training, including guidelines and procedures, to all personnel who work directly or indirectly with the management of these federal funds. Questioned Costs - None
Condition -The Municipality’s staff could not provide us with the officially prepared and certified reports that supported compliance with the filing or submission of reports and financial information, as required by federal award and regulatory agreements. Likewise, reconciliations were not provided between the information used to prepare the required and submitted reports with the formal information presented and accounted for in the official Municipality’s accounting system. Criteria - The state is required to make an accounting to FEMA of eligible costs. Similarly, the subrecipient must make an accounting to the state. In submitting the accounting, the entity is required to certify that reported costs were incurred in performance of eligible work, that the approved work was completed, that the project in in compliance with the provisions of the FEMA-State Agreement, all grants conditions were met, ant the provisions for that project were made in accordance with the applicable payment provisions. Also, as established in the 2 CFR Section 200.302 (a) of the Uniform Guidance, the non-Federal entity’s financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In addition, 2 CFR Section 200.403, states that otherwise authorized by statue, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity and be adequately documented. Cause - There is a lack of knowledge and training to the personnel assigned to the management and reports preparation, as required by this federal award. Additionally, the Municipality does not have an adequate monitoring and internal control regarding the activity, filing and custody of reports, as required by the federal awards and the pass-through entity, and in a way that documents and supports the compliance with reporting requirements. Effect - The program is exposed to not being in compliance with the Reporting Requirements as established in agreement. Also, the Municipality is exposed to the Grantor questioning the use of funds. Recommendation - We recommend that the staff or department in charge locate and document all required reports that were filed according to the requirements of the grant agreement, including the reconciliation thereof with the official Municipality’s accounting subsidiaries. Also, it is absolutely necessary for the Municipality to design, document, establish and provide the necessary and required training, including guidelines and procedures, to all personnel who work directly or indirectly with the management of these federal funds. Questioned Costs - None
Condition -The Municipality’s staff could not provide us with the officially prepared and certified reports that supported compliance with the filing or submission of reports and financial information, as required by federal award and regulatory agreements. Likewise, reconciliations were not provided between the information used to prepare the required and submitted reports with the formal information presented and accounted for in the official Municipality’s accounting system. Criteria - The state is required to make an accounting to FEMA of eligible costs. Similarly, the subrecipient must make an accounting to the state. In submitting the accounting, the entity is required to certify that reported costs were incurred in performance of eligible work, that the approved work was completed, that the project in in compliance with the provisions of the FEMA-State Agreement, all grants conditions were met, ant the provisions for that project were made in accordance with the applicable payment provisions. Also, as established in the 2 CFR Section 200.302 (a) of the Uniform Guidance, the non-Federal entity’s financial management systems, including records documenting compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award, must be sufficient to permit the preparation of reports required by general and program-specific terms and conditions; and the tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds have been used according to the Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. In addition, 2 CFR Section 200.403, states that otherwise authorized by statue, costs must be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles, be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both federally financed and other activities of the non-Federal entity and be adequately documented. Cause - There is a lack of knowledge and training to the personnel assigned to the management and reports preparation, as required by this federal award. Additionally, the Municipality does not have an adequate monitoring and internal control regarding the activity, filing and custody of reports, as required by the federal awards and the pass-through entity, and in a way that documents and supports the compliance with reporting requirements. Effect - The program is exposed to not being in compliance with the Reporting Requirements as established in agreement. Also, the Municipality is exposed to the Grantor questioning the use of funds. Recommendation - We recommend that the staff or department in charge locate and document all required reports that were filed according to the requirements of the grant agreement, including the reconciliation thereof with the official Municipality’s accounting subsidiaries. Also, it is absolutely necessary for the Municipality to design, document, establish and provide the necessary and required training, including guidelines and procedures, to all personnel who work directly or indirectly with the management of these federal funds. Questioned Costs - None
Finding 2023-004 – Period of Performance Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal program title: Block Grants for Community Mental Health Services Assistance Listing Number: 93.958 Pass-Through Agency: Illinois Department of Human Services Pass-Through Number: 45CBB04278; 45CBB03514; 45CBB00648 Award Period: 07/01/2022 – 06/30/2023 Criteria or specific requirement: 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. Condition: Costs outside of the period of performance were charged to the grant. Questioned Costs: $7,253 Context: Four (4) of the sixteen (16) transactions selected for testing. Cause: The Organization did not have a control in place to ensure the proper cut-off of expense charged to federal awards. Effect: The Organization allocated unallowable costs to the federal grant. Repeat Finding: No Recommendation: Management should review and revise its process for allocating costs to federal grants to include additional layers of review related to the cut-off of grant expenditures. Particular attention should be focused on the first and last month of the grant budget period. Views of responsible officials: There is no disagreement with the audit finding.
2023-012 CACFP Subrecipient Reimbursements The BCFNA does not have sufficient controls and procedures to ensure CACFP reimbursements to subrecipients are allowable and supported with sufficient documentation. As a result, significant unallowable and unsupported reimbursements are made without being prevented or detected on a timely basis. The BCFNA administers the CACFP through contracts with child and adult care centers and sponsors of centers (subrecipients) that provide meals to eligible children and adults under their care. The facilities/sponsors determine eligibility of each participant for free or reduced price meals, and are reimbursed at fixed rates for the number and type of meals served. During the year ended June 30, 2023, the BCFNA paid over 750 facilities/sponsors approximately $75 million for meal services. Disbursements to facilities/sponsors represented approximately 98 percent of the program's expenditures. To receive reimbursement for meals provided to eligible participants, CACFP facilities/sponsors submit monthly claims through the CNPWeb (CNP) claim system. The CNP system has edit checks to prevent and detect certain claim errors, such as meal claims that exceed facility/sponsor total enrollment and/or license capacity, or claims for types of meals the facility/sponsor was not approved to serve. Claims that pass the edit checks are reviewed by a BCFNA Public Health Program Associate, while claims that do not pass the edit checks are returned to the facility/sponsor for revision. Facilities/sponsors are not required to provide supporting documentation with their claim. Facilities/sponsors are required to maintain and retain detailed records, including meal count, attendance, enrollment and eligibility determination records, receipts, menus, and other documentation to support meals claimed. BCFNA nutritionists perform periodic monitoring reviews of the facilities/sponsors and disallow costs associated with claim errors identified. These reviews have identified significant issues and claim errors, including some potentially fraudulent activity, and led to over 15 contract terminations in recent years. Since meal reimbursements are made without any supporting documentation, the BCFNA relies on system edit checks and subrecipient monitoring procedures to prevent and detect meal reimbursement claim errors. However, these edits and procedures alone are not sufficient to prevent and detect unallowable and unsupported meal reimbursement claims on a timely basis. The BCFNA has not implemented procedures to review supporting documentation, at least on a test basis, except for testing performed during routine monitoring reviews generally conducted once every 1 to 3 years for each facility/sponsor, and technical assistance reviews performed at the request of the facility/sponsor. Additionally, as noted in finding number 2023-013, weaknesses in the BCFNA monitoring procedures were identified. Our review of documentation supporting a randomly-selected sample of 60 BCFNA monitoring reviews conducted for 58 CACFP facilities/sponsors during the year ended June 30, 2023, noted BCFNA disallowances (overclaims/underclaims) in 41 of 58 (71 percent) reviews for which meal reimbursement claims were tested. Overclaims totaled $50,954 (36 reviews) and underclaims totaled $280 (5 reviews), with a net overclaim of $50,674, or at least 11 percent of claims tested by the BCFNA. Disallowances resulted from various errors including incorrect or unsupported eligibility determinations, meal counts, attendance records, or noncompliance associated with menus and food purchases. The BCFNA adjusted subsequent claims to recoup or reimburse for the identified overclaims/underclaims., Erroneous and unsupported reimbursements represent at least 11 percent of meal reimbursements tested. If similar errors were made on the remaining population of CACFP meal reimbursements totaling approximately $74.6 million, unallowable costs could be significant. Without sufficient controls to ensure the accuracy of facility/sponsor meal reimbursement claims, the BCFNA cannot demonstrate adequate internal controls to ensure CACFP costs are allowable and supported, and the risk of paying unsupported and unallowable claims will continue. Regulation 7 CFR Section 226.7(k) requires the BCFNA to establish procedures for institutions to properly submit claims for reimbursement. Such procedures must include edit checks, including but not limited to, ensuring payments are made only for approved meal types and that the number of meals for which reimbursement is provided does not exceed the product of the total enrollment times operating days times approved meal types. Regulation 2 CFR Section 200.403 provides that costs charged to federal programs should be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the federal award and adequately documented. Furthermore, 2 CFR Section 200.303(a) requires the non-federal entity to "[e]stablish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-federal entity is managing that Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These internal controls should be in compliance with guidance in Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States or the Internal Control Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission." Finding classification This finding is classified as a material weakness in internal control and material noncompliance with the federal activities allowed, allowable costs, and subrecipient monitoring requirements. The noncompliance identified in the finding is material based on the results of our audit sample, which identified at least 11 percent of subrecipient meal reimbursements tested by the BCFNA were not in compliance with federal requirements. The 11 percent error rate exceeds our audit materiality threshold of 4 percent. While the errors identified in the finding were corrected, similar material noncompliance in the remainder of the payments not tested is likely. Our decisions regarding the classification of the internal control deficiencies were made in accordance with AU-C Section 935, Compliance Audits, and the AICPA Audit Guide: Government Auditing Standards and Single Audits (Audit Guide). The Audit Guide provides the following definitions regarding internal control deficiencies: "A deficiency in internal control over compliance exists when the design or operation of a control over compliance does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program on a timely basis." "A material weakness in internal control over compliance is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over compliance, such that there is a reasonable possibility that material noncompliance with a type of compliance requirement of a federal program will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis." "A reasonable possibility exists when the likelihood of the event is either reasonably possible or probable …" Reasonably possible is "[t]he chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less than likely." Probable means "[t]he future event or events are likely to occur." The failure to design and implement adequate controls and procedures to ensure CACFP reimbursements to subrecipients are allowable and supported led to material noncompliance with the applicable requirements. The BCFNA's controls failed to prevent the material noncompliance identified. While the BCFNA's controls detected and corrected the payment errors identified, the detection and correction was not timely, occurring up to 3 years after the payments were made. Also, the detection and correction was limited to only 1 test month per subrecipient without any attempt to identify and correct noncompliance that occurred beyond the test month because, as noted at finding number 2023-013, the BCFNA's controls do not provide for expanded testing when significant errors are identified. Therefore, similar, material noncompliance in the remainder of the payments not tested is likely. Further, because the internal control deficiencies have not been corrected, similar, material noncompliance in future payments is likely. For these reasons, the deficiencies are considered a material weakness. Recommendation The DHSS through the BCFNA strengthen internal controls over meal reimbursements to CACFP facilities/sponsors to ensure costs are allowable and supported. Auditee's Response We disagree with the auditor's finding. Our Corrective Action Plan includes an explanation and specific reasons for our disagreement. Auditor's Comment The DHSS Corrective Action Plan (CAP) states the DHSS disagrees with the State Auditor's Office (SAO) finding; and believes BCFNA controls over meal reimbursements are strong, the BCFNA is in full compliance with all requirements, and no corrective action is needed. However, in making these statements, the DHSS has failed to recognize and acknowledge existing subrecipient reimbursement and monitoring procedures have allowed serious and material subrecipient noncompliance. Regulation 7 CFR Section 226.7(k) requires the BCFNA to establish procedures for subrecipients to properly submit claims for reimbursement. Given the level of material subrecipient noncompliance that has and continues to occur, BCFNA procedures are clearly not sufficient to prevent future noncompliance. The BCFNA has focused on individual components of its systems, but has not holistically evaluated whether the procedures, collectively and in their entirety, comply with the federal requirements intended to ensure subrecipient reimbursements are allowable and supported. The BCFNA continues to strictly follow existing procedures without making adequate adjustments to address and mitigate the serious subrecipient reimbursement problems. Recognizing problems and reacting to those problems are critical components of an effective internal control structure designed to ensure compliance with the federal requirements. The DHSS CAP argues the 11 percent error rate, based on the sample of monitoring reviews performed during the year ended June 30, 2023, is inflated because the reviews are proportionally more likely to include a higher number of claims with discrepancies. However, this error rate is just one indicator of the serious ongoing subrecipient problems. The DHSS CAP includes various misrepresentations of the contents of the finding and the recommendation. These statements, which attempt to negate or reduce the significance of the noncompliance noted in the finding, are listed below (in quotes): 1) "The SAO has not noted any specific noncompliance with federal requirements regarding subrecipient monitoring." This statement is incorrect. The finding states the BCFNA has not complied with 7 CFR Section 226.7(k) requirements (and related Uniform Guidance requirements) regarding procedures for ensuring claims are properly submitted. Furthermore, finding number 2023-013 states the BCFNA did not comply with overall federal subrecipient monitoring requirements as well as specific components of those requirements, including properly following up and ensuring subrecipients take timely and appropriate action on all deficiencies identified and disallowing and recovering improper payments. 2) "Reviewing supporting documentation with every individual reimbursement claim at the time of submission as suggested in the finding…" This statement is incorrect. The finding does not suggest or recommend that the BCFNA require or review documentation for every claim prior to payment. Instead, the finding recommends the BCFNA strengthen internal controls over meal reimbursements to ensure costs are allowable and supported. 3) "Out of the SAO's test sample of 60 monitoring reviews, only 9 of the overclaims were over the $600 threshold of acceptable risk set by the USDA." This statement is incorrect. Of the 36 sampled monitoring reviews with overclaims totaling $50,954, 13 reviews with overclaims totaling $46,724, were in excess of $600. As noted in the finding, if the remaining 23 overpayments of $600 or less, totaling $4,230 are excluded, the error rate is at least 9 percent. Subrecipient data clearly shows significant subreicipient noncompliance is occurring within the CACFP program. These problems cannot be denied and should not be ignored. Until the DHSS recognizes these problems, acknowledges there are weaknesses in its existing procedures, and takes action to strengthen its procedures, significant improper payments to subrecipients will likely continue.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Assistance Listing #93.870 Finding 2023-004 Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance – Allowable Costs/Activities Criteria – Per 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E (2 CFR Section 200.403): (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). Condition – Prepaid gift cards for grocery and gas were purchased in bulk and recorded as federal expenses. However, not all cards were distributed to eligible beneficiaries as of June 30, 2023, and therefore should not have been expensed as not all criteria for allowable costs had been met. Questioned Costs – Approximately $50,580 in expenses were reported that had not yet met all of the allowable cost criteria to be considered federal expenses. Context – The Organization distributed prepaid gift cards to eligible beneficiaries as needed throughout the year ended June 30, 2023. However, not all of the prepaid gift cards had been distributed by June 30, 2023. Effect – By reporting federal expenses prior to meeting all criteria for allowable costs, the Organization runs the risk that amounts may be determined as unallowed by the federal awarding agency and the Organization may have to return the federal funds. Cause – Current processes of the Organization record the purchase of gift cards as an expense, prior to all allowable cost requirements being met. Recommendation – We recommend the Organization improve policies and procedures to record the purchase of gift cards as a prepaid transaction and only expense these items when all allowable cost criteria are met. Management’s Response – Management will improve policies and procedures to record the purchase of gift cards as a prepaid transaction and expense the gift cards when all allowable cost criteria are met. Management will also get input from grant funders when necessary.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Assistance Listing #93.870 Finding 2023-004 Material Weakness, Material Noncompliance – Allowable Costs/Activities Criteria – Per 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E (2 CFR Section 200.403): (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). Condition – Prepaid gift cards for grocery and gas were purchased in bulk and recorded as federal expenses. However, not all cards were distributed to eligible beneficiaries as of June 30, 2023, and therefore should not have been expensed as not all criteria for allowable costs had been met. Questioned Costs – Approximately $50,580 in expenses were reported that had not yet met all of the allowable cost criteria to be considered federal expenses. Context – The Organization distributed prepaid gift cards to eligible beneficiaries as needed throughout the year ended June 30, 2023. However, not all of the prepaid gift cards had been distributed by June 30, 2023. Effect – By reporting federal expenses prior to meeting all criteria for allowable costs, the Organization runs the risk that amounts may be determined as unallowed by the federal awarding agency and the Organization may have to return the federal funds. Cause – Current processes of the Organization record the purchase of gift cards as an expense, prior to all allowable cost requirements being met. Recommendation – We recommend the Organization improve policies and procedures to record the purchase of gift cards as a prepaid transaction and only expense these items when all allowable cost criteria are met. Management’s Response – Management will improve policies and procedures to record the purchase of gift cards as a prepaid transaction and expense the gift cards when all allowable cost criteria are met. Management will also get input from grant funders when necessary.
2023-002 Incorrect Allocation of Program Expense and Inadequate Documentation Program Name/ Assistance Listing Number: 93. 959 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Award Identification: Unknown Type of Finding: Material Weakness Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Criteria: According to 2 CFR §200.302, entities receiving federal funds must have effective internal controls over the use of funds to ensure compliance with federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the federal award. Furthermore, 2 CFR §200.403 states that costs must be adequately documented and be allocable to the respective federal award to be considered allowable. Condition: During the testing of 60 expense transactions, the auditor identified the following exceptions: - 5 transactions were allocated to the incorrect grant. - 3 transactions were assigned to the incorrect expense program. - 4 transactions lacked the required invoice and payment approval documentation as per the organization’s internal controls. Cause of Condition: The identified issues likely stem from a lack of adherence to established internal control procedures and inadequate oversight or training regarding the correct allocation of expenses. Additionally, there may be deficiencies in the document retention process, leading to incomplete records. Effect: The misallocation of expenses could result in non-compliance with the terms and conditions of federal grants, leading to potential questioned costs and the need for reimbursement of funds. The lack of supporting documentation further increases the risk of noncompliance and reduces the audit trail, which could impair the organization’s ability to justify its use of federal funds. Questioned Cost: $24,464 Recommendation: The organization should reinforce its internal controls over expense allocation and documentation retention by providing additional training to staff involved in the financial management of grants. Implementing periodic reviews and reconciliations of grant allocations and ensuring that all supporting documentation is complete and properly filed will help mitigate the risk of misallocations and incomplete records in the future. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We consider the following materiality for consideration of material noncompliance for the major program 93.959 at 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $51,253. View of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding and will implement corrective action.
2023-006 Non-compliance with Compliance Requirements Program Name/ Assistance Listing Number: 93. 959 Block Grants for Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse and 93.788 Multiple Approach Response Strategies (MARS) Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Award Identification: Unknown Type of Finding: Material Weakness Compliance Requirement: Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Criteria: Per 2 CFR §200.305(b), non-Federal entities are responsible for administering Federal funds in a manner consistent with underlying agreements, program objectives, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. According to 2 CFR §200.403, costs must meet the following general criteria to be allowable under Federal awards: (b) Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or in the Federal award concerning types or amounts 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. See also 2 CFR §200.300 through 200.309 of this part. (h) Costs must be incurred during the approved budget period. The Federal awarding agency is authorized, at its discretion, to waive prior written approvals to carryforward unobligated balances to subsequent budget periods pursuant to 2 CFR §200.308(e)(3). Condition: During the review of the schedule of expenditures of federal awards, the auditor noted the following conditions: 1. Non-Conforming Expenditures: An expenditure under the MARS Carry Over did not conform to the limitations set forth in the federal award budget. Specifically, $20,892 was charged for Garage Repairs, whereas the grant budget for equipment was only $1,200, designated specifically for two software purchases at $600 each. 2. Inadequate Documentation: a) The FASD Grant had a period that ended on March 14, 2023. Although the grant period was extended, this extension was not documented, b) A $26,383 FASD expenditure was reallocated to MARS 2.0 Carry Over without substantialjustification for the reclassification, and c) An adjustment of $24,044 was made from MARS 2.0 Carry Over FY 2022 without adequate supporting documentation. 3. Expenditures Outside the Approved Grant Period: a) the FASD total award of $340,000 was reported as fully expended in the 2023 fiscal year-end expenditure report (“Close-Out Report”) submitted to the Grants and Funding Management System on January 31, 2024. However, the Schedule of Federal Expenditure showed only $312,707 in expenditures. The remaining $27, 293 was indicated as a carryover for FY 2024. Of the $312,707 in expenditures, $71,277 were incurred after March 14, 2023, with only $21,395 falling within the 45-day closeout period following that date, b) $26,800 in unallowable costs were incurred under the MARS 2.0 Carry Over 45 days after the performance period ended on September 29, 2022, specifically for payroll processing, and c) $1,813 in costs were incurred before the performance period for the “Mars One-Pill Can Kill” grant dated February 1, 2023 to September 29, 2023. There was no prior grant. 4. Misclassification: $2,010 in MARS 3.0 expenditures were incorrectly classified under FASD. Cause of Condition: Insufficient understanding of program requirements. There is no formal monitoring of program expenditures on a periodic basis to ensure that the Organization’s expenditures and activities align with their grant budget and period of performance. Inconsistent adherence to record retention policies, resulting from the temporary hybrid working-from-home arrangements due to the pandemic, has led to insufficient support for all federal expenditures. The Organization lacks written policies and procedures for allocating expenditures across different programs. Effect: The current procedures for administering Federal funds are inadequately designed to ensure that costs and activities are managed in a manner consistent with the underlying agreements and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. These deficiencies could lead to misstatements in the SEFA that are not corrected promptly and could result in the charging of unallowable costs. Questioned Cost: $179,117 Recommendation: We recommend the following actions: 1. Training: Program administrators should receive adequatetraining and acquire knowledge of the compliancerequirements for each specific program to ensure adherence to these requirements. 2. Periodic Program Monitoring: The organization should establish a periodic review process for each program budget to ensure alignment with each line item in the budget. 3. Formal Procedures: The organization should document its procedures for expense allocation to ensure consistency timeliness, and accuracy. 4. Adequate Staffing: The organization should ensure that processes are staffed with knowledgeable personnel capableof reviewing and adhering to established policies and procedures. Description of the Nature and Extent of Issues Reported: We consider the following materiality for consideration of material noncompliance for the major program 93.959 at 5% of the total awards expended amounting to $51,253. View of Responsible Official: Management agrees with the finding and will implement corrective action.
2023-013 – Allocable Costs related to Compensation (Material Noncompliance, Material Weakness in Internal Controls over Compliance) Federal Program Information Federal Award Title and ALN: Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit Program, 20.509 Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Transportation Pass-Through Entity: New Mexico Department of Transportation Federal Award ID Number: N/A Federal Award Year: 2023 Condition - During reconciliation of the general ledger to SEFA, it was noted administrative percentages of payroll were included on reimbursement requests monthly that did not include supporting documentation on what the percentages were based on or support by the employee documenting the time spent on the grant. No documentation is maintained to support the process by which these estimates were produced, or the relationship to the activities actually performed. No analysis of actual activities versus budgeted activities is performed. There are no controls in place to review after-the-fact charges to the Federal grant by the administrative personnel vs. the amounts charged. Criteria - Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 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). Per 2 CFR section 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: paragraph (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles; paragraph (g) Be adequately documented. Per 2 CFR section 200.430(i)(1) – Compensation – personal services, Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (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; (viii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity actually performed; (B) Significant changes in the corresponding work activity (as defined by the non-Federal entity's written policies) are identified and entered into the records in a timely manner. Short term (such as one or two months) fluctuation between workload categories need not be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The non-Federal entity's system of internal controls includes processes to review after-the-fact interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustment must be made such that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Cause - The County does not have policies and procedures in place to ensure the allowability of the percent allocations or retain detailed approved supporting documentation. Questioned Costs – Questioned and likely costs of $77,520 Effect - The County could spend federal award funding on time not spent on the grant which could lead to disallowed costs. Auditor’s Recommendation - The auditor recommends the County strengthen policies and procedures to ensure the charging of administrative costs for allowability is based off supported calculations or documented time spent to grant. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action - The County will create a documented process in the new policy and procedures manual for federal guidelines and charging of administrative costs for documented time spent on grants with supporting calculations will be documented for clarity and consistency. Responsible Official – Andrea Montoya, Deputy County Manager and Robert Placencio, Finance Director Timeline and Estimated Completion Date - No later than August 31, 2024.
2023-013 – Allocable Costs related to Compensation (Material Noncompliance, Material Weakness in Internal Controls over Compliance) Federal Program Information Federal Award Title and ALN: Formula Grants for Rural Areas and Tribal Transit Program, 20.509 Federal Awarding Agency: U.S. Department of the Transportation Pass-Through Entity: New Mexico Department of Transportation Federal Award ID Number: N/A Federal Award Year: 2023 Condition - During reconciliation of the general ledger to SEFA, it was noted administrative percentages of payroll were included on reimbursement requests monthly that did not include supporting documentation on what the percentages were based on or support by the employee documenting the time spent on the grant. No documentation is maintained to support the process by which these estimates were produced, or the relationship to the activities actually performed. No analysis of actual activities versus budgeted activities is performed. There are no controls in place to review after-the-fact charges to the Federal grant by the administrative personnel vs. the amounts charged. Criteria - Per 2 CFR 200.303(a), the non-federal entity must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that the non-Federal entity is managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal award. 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). Per 2 CFR section 200.403 – Factors affecting allowability of costs, except where otherwise authorized by statute, costs must meet the following general criteria in order to be allowable under Federal awards: paragraph (a) Be necessary and reasonable for the performance of the Federal award and be allocable thereto under these principles; paragraph (g) Be adequately documented. Per 2 CFR section 200.430(i)(1) – Compensation – personal services, Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed: (i) Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated; (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; (viii) Budget estimates (i.e., estimates determined before the services are performed) alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards, but may be used for interim accounting purposes, provided that: A) The system for establishing the estimates produces reasonable approximations of the activity actually performed; (B) Significant changes in the corresponding work activity (as defined by the non-Federal entity's written policies) are identified and entered into the records in a timely manner. Short term (such as one or two months) fluctuation between workload categories need not be considered as long as the distribution of salaries and wages is reasonable over the longer term; and (C) The non-Federal entity's system of internal controls includes processes to review after-the-fact interim charges made to a Federal award based on budget estimates. All necessary adjustment must be made such that the final amount charged to the Federal award is accurate, allowable, and properly allocated. Cause - The County does not have policies and procedures in place to ensure the allowability of the percent allocations or retain detailed approved supporting documentation. Questioned Costs – Questioned and likely costs of $77,520 Effect - The County could spend federal award funding on time not spent on the grant which could lead to disallowed costs. Auditor’s Recommendation - The auditor recommends the County strengthen policies and procedures to ensure the charging of administrative costs for allowability is based off supported calculations or documented time spent to grant. Views of Responsible Officials and Planned Corrective Action - The County will create a documented process in the new policy and procedures manual for federal guidelines and charging of administrative costs for documented time spent on grants with supporting calculations will be documented for clarity and consistency. Responsible Official – Andrea Montoya, Deputy County Manager and Robert Placencio, Finance Director Timeline and Estimated Completion Date - No later than August 31, 2024.
Activities Allowed or Unallowed; Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Federal Award Identification Assistance Listing Program Title: Formula Grants for Rural Areas Assistance Listing Program Number: 20.509 Federal Award ID Number and Year: Various Federal Agency: U.S. Department of Transportation Pass-Through Entity: Nebraska Department of Transportation Criteria The Organization must establish and maintain effective internal control over the Federal award that provides reasonable assurance that they are managing the Federal award in compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Federal Award (2 CFR 200.303). Costs must be adequately documented (2 CFR 200.403(g)). Insurance refunds must be credited against insurance costs in the year the refund is received (2 CFR 200.447(e)). Condition The Organization lacked adequate documentation to support: - That certain expenditures followed an approval process before being paid. - That certain expenditures were for allowable activities and in accordance with allowable cost principles. Repeat Finding Yes: 2022-004. Cause Procedures within the Organization were inadequate to ensure that expenditures follow a review and approval process prior to being paid, that costs were in accordance with Federal requirements and that only costs which had been paid for were requested for reimbursement. Effect or Potential Effect Increased potential for errors or misuse of funds. Questioned Costs Known $20,547 Statistical Sample No. Context During the fiscal year, the Organization requested a monthly reimbursement from the pass-through entity. Auditor selected three of these monthly reimbursement requests (August 2022, October 2022, and March 2023) for testing, reviewing all non-payrollrelated expenses, resulting in testing approximately 290 different line items composing many more individual transactions. Within this sample, auditor noted: - Multiple instances where no documentation existed to support a system of internal control whereby expenditures were approved by a competent individual prior to their being paid. - One instance of a transposition error between the fuel summary report and the reimbursement request, where the amounts in the reimbursement request listed the number of gallons of fuel as opposed to the cost of the fuel, resulting in the Organization receiving a smaller reimbursement than what it was eligible for of $1,111. - In two of the months selected for testing, the fuel costs for the same five vehicles in both months were excluded from the reimbursement request, resulting in the Organization receiving a smaller reimbursement than what it was eligible for of $15,539. The vehicle VINs are *7081, *2676, *2427, *4288, and *2962. - The fuel reimbursement summary for October 2022 for VIN *9460 shows regular fill-ups in gallons exceeding the fuel tank capacity for this vehicle. - The fuel reimbursement summary for October 2022 shows multiple vehicles (VINs *5418, *5421, *4450, and *1256) that received fill-ups of both diesel fuel and regular unleaded 10% ethanol gasoline. It is the auditor’s understanding that this is not recommended for vehicles. - Multiple instances where the available supporting documentation was incomplete, resulting in questioned costs of $20,547. - Multiple instances where documentation provided did not include sufficient detail to determine if products and/or services provided meet the definition of allowable activity, or to determine if insurance coverages were for assets owned by the Organization. - One expenditure for which reimbursement was requested in August 2022 and again in September 2022 amounting to $17,951. This duplicate reimbursement was corrected in the March 2023 reimbursement request. - Multiple instances of expenditure misclassification in violation of the invoicing and documentation guidelines issued by the pass-through entity, resulting in no additional questioned costs. - Multiple instances where the expenditure appears to be for a vehicle owned by the Organization, however, the supporting documentation shows the service is for a different vehicle than that noted on the reimbursement request. - Auditor was unable to determine if insurance refunds received were credited against insurance costs. Recommendation We recommend the Organization establish a system of internal control consisting of policies and procedures whereby all expenditures are properly explained with supporting documentation and are reviewed and approved prior to payment. Additionally, that only those expenditures which have been paid for are requested for reimbursement. Views of Responsible Officials See Corrective Action Plan, below.
Federal Agency: Department of Health and Human Services Federal Program Name: Child Care and Development Programs Assistance Listing Number: 93.575 Federal Award Identification Number and Year: 19-S225-00-2 – 2022 Pass-Through Agency: California Department of Education Pass-Through Number: 10163 Award Period: 7/1/2022-6/30/2023 Compliance Requirement Affected: H - period of availability/performance Type of Finding: Significant Deficiency Criteria or specific requirement: 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. Condition: During test of non-payroll expenditures charged to the Child Care and Development Programs, one of the supporting documents indicated that costs in the amount of $1,625 charged to program was paid in the award period, but was incurred prior to the award period. Cause: The invoice was paid in the award year and internal controls over compliance failed to identify the ineligibility of the expense. Effect: $1,625 of ineligible expenses were charged to the federal program. Questioned Costs: $1,625 of known and likely cost. Repeat finding: Not a repeat finding. Recommendation: We recommend the Organization review its internal control processes over compliance to ensure adequate review of period of performance. Views of responsible officials and Corrective Action Plan: Background and Contributing Factors: At the time of the expenditure in question, our organization was relying on Charter Impact to manage our accounting and grant reporting. Unfortunately, Charter Impact did not fulfill its contractual obligations, including timely submission of grant reports and ensuring compliance with federal guidelines. Their failure to submit accurate and timely grant reports, contributed to the lapse in internal controls that led to the ineligible expense being charged to the federal program. 2023-002 Internal Control over Compliance (Continued) 500 Corrective Action Plan: 1. Implementation of Sage Accounting Software: We have since implemented a comprehensive financial accounting software system, Sage, which allows us to track expenditures more accurately and ensure compliance with federal grant requirements. The system includes built-in safeguards to flag non-compliant expenditures. 2. Review and Strengthening of Internal Controls: Life Source International Charter School will be implementing additional internal control systems & processes that include an additional review of back up documents before monthly reports are filed. A copy of all backup documents in support of all monthly reports will be kept at both Life Source International Charter School and the outside entities providing services and making reports on behalf of Life Source International Charter School. 3. Staff Training and Capacity Building: Our staff has received training on federal grant compliance, including the specific criteria governing the period of performance and allowable costs under federal awards. Additionally, with the Sage system in place, staff are now better equipped to manage compliance and reporting accurately. 4. Commitment to Ongoing Compliance: We are committed to continually improving our internal control processes to ensure compliance with all federal regulations. Findings and Questioned Costs – State Compliance There were no findings or questioned costs related to state awards for June 30, 2023.
FINDING 2023-005 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: 84.425 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): S425V200013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context On December 17, 2021, the School Corporation paid all School Corporation employees who had been employed with the School Corporation during the 2020-2021 school year and for 120 days a School Board approved retention bonus. The across-the-board stipends were paid without justification or documentation that provided for additional duties or work performed on which to base the stipends. The total amount of stipends paid, $822,750, were considered questioned costs. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 29 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the stipend payments 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: (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. . . ." Indiana Department of Education's ESSER II Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) states in part: "12. Can ESSER II funds be used for staff stipends? . . . While across the board stipends are not permitted (as "universal" or "across the board" does not in and of itself demonstrate sufficient documentation), LEAs may pay staff for COVID-related work that has been documented. Most, if not all, staff likely had extra responsibilities as well as time and effort to respond to the pandemic. ESSER funds can be used to pay staff for that work and LEAs are responsible for documenting (with internal controls) that this work occurred. This is consistent with guidance on all salary and stipend payments with all federal funds. . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 30 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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, costs were reimbursed that did not have adequate documentation to ensure compliance with the compliance requirement. 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 School Corporation. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $822,750 were identified as detailed in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure costs are adequately documented. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report. Auditor's Response Per the Indiana Department of Education's ESSER II Frequently Asked Questions as stated above in the listed "criteria," across the School Board stipends are not permitted and LEAs may pay staff for COVID-related work that has been documented. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
FINDING 2023-005 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: 84.425 Federal Award Number and Year (or Other Identifying Number): S425V200013 Pass-Through Entity: Indiana Department of Education Compliance Requirements: Activities Allowed or Unallowed, Allowable Costs/Cost Principles Audit Findings: Material Weakness, Modified Opinion Condition and Context On December 17, 2021, the School Corporation paid all School Corporation employees who had been employed with the School Corporation during the 2020-2021 school year and for 120 days a School Board approved retention bonus. The across-the-board stipends were paid without justification or documentation that provided for additional duties or work performed on which to base the stipends. The total amount of stipends paid, $822,750, were considered questioned costs. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 29 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) The lack of internal controls and noncompliance were isolated to the stipend payments 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: (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. . . ." Indiana Department of Education's ESSER II Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) states in part: "12. Can ESSER II funds be used for staff stipends? . . . While across the board stipends are not permitted (as "universal" or "across the board" does not in and of itself demonstrate sufficient documentation), LEAs may pay staff for COVID-related work that has been documented. Most, if not all, staff likely had extra responsibilities as well as time and effort to respond to the pandemic. ESSER funds can be used to pay staff for that work and LEAs are responsible for documenting (with internal controls) that this work occurred. This is consistent with guidance on all salary and stipend payments with all federal funds. . . ." Cause A proper system of internal controls was not designed by management of the School Corporation. Embedded within a properly designed and implemented internal control system should be internal controls consisting of policies and procedures. Policies reflect the School Corporation's management statements of what should be done to effect internal controls, and procedures should consist of actions that would implement these policies. INDIANA STATE BOARD OF ACCOUNTS 30 MICHIGAN CITY AREA SCHOOLS SCHEDULE OF FINDINGS AND QUESTIONED COSTS (Continued) 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, costs were reimbursed that did not have adequate documentation to ensure compliance with the compliance requirement. 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 School Corporation. Questioned Costs Known questioned costs of $822,750 were identified as detailed in the Condition and Context. Recommendation We recommended that management of the School Corporation establish a proper system of internal controls and develop policies and procedures to ensure costs are adequately documented. Views of Responsible Officials For the views of responsible officials, refer to the Corrective Action Plan that is part of this report. Auditor's Response Per the Indiana Department of Education's ESSER II Frequently Asked Questions as stated above in the listed "criteria," across the School Board stipends are not permitted and LEAs may pay staff for COVID-related work that has been documented. We reaffirm our finding and will review the status of the finding during our next audit.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.
Federal Program Information: Research and Development Cluster (various ALN #’s) Criteria or Specific Requirement (Including Statutory, Regulatory or Other Citation): M. Subrecipient Monitoring - per 2 CFR Part 200.403, the University shall monitor the activities of a subrecipient as necessary to ensure that the subrecipient complies with Federal statutes, regulations, and the terms and conditions of the subaward. The pass-through entity is responsible for monitoring the overall performance of a subrecipient to ensure that the goals and objectives of the subaward are achieved. In monitoring a subrecipient, a pass-through entity must: (1) Review financial and performance reports. Condition: The University is not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring conditions as required. Subrecipient invoices not reviewed by the University or review was not performed within required timeframe. Cause: Insufficient internal controls and administrative oversight with respect to the University’s subrecipient monitoring process. Effect or Potential Effect: The University was not in compliance with certain subrecipient monitoring requirements during the year. Questioned Costs: None. Context: We noted the following in during our testing: • For 4 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, no evidence of invoice review or sign off completed by the university. • For 2 of 25 subrecipient invoices selected for testing, invoice date shows expenditure was related to a prior period expense. Identification as a Repeat Finding: No similar findings noted in the prior year. Recommendation: We recommend that the University enhance its internal controls and policies and procedures over the applicable compliance requirements to ensure that the University is appropriately and timely monitoring its subrecipient invoices. Views of Responsible Officials: The process to review subrecipient invoices will be improved by requiring the review of supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable by the newly established Sponsored Program Office (SPO) post award team. This team will thoroughly review supporting documents to ensure expenses are allowable, allocable, reasonable and recorded in the proper period according to university policies and grant terms. Invoices will be reviewed by SPO and will serve as the key control point before transactions are forwarded to accounting to post to sponsored awards. The Director of Compliance will conduct spot checks on all sponsored transactional activity, especially for high-risk grants to provide an additional layer of oversight. The new review process and training for these responsibilities will be implemented by spring 2025 as part of the broader campus-wide workflow training and staffing up of the new SPO post-award office. The Director of Post Award Compliance will be hired by March 2025.